Anger can be Positive

So, much anger on display.

We have become conditioned to believe anger is a negative emotion. Difficult not to think that way with what we are witnessing in our society these days. But I'm not so sure.

Anger as a catalyst for hate certainly is a negative.

Anger as a catalyst for Love certainly is a positive.

All marriages have difficulties. All spouses become angry with one another at some point in time. Some respond with Love and forgiveness to work things out, even strengthen their marriage. Others respond with resentment and hate leading to divorce.

All this anger ... I don't think it in and of itself makes anyone a bad person, but each individual's response to their anger might.

Ever see an athlete become angered and turn in an amazing performance?

Ever see an athlete become angry, lose his composure and perform below her/his norm?

Yeah, we're seeing a lot of negative response to anger right now. This is never lastingly productive.

I have been seeing parallels drawn between these riots and the Boston Tea Party. Umm, kind of, but not really valid. One was rebellion against a tyrannical king and the other is rebellion against an unjust society. The difference being We the People are the king of our society.

That's the beauty of our Constitution. The power lies with the people. We choose who will represent us, speak for us.

So, you don't like the status quo? Elect someone else.

But we are a minority, we don't have the votes to do so! Please, look at the recent influx of Muslim Congressional members. They consolidated their voting base and have won seats.

And this starts on the local level, in each community.

Your vote is your positive outlet for anger. You don't like the old white men and women running the show, vote them out. Put someone in who will change the culture more to your liking. And that power is broad ranging - it is not just political as Muslims are demonstrating.

It's not the quick release of anger that we see in violent protests, but its impact is far more significant and much longer lasting as the works of our founding fathers have proven.

We are stuck

If all we ever do is all we’ve ever done, all we’ll ever have is what we’ve always had.

We’ve seen the video and pictures of former officer Derek Chauvin with his knee on George Floyd’s neck.

We’ve seen the videos and pictures of rioting, looting, burning.

Same old, same old.

I no more understand the rioting, looting and burning than I understand Chauvin’s actions.

What I do understand is we are stuck.

The cry’s for change are at crescendo level again, for now. They will slowly ebb away only to return once again when another instance of police brutality occurs. That’s the cycle. That’s the rut we are stuck in.

When complex problems present themselves the immediate impulse is often to treat symptoms of the problem. I think we saw that in initial responses to both the covid-19 virus and societal reactions to it.   Fortunately there are efforts afoot to uncover the root cause of the problem and solve that problem. I’m not at all sure there exists significant effort to discern the root cause of police brutality.

No, it is not racism. If it were racism there would not be instances of white suspects  being brutalized by white officers, but there are. There are also instances of black suspects being brutalized by black officers. Racism is simply the spark that brings recognition to the problem.  Riots, looting and burning a knee jerk reaction and at this point a conditioned response.

Sometimes the cure is worse than the disease.

Yeah, that applies here as well. Rioting, looting and burning only serves to perpetuate the negative stereotype associated with those rioting. Everyone’s mind went to “blacks” as they read that last sentence and that is another issue of this complex problem for if we look at pictures and videos of these violent protests we see white people involved in rioting, looting and burning too.

Who’s to blame?  Ask a black and chances are high you will hear racists (whites) are to blame. The premise that racism is the sole purview of the Caucasian race is preposterous. In my own experience I have encountered racism from people of all races. There are certainly black racists among us.

Maybe we should ask, “what’s to blame”?  Hate.  That is the answer that makes sense and goes to the root cause of this problem. I am not ready to proclaim hate as the sole cause of this problem.  Fear certainly plays a role as well. And where does fear stem from? Differences.

Now, I think we are getting somewhere.

We are all uniquely different and should celebrate that fact, but differences can make us uncomfortable, fearful.  In a general sense we fear for our safety because differences equate to unpredictability. We don’t know what to expect. We find ourselves outside our comfort zone and so our defense mechanisms activate to protect us from this unknown threat.

There’s another key consideration - the unknown.  We fear the unknown. Once it becomes known we can move on to respect what we once feared.  That’s not to equate respect with love, rainbows and unicorns for danger can still be present in respect. It means what we once knew little about has become better known and an element of predictability attached to it. We may not like what is predictable, but we can learn from it and how to effectively deal with it. Managed response if you will.

Managed response implies a level of trust exists. Predictability. Anticipated behavior based on past experiences. Trust is the foundational element of all relationships. So, we need to invest time in getting to know one another?

Yes, in part, for if hate is the root cause of this problem, then the only remedy is Love.  And love cannot exist without Trust. The Bible tells us this as God’s mantra isn’t so much about Love as it is first about Trust. Over and over we find passages where we are asked and instructed to Trust in God. That is the invitation to invest in a relationship.  To discover and focus on our similarities as opposed to our differences.

How do we go from where we are now struck to a position of trusting one another.

There are emotional responses to fear. Nervousness chief among them. However, the same emotional response that trigger nervousness and fear also trigger excitement.  Have you ever noticed the thrill that can come from being frightened?  Yeah, so, if we were to concentrate on being excited about differences and recognizing them as opportunities instead of obstacles we might be onto something that could bring significant positive change to what sometimes seems a hopeless situation.

And now I’ve come full cycle as we are back to celebrating differences. Being excited about differences.  Seeing opportunities in differences rather than obstacles. And recognizing when we invest in one another it builds trust and can result in love developing and pushing out the hate.

Trust has been decimated.

I have voted in 10 presidential elections and readily admit to having cast votes for Democrat, Independent and Republican candidates over those 40 years. I also admit to voting more conservative as I have aged and I do not believe this has much, if anything, to do with maturing or becoming wiser with age. I have always voted for the candidate who I believed was sincere; the candidate I thought I could trust ... the most.

I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980 because I felt he was a good decent Christian man. I did not vote for Ronald Reagan in 1980 because he was an actor and the thought occurred to me I might not be able to discern when he was being sincere and when he was acting. I did not feel I could trust Reagan.

In 1984 I did vote for Ronald Reagan and rightfully so. Reagan had proven himself and gained my trust. He was a very effective communicator speaking with eloquence but relatable to the common man. He connected with most Americans.

In 1988 George H. W. Bush rode Reagan's coattails to the victory and received my vote. I considered Dukakis but never felt I could trust him. I just didn't feel he was openly honest ... not that any politician is ever completely honest, but I never warmed to Dukakis.

By 1992 George H. W. Bush had lost his luster and I was looking for a new candidate. Reagan was a tough act to follow and this Bush just didn't measure up, in my opinion.  I was not a fan of Bill Clinton either. My personal nickname for him was Slick Willy and I thought of him as a smooth talking used car salesman. My vote went to Ross Perot, the Independent candidate knowing full well any votes cast for him could be equated to a vote for Clinton because it took a vote from Bush. Perot appealed to me because he was a straight talker. Not that I thought I could trust every little thing he said. He was just an outsider with nothing to lose and no reason not to speak his mind.

The 1996 election was a difficult one for me. Slick Willy was a gifted orator and I think did a good job in generally representing these United States, but he was sleazy nonetheless.  Bob Dole was old and old guard. I just felt no energy from Dole at all. So, my vote reluctantly went to Perot, again knowing it was a "wasted" vote.

In 2000 I was just thankful we would be getting rid of Bill Clinton. Again, he was a good orator, but sleazy: just not what I wanted in a President of the United States. To be perfectly honest, Al Gore held some appeal to me while serving as Clinton's vice president. Then on the campaign trail I began to have serious doubts about the guy. Enter George W. Bush.  I liked the guy and he received my vote due in no small part to his down home affable personality displayed to the people.

"W" got my vote again in 2004. While the man faced heavy criticism on some fronts, I felt he was a good man at heart.  I did not agree with all his decisions, but I trusted him and his decision-making processes. John Kerry was too east coast stuff shirt for me and  frankly scared me off with what was then a radical left view.

The 2008 presidential election was extremely interesting to me.  John McCain was an old white man who did not exude a lot of energy. Barack Obama was a younger black man and good orator. Neither won me over completely.  I had great hope Obama could be a unifying force in an America that seemed to me to be growing more divisive with each passing year. If, he could overcome expected backlash over his being black, good things might happen.  On the other hand Sarah Palin, I did like a lot and thought she could make the same type of impact as the first woman vice president and heir to the presidency.  In the end, I cast my vote for Sarah Palin, er, John McCain.

What I thought was a great opportunity to unite the country was being squandered by Obama to such a degree I was forced to consider if it was intentionally so. Mitt Romney as the 2012 Republican candidate was a better option at this point in time. Frankly, I have never been more disappointed in an elected official than I was with Barack Obama by this time. Definitely not a Uniter. His presidency proved to be the most divisive ... ever. The country suffered for it. Very unfortunately the country would endure continued suffering for an additional 4 years.

That brings us to the 2016 election. I was disillusioned, disgruntled and generally dissatisfied with the whole political situation in the United States at this point in time. Hillary Clinton was an arrogant. pompous bitch who had no business being in any elected position let alone the presidency. And who did the Republican's nominate, but none other than Donald Trump the arrogant, pompous businessman who had earned and lost fortunes and seemingly had no humility to speak of. What was I to do?

Well, there were several things during that campaign that had me wondering just what the hell was going on. There were the pictures of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton looking pretty chummy in past years.  The Clinton Body Shop theories were in full blossom. Trump was almost completely unfiltered saying and doing pretty much whatever he was feeling at any given moment. Impetuous? Coldly calculating?  Truth be told, these two candidates could not possibly be the best America had to offer, could they?  I absolutely 100% did not rust Hillary. No faith or trust in her whatsoever.

Trump?

As I watched him a grudging respect with a smidgen of admiration crept into my opinion of him.  It had always seemed to me that in a general sense the republicans tended to take the high road while democrats were quite willing to get down and dirty in campaigning ... and their approach to and style of governing. This really hurt Mitt Romney in 2012 when he seemed reluctant to fight back - not an image one needs when running for the presidency of the United States.

When Donald Trump came out swinging and playing the dirty politics game better than the democrats could I began to take notice. I still didn't like the guy or how I perceived he might present himself as the President of the United States, but it was almost comical watching Hillary and the Democrats try to figure out what to do with him.

The underlying current surrounding political polls that saw Hillary ahead by wide margins didn't feel right to me. Trump seemed to be building momentum and Hillary was just hanging on seemingly having completely underestimated Trump as a political foe. He was an outsider and she had spent decades consolidating good old boy power connections in what Trump was calling "the Swamp."

I still didn't like Trump as a candidate, but he got my vote because after 8 years of disastrous Obama presidency there was no way I could vote for the radical left agenda of Hillary Clinton. No trust in her or the Democrat party whatsoever at this point. I could not help thinking John F. Kennedy wouldn't even recognize the Democrat party of 2016. In fact, the Republican party is more in tune with Kennedy's presidency than today's Democrat party is.

So, here we go in 2020 and it's our current President of the United States Trump running against ... well, Joe Biden for now.  I have my doubts that Joe Biden will be the eventual candidate for the Democrat party. I suspect Hillary will rear her head. I could see Michelle Obama entering the fray in some way. I'm not even convinced Bernie Sanders is completely out of it, yet. Whether one of these surface as a vice presidential running mate to Biden or as the nominee themselves will be interesting to see play out.  I don't trust any of them for varying reasons. Strangely enough, as much as I hate Socialism and Bernie Sanders platform, he is the one I trust most among the Democrats simply because he freely admits to being a socialist democrat.  Honesty carries weight with me.

Donald Trump ... I've grown to appreciate him more. He's still arrogant, pompous, lacking humility and completely unfiltered, but his daily press conferences have allowed America to see a different side to him. His leadership has been outstanding - he's shared the credit and taken the brunt of the blame and  criticism instead of throwing his experts under the bus. Most importantly he and Vice President Pence have stated their governing philosophy openly and followed through with actions supporting said philosophy. Namely that it is the Federal Government's role to do whatever it takes to support an effort that is Locally executed and State managed.  THIS is exactly how the Constitution of the United States designed our government to work.

While the media and people in general cast aspersions upon President Trump for the federal government not being prepared for the pandemic nor having a nationwide plan to combat the pandemic, President Trump has been receptive to state's needs and facilitated responses tailored to what governors from each state have requested. He has marshaled both public and private resources to work together in responding to these needs. He has mobilized the military to help meet the state's needs. He has worked with his medical and financial experts to develop appropriate responses. The dude has been on his "A" game despite the near constant criticism and partisanship obstacles thrown in his way.  

He's still in there swinging at his critics and opposition in a manner that those who have made their political lives on such suddenly find unbecoming, but we are also being treated to a fatherly, grandfatherly side of our President that paints a different picture of the man. And I know this, President Trump will receive my vote in the 2020 presidential election because he is who is he. I know what I'm getting with President Trump ~ the good, the bad, the ugly. He's not always nice, but he is effective. He changes his mind, his opinion, his story and does so unabashedly. He's flexible in that regard. And he is wicked smart in more than just finance. He's running circles around the Democrats ... and the rest of the world. He really is restoring the United States to its rightful place atop the world by simply putting America first.  I like that. I like that a LOT.

I still do not completely trust the man, but in a political world that has seen public trust decimated by blind partisan politics and radical agendas I feel like ... oh, I don't know ... I kinda, maybe, sorta know what I'm getting with Donald Trump. And that equates in some way to at least a small level of trust.

What was Nancy Pelosi's motivation?

This week the United States House of Representative voted on and passed a 3 Trillion dollar bill.

There is no chance the bill clears the United States Senate and even if it did President Trump has vowed to veto it.

Nancy Pelosi knew this bill would never make it through the Senate or across the President's desk so why did she present it anyway?

As I pondered this certain pieces of the puzzle began falling into place, at least in my mind.

* Speaker Pelosi did not have the House in session for weeks.
* This bill is 1800 pages long - that's really long. The longest Harry Potter book only has 776 pages.
* This was a strictly partisan bill with no input from the Republicans
* How long does it take to write 1800 pages ...

That's the point in the thought process where bells began to ding.

Obviously Nancy Pelosi did not author this bill by herself.  So just who did contribute to its writing?

Well, I believe the answer lies in what is included in the bill and from there it is a very short leap to understanding why this bill with almost no hope of making it through the Senate and across the President's desk was brought to the House of Representatives for a vote anyway.

Contained in the bill is money for a litany of special interest groups.  There is funding for abortions, illegal immigrants, college tuition forgiveness and ... well, you get the idea.  And cannabis was mentioned 68 times, far more than the word jobs was mentioned. Any and every group who have traditionally voted democrat has mention in this $3 Trillion dollar bill.  That's the key to understanding why Nancy Pelosi presented a bill with virtually no hope of making through the process.

And lobbyists of each group representing the democrat base wrote their own portion of the bill.

This was a campaign move.

I have no empirical proof for this, but it seems to me there is a lot more enthusiasm and energy around Trump than there is around Biden.  The way this election is shaping up I suspect voter turnout will not be strong. And if I am correct on this, and even if I am not correct about this,  Pelosi and the Democrats have to figure out a way to pump energy into Biden's campaign to get their base vote to go to the polls.  How better to do that than introduce a bill promising money, lots of money, and having them construct their own portions of the bill?

The message is clear, Vote Democrat and when we also control the Senate and the White House with your help in the election we will then push through everything proposed in this bill you helped write.

There's Pelosi's motivation for introducing a bill she surely knew had no chance of making it through the process.

Our liberty is not their Liberty.

It seems to me as long as people feel they can say what they want, do what they want, worship as they see fit and freely vote for who and what they support they equate this to liberty.  Yet, there is also an expectation "the government" will protect us, rescue us and provide for us: government is perceived as society's safety net.

When the colonies declared their independence the word Liberty meant something far different.

Many of the founding families of America came here seeking Liberty from tyranny. They wanted the ability to choose for themselves how to worship and how to live. They sought Freedom from dependence on monarchical government. They sought the ability to choose their way without interference from rulers. This is the context the Declaration of Independence and eventually the Constitution of the United States were written in.  There was no safety net for the founding generations. No one there to bail them out should they have failed.  AND they certainly did not desire or expect government to do so for them.

These basic concepts of our founding fathers are foreign to both political parties of today, and to most Americans in general. Don't even get me started on the so-called Libertarian Party.  In today's world, the Constitution that was put in place to limit the power and size of federal government and restrain its ability to infringe upon Liberty has been severely eroded and is regularly violated. This has taken place with support from the public. That support has been active and intentional. It has also occurred through silence that condones the growing of federal government size and power.

I encourage you to read the United States Constitution. It is not a very long document at all. It provides for three branches of government with specific responsibilities to provide checks and balances each to the others.

Then consider our government of today.

There exists today almost innumerable new administrations, cabinet posts, departments that have effectively redefined the Constitution. Some would argue, "refined" the Constitution, but is that really the case?

Benjamin Franklin is credited with saying: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Re-read that and consider the capitalization of the words Liberty and Safety.

In this time of the Covid-19 pandemic people are throwing about Franklin's words in defense of wanting to go shopping and out to bars and have concerts, sporting events and other forms of entertainment and diversion back in their lives. Luxuries.

This is in no manner, form, means or way what the founding generations declared, fought for and died to bring forth on this continent. This is why when people write of it today they do not capitalize the word liberty as the founding generations did. The word does not mean the same today as it did then.

We are reaping what has been sown and doing so largely with indifference and meekness. We continue to transfer power from the people to the government and only when our freedom is impinged to an extent our luxuries are infringed upon or taken do we object or protest and demand our "liberty." Our founding generations would be embarrassed with and furious about the state of the Republic today. They would be disappointed and saddened to see we have become exactly what they fought against.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Notice which words are capitalized and ask, why?

The founding generations began a journey. They struggled mightily after winning their independence and freedom to draw a map for future generations to follow towards Liberty.  They sought to minimize government intrusion while also providing Safety for the people. Now, read again Benjamin Franklin's quote: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

The founding generations marked the trail to be followed towards Liberty with capitalized words including Creator. The generations that have followed have eroded their work. Creator or God is the easiest seen example, but Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness have also been under constant attack. The nation has moved from Independence won with blood, sweat and tears to ever growing dependence on the very enemy our forefathers won their Independence, Freedom and Liberty from.

This leaves questions to be asked and answered:

Can We the People find our way back to the path of our founding fathers? Do we have the courage to do so?  Can we abandon the perceived comfort of an evermore intrusive big central government for Independence and the Freedom to stand on our own merits? Succeed or fail without a governmental safety net?

If not, do we need to change how we define our nation to better represent the state of the republic today and the map we are drawing for future generations.

Do we need to stop paying lip service to ideals of our forefathers abandoning what we once were and attempt to define who we are now?

The choice is yours.  The choice is ours.  We are in this together. We the People of these United States of America.

Then join hand in hand brave Americans all. By uniting we stand, by dividing we fall. ~ John Dickinson, a Founding Father of these United States.

Leadership

I wrote the following about Ohio Governor Mike DeWine this morning:

"THIS is leadership. Yes, I did vote for him, but freely admit to being lukewarm at best about the guy. He has won me over with these press briefings and now, this:"

Governor Mike DeWine: “I respect the First Amendment. I am fair game. But, it is not fair game to be disrespectful or obnoxious to the news media. To treat them with disrespect and to not practice social distancing with them, I find that very sad.

In addition, I'm the elected official who ran for office. I'm the one who makes policy decisions. Members of my cabinet work hard, but I set the policy. When you don't like the policy, again - you can demonstrate against me - that's fair game. But to bother the family of Dr. Acton, that's not fair game. It's not right. It's not necessary. The buck stops here. I'm the responsible person.”

As I acknowledged other's comments concerning this statement I considered how my opinion of Governor Mike DeWine has changed. I had considered him wishy-washy with a generally weak persona. His daily press briefings have gradually changed my opinion as he has demonstrated poise and an open willingness to admit when he doesn’t have an answer. When he answers question he tends to give clear and concise responses which lends an air of confidence in him to those listening. Then when he stood up to the media and to those protesting at Dr. Acton’s home taking full responsibility on himself, well, I came away very impressed. 

My mind ambled off on many tangents at least two of which I will share with you.  

My opinion of our President Donald Trump is changing as well. I also voted for Donald Trump to be our President.  Reluctantly so and primarily because the Democrat Party of John Kennedy has moved decidedly towards socialism, in my opinion.  I did not trust Donald Trump, but trusted Hilary Clinton even less. 

As I have watched our President Trump in his own daily press briefings I have come to appreciate his leadership as well. President a Trump is not as polished as Mike DeWine in conducting his press briefings or responding to questions posed to him. Granted the type of questions posed to our President Trump are generally laced with far more vitriol than Governor DeWine has asked of him. 

What I’ve seen from our President Trump is the same type of leadership Mike DeWine displays, but in a much different persona and delivery.  President Trump is unbridled and unfiltered but he steps up to the podium every day and takes every criticism leveled at him and his administration’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The buck stops with him and her defends his advisers and experts just as Governor DeWine defends his.  

I admire that about our President Trump and ... well, I still don’t trust him and maybe that’s a topic to write about another day. I do have a growing sense of appreciation for our President and his leadership abilities.

The second tangent? 

Here’s the thing, I consider myself a good judge of character and trust my instincts and intuition when it comes to forming opinions of people. My opinions of Governor DeWine and President Trump are being modified for the better based on their demonstrated leadership during this pandemic crisis.  

Were my original instincts wrong?

Have I changed?

Have Governor DeWine and or President Trump changed? 

Is it a matter of facing adversity forcing Governor DeWine and President Trump to rise to the occasion? 

All of the above?

None of the above?

I have marveled at how these United States of America always seem to have the right leader in times of crisis. From George Washington, to Abraham Lincoln, to FDR and JFK.  As uncomfortable as I am at times with Donald Trump I am also grateful he is our President at this time. His organizational, logistical and business acumen is exactly what the country needs at this time. 

The same can be said of Mike DeWine who could well be auditioning for a future run at the presidency. His leadership has been strong and Ohio is being looked at as a model for how to confront this virus. 

Both men still have their detractors. Leaders always have detractors. The good ones are able to work with their detractors. Both DeWine and Trump are demonstrating the ability to do this. They also deflect criticism from others and take full responsibility upon their own shoulders. Granted DeWine does so with far more humility than Trump. Our Presidents biggest fault might be a seeming inability to be humble in a public setting. Nevertheless, these two men are getting the job done ... and they could not do that unless a majority of we the people followed their lead. 

The Good Brought by the Pandemic

These are crazy times we are living through. Unprecedented times for any of us. What can we do?

Even before this pandemic announced itself into our lives our society was in an upheaval. It had taken place gradually over decades but picked up momentum in recent years.

do not post this as a subject for debate for there can be no debate. It is fact. You can express your like or dislike, but the fact remains. Our country has changed from the vision our founding fathers had for it.

Our founding fathers were against a powerful centralized government, not just opposed to a monarchy. The original version of our federal government was not even funded. The political power was found locally. Over time, a very long time, our federal government has grown and become ever more powerful.

The source of federal government growth in power can be traced back to taxes. This writing is not meant to be a history lesson on taxation. You can do that research on your own beginning with the Revenue Act of 1861 imposing an income tax during the Civil War through the failed attempt to re-institute such in 1864 through the Revenue Act of 1909 and ratification of the 16th Amendment in February of 1913 through replacement of the patronage system with career employees in the 1950's to the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.

Our federal government has grown to proportions that would have horrified most of the the founding fathers.

Even before the pandemic of 2019-20 set in the country was faced with growing momentum to move the needle once again. The Bernie Sanders Democrat Socialist movement. Although Mr. Sanders is not the presumptive Democrat nominee, the movement he leads has moved the Democrat party ever closer to socialism.

Enter the 45th president of the United States and the Pandemic of 2019-2020.

Now, I have found no one willing to argue Donald Trump is not brash, buffoonish and politically incorrect. That's simply who he is. He is also an extremely intelligent man although people can be less eager to agree on this. But the real source of controversy concerning Donald Trump's presidency is found in how he believes a president should govern.

The man is old school in a modern world.

And that might well be exactly what the republic needs to save itself from an ever growing federal government that has become evermore intrusive in individual lives, liberties and rights.

Here's the short version of President Trump's philosophy of governing: the Federal government's role is to be supportive of State managed and Locally executed efforts.

This is in stark contrast to what We the People have become conditioned to believe the role of the federal government is supposed to be ... and decidedly not what the Democrat party big government platforms have been increasingly built upon.

President Trump has begun to move the country away from reliance on big federal government that has enslaved evermore people through dependence on government assistance.

When the pandemic began to become recognized as a life changer, governors of the States looked to Washington D.C., the President and Congress to take the lead in fighting back against it.

The incohesive response from the federal government has truly been something to behold. The roles of the Democrat and Republican parties have been reversed or at the very least intermingled so one has difficulty discerning which is which at times. Republicans trying to push through money to the people being stonewalled by the Democrats who have always used giving money to the people as a means to exert ever greater control over the people.

Seriously, what the hell is happening in Washington, D.C.?

Then there is President Trump leading the federal response not by telling the Governor's of the States what to do, but by asking them what they need . Ventilators? Okay, he marshals more ventilators than has proven to be needed and did so by bringing private and public sectors together. PPE? You got it. Private companies and individual citizens retooling their efforts from normal production to produce needed products ... of their own accord. Although President Trump did invoke the PDA, he has had to use it very sparingly.

Let's not wallow in altruism though. President Trump believes in a capitalist system and knew that where there is money to be made, people would jump on the opportunity to do so. And they have and will continue to do so until that source of money runs dry. This different than the Democrat party's philosophy only in execution. The worst by-product our President has had to deal with is price gouging and he has stepped forward a number of times to squelch attempts at doing so.

The good coming from this pandemic?

A reestablishing of government of the people, for the people, by the people. The power is shifting back to the local governments. This is coming to fruition as we speak and if you doubt me simply focus on the movement to allow local health departments to set the guidelines for reopening the economy. It's Federally suggested (not mandated) guidelines being given to the States who in turn are providing their own suggested (not mandated) guidelines to County and Parish level governments. The power is being given back to the People where the founding fathers were insistent it should rest in the first place.

That is a very good thing.