Subscribe to continue reading
Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.
Category: Uncategorized
-
The Heather Cox Richardson’s July 29, 2026 newsletter, is not a neutral wire-service report. Most of its concrete numbers and attributed statements are accurate. However, several sentences blend verified facts with opinion, inference, anonymous-source reporting, or speculation.
Note that the military-supply shortage reporting is based on anonymous sources, not independently confirmed. The news is heavy on interpretations of motives. Dissent and Iranian confidence is speculative or opinion
The report is factually grounded but strongly anti-Trump in framing. It should be considered as an opinionated synthesis of largely genuine reporting, in which facts, quotations, interpretations and speculation is woven together without always marking the boundaries clearly.
Top of Form
Heather Cox Richardson is better described as a first class historian writing liberal political commentary and not a politically balanced analyst.
I generally find her Substack newsletters rely on real events, quotations, public records, and mainstream reporting. Her stated purpose is to explain “the history behind today’s politics,” and she openly approaches current events through a concern for democracy, equality before the law, and resistance to authoritarianism.
However, her work regularly does more than supply historical context. She constructs a continuing political narrative in which Trump and the modern Republican movement are commonly associated with authoritarianism, oligarchy, or threats to democracy. Her selected historical parallels give current events moral direction, rather than merely presenting competing interpretations.
Richardson in my opinion is often careful with individual facts, but she is not politically neutral in deciding which facts matter, how they fit together, or what historical lesson readers should draw from them.
She provides informed, readable, historically grounded commentary from a recognizable center-left or liberal-democratic viewpoint—not balanced reporting in the conventional sense of presenting the strongest arguments from both sides.
An old farmer noticed his weather vane spinning wildly before a summer storm. His neighbor asked, “Which way is the wind really blowing?” The farmer replied, “Hard to tell from the vane alone. Best look at the clouds, feel the air, and check whether the cows are heading for the barn.”
Wit & Wisdom: “One sign may point the way, but a wise man checks the whole sky.”
-
Did We Make A Huge Post 9/11 Mistake?
Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter last October and the subsequent reporting on the Twitter Files by journalists Matt Taibbi, Bar Weiss, and a handful of others beginning in early December is one of the important news stories of our time. The Twitter Files story encompasses, and to a large extent connects, every major political scandal of the Trump-Biden era. Put simply, the Twitter Files reveal an unholy alliance between Big Tech and the deep state designed to throttle free speech and maintain an official narrative through censorship and propaganda. This should not just disturb us, it should prod us to action in defense of the First Amendment, free and fair elections, and indeed our country.
The late great political scientist Angelo Codevilla argued that our response to 9/11 was completely wrong. Instead of erecting a sprawling security and surveillance apparatus to detect and disrupt potential terrorist plots, we should have issued an ultimatum to the regimes that were harboring Al Qaeda: you make war on these terrorists and bring them to justice or we will make war on you. The reason not to do what we did, Codevilla argued, is that a security and surveillance apparatus powerful and pervasive enough to do what we wanted it to do was incompatible with a free society. It might defeat the terrorists, but it would eventually be turned on the American people.
The Twitter Files leave little doubt that Codevilla’s prediction has come to pass. The question we face now is whether the American people and their elected representatives will fight back. The fate of the republic rests on the answer. (comments from an article “The Twitter Files Reveal an Existential Threat” by John Daniel Davidson January 2023)
-
March 2023
Did We Make A Huge Post 9/11 Mistake?
Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter last October and the subsequent reporting on the Twitter Files by journalists Matt Taibbi, Bar Weiss, and a handful of others beginning in early December is one of the important news stories of our time. The Twitter Files story encompasses, and to a large extent connects, every major political scandal of the Trump-Biden era. Put simply, the Twitter Files reveal an unholy alliance between Big Tech and the deep state designed to throttle free speech and maintain an official narrative through censorship and propaganda. This should not just disturb us, it should prod us to action in defense of the First Amendment, free and fair elections, and indeed our country.
The late great political scientist Angelo Codevilla argued that our response to 9/11 was completely wrong. Instead of erecting a sprawling security and surveillance apparatus to detect and disrupt potential terrorist plots, we should have issued an ultimatum to the regimes that were harboring Al Qaeda: you make war on these terrorists and bring them to justice or we will make war on you. The reason not to do what we did, Codevilla argued, is that a security and surveillance apparatus powerful and pervasive enough to do what we wanted it to do was incompatible with a free society. It might defeat the terrorists, but it would eventually be turned on the American people.
The Twitter Files leave little doubt that Codevilla’s prediction has come to pass. The question we face now is whether the American people and their elected representatives will fight back. The fate of the republic rests on the answer. (comments from an article “The Twitter Files Reveal an Existential Threat” by John Daniel Davidson January 2023)
-
Commentary on Culture, Philosophy, and Popular Topics of the Day
Truth vs. Opinion
“If you want to assert a truth, first make sure it’s not just an opinion that you desperately want to be true.” – Neil deGrasse Tyson
There is a difference between an opinion and a fact. It is a fact that Individuals with body fat over 31% are considered obese by the FDA and NIH. Individuals are obese because they habitually over eat the wrong foods and do not exercise is an opinion.
While an opinion is not a fact, nothing in another’s “opinion” means anything about you. An opinion is all about the person expressing the opinion. So why do so many people get upset by the opinions of others? I think it is because they believe the opinion means something about them. This tends to trigger emotional energy which in turn triggers a fight or flight response. Either response has the effect of energizing the opinion into something meaningful. It inflates it. However, if one were to ignore the opinion, it will deflate like a leaky hot air balloon.
Example: An electric current can only flow if there are positive and negative poles. When you engage in debate about opinions, you become one of the poles. This allows emotional energy to flow. The more attention you give the opinion, the stronger the emotional energy flows.
The Bottom Line: all opinions are the personal views of the person expressing the opinion. They are not concrete assessments about any person, group, nationality, etc. When you understand this, then other people’s opinions will cease to cause you grief. You will realize the opinions for what they are: a personal view, attitude, or appraisal that means nothing about you, but everything about the individual advancing their opinion.
“Opinion is the lowest form of human knowledge. It requires no accountability, no understanding. The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another’s world.” These words of wisdom are often incorrectly attributed to Plato but are actually derived from the writings of the poet George Eliot. Caveat: These words are relevant for today, but unfortunately many individuals who claim to agree with this idea of knowledge all too often lack the will or empathy skills necessary to really understand and share the feelings of another. In my “opinion,” this is the root cause of much of the division that exists in our world today.
-
Welcome to WordPress! This is your first post. Edit or delete it to take the first step in your blogging journey.
On Second Thought 