Remember seeing pictures of these?

They are photos from mid-20th-century Moscow, USSR, when larger-than-life statues and posters of Soviet leaders were everywhere.

You still see their equivalent in countries around the world ruled by autocrats and dictators. They are a constant reminder of the omnipotence of their leaders.

*. *. *

Now take a look at this:

No, you’re not seeing things. And it’s not an AI-created picture; it is an actual photograph of the U.S. Department of Labor Building in Washington, D.C., sporting a gigantic poster of Donald Trump bearing the legend, “American Workers First.” And on the other side of the big American flag is a similar portrait of the renowned trust-busting President Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt, with the same legend.

The difference — well, one of the thousand or so differences —- between the two men is that Roosevelt actually did place the interests of American workers at the forefront of his labor policies, whereas Trump has done nothing but force thousands of people out of work, slash their earned benefits, and demolish their social safety nets . . . all in the interest of lining his own and his billionaire friends’ pockets.

That — and plastering his face on buildings to remind the common people who is the boss — is the stuff of which dictators are made. Yet Trump somehow felt the need, two days in a row this week, to “reassure” the American people and his Cabinet that he is most assuredly not a dictator.

Methinks the old boy doth protest too much.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/27/25

Today, as it happens, is “National Just Because Day” — the perfect time to write an article about hooters: just because. So let’s take a little trip back in time . . .

The year was 1959. I was shopping in one of my favorite clothing stores in downtown Washington, D.C., about to pay for my purchases, when a well-dressed man approached me, handed me his business card, and introduced himself as the manager of the soon-to-be-opened D.C. branch of the Gaslight Clubs.

Then he asked me if I would be interested in applying for a job at the club.

I was very young, but old enough — and savvy enough — to know that being a “waitress” in a private gentlemen’s key club was not my goal in life, no matter how generous the tips might be. I had a good job that I loved, an active social life, and I was taking college classes two nights a week. Life was good; I didn’t need to be the serving girl to a bunch of lecherous old men.

So I thanked him for the compliment, and declined his offer.

It was an era of male dominance and female subservience, when we “girls” had to wait to be asked out by a man; when we were restricted to lower-paying jobs; when we were expected eventually to become stay-at-home wives and mothers because those who wished to be doctors or lawyers or engineers were assumed to be lesbians, which was something you definitely did not want to be suspected of. There weren’t many Ruth Bader Ginsburgs around in those days.

And it was an era when workplace sexual harassment was considered the norm. I wish I had a dollar for every time someone took aim at my backside — and got their hands smacked for it . . .

*. *. *

By the 1980s, Gaslight Clubs and Playboy Clubs were everywhere. We women were a little better off than in the’60s, but not much. We had navigated the Betty Friedan sexual revolution, and were freer to impose our own terms on a relationship; but it would still be another decade before gender discrimination became verboten and employers began subjecting their employees to mandatory sensitivity training courses.

In 1983, a group of men opened a restaurant in Clearwater, Florida; they hired attractive, amply-endowed young women as servers; they dressed them in hot pants and low-cut tee shirts; and they named their establishment “Hooters.”

And to everyone’s surprise, they were enormously successful — perhaps because of the titillating name. (Sorry about that.) Soon, Hooters were everywhere. You could stop in for dinner and be treated to a face full of Hooters’ hooters.

*. *. *

I hadn’t thought about Hooters in years; in fact, if you had asked me, I would have said they no longer existed. But then I read that they are still very much alive, although legally in bankruptcy, and hoping to be rescued and revitalized by one Neil Kiefer. He says he wants to turn the “breastaurant” into “a place where men come for beer and wings alongside families who are there for chicken strips and curly fries at lunch.” [Heather Haddon, Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2025.]

Kiefer wants to redo the more rundown locations, update the menu, and make the entire chain — in the words of its original founders — “delightfully tacky” again. [Id.]

While he says, “I don’t think you’re going to see a bunch of butt cheeks hanging out,” Kiefer does allow that the waitresses will be wearing orange shorts (not hot pants or bikini-style bottoms), and that the job qualifications will include “glamorous hair styling” and the “ability to maintain attractive fit & image.” [Id.]

In other words, sex appeal is definitely required.

Goodness knows, we’re no longer in the 1980s; it’s the 2020s, and the sexual revolution has long since come, gone, and left its mark. Skimpy outfits on well-built (and some not-so-well-built) women are to be found everywhere these days, from the beach, to the local mall . . . even (unfortunately) in our middle and high schools. I doubt anyone would be shocked by a pair of orange short shorts.

What I am wondering, though, is how a generation of young women still having to fight for job equality, reproductive rights, and basic respect will feel about their mammary glands being publicly promoted as “hooters.”

And I’m thinking that perhaps some entrepreneurial ladies should pool their financial resources and open a competing chain, staff it with hunky male waiters clad only in Speedos, and call it . . .

Well, never mind. You get my point.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/27/25

You remember Richard Nixon, don’t you? He was the president who resigned on August 8, 1974, before he could be impeached for crimes in connection with the Watergate Scandal.

At a press conference on November 17, 1973, when questioned about Watergate, he had declared, “I am not a crook.”

Well, he lied. He was a crook. And he, his partners-in-crime, and the entire country paid a steep price for it.

*. *. *

Then there was Bill Clinton, who foolishly insisted, when asked about his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky:

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

Guess what? He lied too.

*. *. *

And this one, who says his war of attrition against Ukraine is a “special military operation,” launched to protect Russia-friendly Ukrainians from alleged persecution by a non-existent Nazi regime:

The whole world knows he lies about everything.

*. *. *

Deny, deny, deny. It’s a common tactic used by everyone from the toddler caught with his hand in the cookie jar, to the student who lobbed the spitball at the teacher, to the world leader whitewashing anything from garden-variety corruption to full-blown genocide.

When you know you’re guilty, you just keep denying it and hope there’s no one out there who can prove you’re lying.

So why — considering his well-documented inability to tell the truth about anything — should we believe this guy when he declares, twice in two days:

“I am not a dictator” . . . and then immediately adds that a lot of people are saying maybe they’d actually like to have a dictator?

And we’re supposed to believe him? With his track record?

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/27/25

Haven’t you ever wondered what your reactions to those inkblots would say about you? I have.

(I’ve also thought about being hypnotized, and parachuting from an airplane; but not all of our wishes are fulfilled. Maybe in my next life.)

Visual clues can create strong — and often unexpected — impressions. For example, that inkblot above looks to me like a couple of 18th century Russian peasants celebrating the end of a hard day in the fields, probably with a half-empty bottle of vodka nearby. Go figure.

“So what’s the point?” — I hear you ask.

Well , it’s simply to share with you my visceral reaction to a photograph I stumbled across online yesterday. It’s not an inkblot, and certainly nothing unfamiliar. But my immediate thought was:

“The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse”

Yup . . . I looked at those faces and I thought about these guys:

My mind is obviously in a very dark place right now. I think it may be time for a mental reboot; maybe I’ll start by turning off the news and watching “Mary Poppins” again.

🎶 “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious . . .” 🎶

Oh, yes . . . that’s much better.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/26/25

It’s a 21st-century, cyber-world phenomenon, and it has reached pandemic proportions. Nearly everyone I know — with the exception of a few people who refuse or can’t bear to follow the daily news — is suffering from it. In text-speak, on a more personal level, it’s called “TMI”: Too Much Information. For news junkies like myself, I call it “IO”: Information Overload.

Much of my online doodling consists of my personal reactions to, and commentaries on, the day’s events. I’ve gotten into the habit of scanning the headlines for interesting items two or three times a day, in addition to checking out the little news flashes that pop up on my screen with disturbing regularity. And, depending on what I find and what mood I happen to be in that day, I begin writing my next day’s articles.

It is now 9:15 p.m. on Monday, August 25th, and I have compiled a list of five newsworthy events that have caused me enough concern, or simply pissed me off sufficiently, to inspire a response. Their headlines are:

> “How Russia is trying to win over the world beyond the West.” (BBC)

> “[Supreme Court Justices] Gorsuch and Kavanaugh warn lower court judges in Trump cases.” (CNN)

> “Trump signs executive order establishing ‘specialized’ National Guard units to address crime in cities.” (CNN)

> “Kilmar Abrego Garcia sues to fight deportation to Uganda after being detained by ICE.” (CNN)

> “Trump orders removal of Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook.” (BBC)

I tried the “eenie-meenie-miney-mo” approach to choosing the most important subjects, but it didn’t work. They’re all vital; they’re all infuriating; and taken together, they’re too much.

So I had decided to wait until midnight, file this list as my first post of the day, and not deal with any of it until morning when hopefully I would be in a better mood. And then this alert popped up on my phone:

> “The Plan to Make Hooters ‘Delightfully Tacky’ Again.” (Wall Street Journal)

Okay, it’s not earthshaking news. But it’s somewhat enticing, it’s fun, and it took my mind — even momentarily — off of the bad stuff. So I’m still going to call it an early day; but at least I now know what my next topic will be. It won’t be about wars, or Donald Trump, or Vladimir Putin, or any of the world’s other current madness. It will be about these . . . er, sorry . . . this:

And if that doesn’t make you smile . . . well, all I can offer you is my sympathy; you may be even more depressed than I am.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/26/25 (12:01 a.m.)

How exciting! Vladimir Putin has declared that he sees “a light at the end of the tunnel.”

Unfortunately, it’s not the tunnel leading to the end of his war of attrition against Ukraine. Rather, it is the road leading to improved — and potentially profitable — trade relations between Russia and the United States.

Yes, it’s all about the money. That is what was really accomplished by the two billionaire leaders at that “summit” in Alaska on August 15th, when they were supposed to be working toward putting an end to the nearly four-year massacre of civilians in Ukraine.

As Putin said while visiting a Russian nuclear research center on Friday, August 22nd:

“With the arrival of President Trump [in the White House], I think that a light at the end of the tunnel has finally loomed. And now we had a very good, meaningful and frank meeting in Alaska.

“The next steps now depend on the leadership of the United States, but I am confident that the leadership qualities of the current president, President Trump, are a good guarantee that relations will be restored.” [Anastasia Lyrchikova ad Dmitry Antonov, Reuters, August 22, 2025.]

Without going into detail, Putin spoke of “huge, huge” mineral reserves in the Arctic region, and pointed out that Russia’s Novatek — a liquefied natural gas company — was already in operation there. He added:

“We are discussing, by the way, with American partners the possibility of working together in this area. And not only in our Arctic zone, but also in Alaska. And at the same time, the technologies that we possess, today no one but us possesses. And this is of interest to our partners, including those from the States.” [Id.]

That’s all well and good, assuming any trade agreements are mutually beneficial, and not simply a give-away of Alaska’s vast natural resources. Certainly, improved trade relations would be preferable to the current atmosphere of open hostility and threats of mutually-assured destruction. But cloaking trade talks in the guise of ceasefire negotiations is not merely misleading . . . it’s despicable.

The fate of Ukraine — in fact, the future of the entire world — currently rests in the hands of two old men who, though purportedly at opposite ends of the political spectrum, are in fact like two peas in the proverbial pod. They are a matched set of autocratic, tyrannical, avaricious, rapacious, narcissistic, blood-thirsty sociopaths.

The principal difference between them is that one is diabolically clever and manipulative, while the other is just a bully.

And of the two, guess which one is more likely to come out on top.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/25/25

Jackie Kennedy had exquisite taste — in clothes, home decor, entertainment, and her choice of a first husband.

Melania Trump . . . not so much. She dresses well, but remember her “Handmaid’s Tale” Christmas trees?

And her husband . . . well, you have only to consider his passion for gilt and glitter, the decor of his New York penthouse, the shiny personalized items he added to the Oval Office, and his choice of entertainment for the once-renowned Kennedy Center — reportedly sidelining classical ballet to make room for something on the order of “So You Think You Can Dance” (which is good fun for TV viewing, but hardly appropriate for a cultural center).

There is also, of course, his paving over of a substantial portion of the beautiful White House Rose Garden, and his plans for a 90,000-square-foot, $200 million ballroom addition. His simple philosophy: More is better.

Well, no . . . sometimes, more is just more. Take, for example, his new money-making sideline: Trump merchandise in the White House gift shop.

Never mind the traditional items available for purchase by tourists looking for a bit of memorabilia to take home with them. For the current White House occupant, it has to be all about him . . . and if he can line his already overflowing pockets a bit more, then so much the better.

We’re not talking about tasteful trinkets, like photos and books about the history of the White House, or even coffee mugs bearing pictures of the building. No, we’re talking about Trump, Trump, and more Trump . . . . MAGA, MAGA, and more MAGA . . .

. . . and Crap, Crap, and more Crap . . .

. . . and even this flagrant bit of unconstitutional wishful thinking:

What must European leaders Starmer, Macron, Herz, Meloni, Stubb, Rutte and von der Leyen have thought when they arrived to try to find a solution to the war in Ukraine, and received a tour of . . . THAT??!!!

*. *. *

Now, I don’t think I’m a snob. There is ample room in this world for an infinite variety of tastes. Classical, country-western and rock music can co-exist nicely. One person may enjoy minimalist decor, another prefer a bit of kitsch and clutter, and a third person even love red Christmas trees. It’s okay. In fact, it’s the variety of choices that make life so interesting.

But in the world of international diplomacy, there are traditions and rules — and plain old common sense — to be considered. If Trump’s taste in decor is more glitzy than yours or mine, that’s fine. But did he have to put his egotistical, money-grubbing collection of cheap merchandise on display for all the world to see?

Frankly, it’s mortifying.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/25/25

The White House at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., is one of several immediately-recognizable edifices representing the freedom, democracy, and the political, industrial and economic greatness that is the United States of America.

First occupied in 1800 by the young country’s second president, John Adams, and his wife Abigail, it has stood for 225 years as “The People’s House” — officially the nerve center for 46 of 47 presidencies . . .

. . . except for a period of about three years beginning on August 24, 1814 — 211 years ago today — when British troops sacked and set fire to it during the War of 1812.

The country’s fourth president, James Madison, had left the day before to meet with his generals on the nearby battlefield, expecting to return the following day. But, knowing that the British troops were closing in on Washington, he gave his wife Dolley instructions to gather up important state papers and be prepared to abandon the White House at a moment’s notice.

Dolley made her escape, and the Madisons were able to return to Washington three days later . . . though not to the burnt-out White House. They took up residence in the nearby Octagon House, where Madison served out the rest of his term. It was only in 1817 that newly-elected president James Monroe was able to occupy the reconstructed building. [“This Day In History,” History.com, August 24, 2025.]

And there on Pennsylvania Avenue it has stood ever since, through Democratic and Republican administrations, through times of peace and times of war, and through periods of civil strife.

*. *. *

The White House is now again under fire, though not at the hands of a foreign foe. But — “God willin’ and the creek don’t rise” (as they say in the American south) — it will survive, and there it will remain for the next 250 years.

The White House, and everything it represents, has endured much over two and a half centuries; with the people’s help and courage, it can surely withstand another three and a half years.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/24/25

Forget the finish line; the horses are back behind the starting gate . . . again.

It’s as though three and a half years of talks never happened . . . as though the leaders of the United States and the EU nations never tried . . . as though nearly a million dead and wounded never even existed.

Because today, of all days — the 34th anniversary of Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union — Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov chose to drop a metaphorical bomb on the hopes and prayers of the Ukrainian people and their allies for any sort of peace treaty in the foreseeable future.

Speaking in an an almost unprecedented, pre-taped interview that aired today on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Lavrov unashamedly denied that Russia had erred in striking civilian targets in Ukraine; again questioned Volodymyr Zelensky’s legitimacy as president of Ukraine; and blamed Ukraine for blocking the peace process. [RFE/RL, August 24, 2024.]

It is unclear when Lavrov’s interview was taped. But its release on this significant day for the Ukrainian people was surely no coincidence. His remarks included the following:

“The reaction to the Anchorage meeting, the gathering in Washington of these European representatives and what they were doing after Washington indicates that they don’t want peace.” [Id.]

On the subject of post-war security guarantees for Ukraine — which the U.S. and European allies have been frantically working to formulate — Lavrov said that such guarantees should be given by the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council: the United States, United Kingdom, France, China . . . and Russia. [Id.]

What’s that old joke about sending the fox to guard the henhouse?

But Lavrov wasn’t joking. He was seriously suggesting that Russia — the very country that wants nothing less than to rob Ukraine of its sovereignty — should have an equal voice in guaranteeing its security.

Then he went on to reiterate the same demands that have roadblocked negotiations all along:

“The guarantors would be guaranteeing the security of Ukraine, which must be neutral, which must be nonaligned with any military bloc and which must be non-nuclear.” [Id.]

He again questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy as president; downplayed the likelihood of a summit between Putin and Zelensky due to the existence of “too many” unresolved issues; and accused Ukraine of bringing about Russia’s actions — which he declined to call an “invasion” — by Ukraine’s alleged mistreatment of culturally Russian residents of regions of eastern Ukraine bordering on Russia. [Eric Bazail-Eimil, Politico, August 24, 2025.]

Lavrov further attempted to drive a wedge between the U.S. and its European allies, claiming that Russia and the U.S. are of like minds, and that the EU members’ actions are responsible for the continuation of the conflict:

“We want peace in Ukraine. He wants, President Trump wants, peace in Ukraine. The reaction to [the] Anchorage meeting, the gathering in Washington of these European representatives and what they were doing after Washington indicates that they don’t want peace.” [Id.]

And he said it all with a straight face.

*. *. *

But in Kyiv, President Zelensky was having none of it. Speaking to his people and to the world, he said:

“[Ukraine] will never again accept the humiliation of what the Russians say is a ‘compromise.’ We need a just peace in which our future will be ours to decide. . . . Ukraine is not a victim; it is a fighter.” [RFE/RL, op.cit.]

Happy Anniversary, Ukraine.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/24/25

Perhaps Vladimir Putin wasn’t in the mood to spend millions of dollars on a new holding facility for his deportees; or maybe he just didn’t have time before his next scheduled roundup. So he improvised, and simply repurposed Moscow’s Zhukovsky Airport to hold some of the Central Asian migrants recently arrested in the Kremlin’s latest ethnic purge.

Following the deadly terror attack on the Crocus City Hall concert venue outside Moscow on March 22, 2024, four suspects were quickly arrested and charged, with 15 additional accomplices being detained thereafter. On August 4th of this year, the 19 Central Asian men — most of them from Tajikistan — went on trial for the crime. As yet, there has been no word of a verdict in the case.

Since that time, the Russian government has instituted a sweep of Central Asian migrants, ostensibly for deportation to their home countries as security risks. But they don’t all get to go home; and now, dozens have said they have been held at Zhukovsky Airport for more than a week.

According to one report, these men have been seen locked inside a cramped room with prison-style iron bunk beds; some have barely enough room to sit, while others lie on the concrete floor. There are no windows or air conditioners; a trash can overflows with empty packages from instant noodles. One man said:

“I have been here for 10 days. They give us instant soup once a day, nothing else. There is a man among us who suffers from a heart condition.” [RFE/RL, August 22, 2025.]

Another prisoner added:

“We told [Russian authorities] that we want to buy return tickets and go back to Tajikistan, but they are holding us here and not allowing us in or to return home.” [Id.]

Sound familiar?

Not surprising; the two situations are disturbingly similar. But there is one significant difference: the Central Asian migrants in Russia are not merely being deported. Thousands of them are being conscripted into the Russian military to fight in Ukraine . . . sometimes by means of enticements such as big bonuses, but more often through coercion and force.

One young man from Kazakhstan, Kiril Nysanbaev, had already served in the military at home, but then went to Russia in the fall of 2023 to find work in a factory at Chelyabinsk. A few months later, he called his family, saying he was in a migrant detention center. According to his twin sister, Kamilla:

“He said he was detained in connection with a robbery incident. He told me that Russian officers at the detention facility beat him and forced him to sign a contract [to fight in Ukraine].” [Azattyq Asia, RFE/RL, August 21, 2025.]

In March of this year, Kiril was killed in battle in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. His family were not notified of his death until June. [Id.]

Thousands of such stories are emerging concerning conscripts from the former Soviet Central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. Ukraine has established a state-run project, “I Want To Live,” offering soldiers fighting for Russia a means of safely surrendering to Ukrainian forces, rather than returning to Russia or to their home countries, where they would likely be facing criminal charges.

The project says it has obtained lists of names of more than 2,000 Uzbek nationals, more than 930 Tajiks, 529 Kazakh nationals, and 327 Kyrgyz citizens in the first six months of this year. And the numbers continue to grow. [Id.]

Russia, desperate to replace the hundreds of thousands of its own troops killed or wounded in Ukraine, earlier resorted to recruiting criminals from its prisons. Now it has added this new source of manpower — Central Asian migrants — often referred to as “cannon fodder” because of their lack of military experience or training and the likelihood they won’t survive.

To Vladimir Putin, they are just bodies.

It is nothing less than human trafficking, and it is a crime against humanity. Why can’t it be stopped?

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
8/24/25