No, it’s not another Woodward-and-Bernstein, Watergate-style bombshell. But it’s almost as rare an event.

The Washington Post, for the first time in decades, has refused to endorse a candidate in a U.S. presidential election.

Absolutely! And that’s not all. They said they’re not going to do it again . . . not ever.

What am I going to do now? How will I know who to vote for?!!

But seriously . . .

I happen to think they’re doing exactly what a news outlet should be doing: reporting the news, not trying to create it. So, kudos to you, Washington Post. You’ve followed the campaigns, reported on the good, the bad and the weird as it has occurred, and offered analyses and editorial opinions. And now it’s time for us, the public, to make our own decisions. We don’t need investigative reporters, political analysts, editorial boards, or Jeff Bezos himself standing over our shoulders and telling us how to vote.

But what does this say about the state of our country — or, specifically our politicians — when the only way you can vote is by trying to choose between the lesser of two evils?

And it’s not just Donald Trump and Kamala Harris who have been judged and found wanting. It’s the sad fact that we couldn’t come up with anyone — in either party — better qualified.

Well, yes, him . . . but he’s dead.

Which appears to be precisely the reason the Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos, made the decision that he did, despite opposition from many of the paper’s staff members.

The Post’s publisher, Will Lewis, issued the following announcement:

“The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election. We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.” [Hadas Gold and Brian Stelter, CNN, October 25, 2024.]

Lewis continued: “We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.” [Id.]

The paper’s staffers had been alerted by editorial page editor David Shipley that a “significant” announcement was forthcoming, and that there were likely to be “strong reactions” to it. And indeed there were.

Editor-at-large Robert Kagan said he has resigned over Bezos’ decision.

And former executive editor Marty Baron, who led the paper’s coverage of the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack, had this to say:

“This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty. Donald Trump will see this as an invitation to further intimidate owner Bezos (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.” [Id.]

Looking at it from the point of view of editors whose job it is to . . . well . . . editorialize, I can see their point. But I disagree. Because I have felt for many years that the news media in general — print, broadcast and online — have stepped too far outside the acceptable parameters of news reporting, and have become too involved in influencing public opinion.

It’s a fine line, I know, and there are valid arguments on both sides. But that’s how I feel.

So, again . . . Bravo, Jeff Bezos. Let Donald Trump twist it any way he chooses. In standing up to him — in this citizen’s opinion, at least — you have once more shown that courage for which the Washington Post has indeed become famed.

And now I look forward to hearing what Woodward and Bernstein think.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/25/24

In politics, that would be pretty low. But this diatribe, delivered by one of the two candidates for the U.S. presidency, reached new depths of degradation on Wednesday at a rally in Duluth, Georgia:

“Immediately upon taking the oath of office, I will launch the largest deportation program in American history.

”I will rescue every town, and every town is petrified, even if they don’t have them (undocumented migrants), because they know they’re coming. They’re heading for the towns. They’re heading for the towns. Who could do this to our country? Who could do this? Who could do this to our country?

”They’re taking over Times Square in New York, and they have weapons that our military doesn’t even have. You’d say, where the hell are they getting the weapons? But we have guys that want to confront them, and they’re going to be allowed to confront them, and we’re going to get them the hell out of here.” [Stephen Collinson, Caitlin Hu and Shelby Rose, CNN Meanwhile In America, October 25, 2024.]

I will leave it to you to figure out which racist, hate-filled, fear-mongering candidate came up with that steaming pile of

But I’ll give you one little hint: It wasn’t Kamala Harris.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/25/24

Looking back through time is endlessly fascinating, and invariably leaves me wishing either that I could have been around to witness an event, or thanking my lucky stars I wasn’t. For example, who wouldn’t be happy to see the end of three decades of war, as in . . .

1648 – Thirty Years’ War ends. Actually a series of wars, fought by various European countries for a variety of reasons — many of them having to do with religion, as usual. I’ve never been able to sort out the details, but as a result of the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia ending the 30 years of grief and bloodshed, “the Netherlands gained independence from Spain, Sweden gained control of the Baltic and France was acknowledged as the preeminent Western power. The power of the Holy Roman Emperor was broken and the German states were again able to determine the religion of their lands.” [History.com, October 24, 2024.]

It sounds as though at least some good came out of that war (or series of wars) — unlike a few more recent ones I could name.

*. *. *

1861 – Western Union completes the first transcontinental telegraph line. And the mania for instant communication still hasn’t been satisfied. What do you suppose those folks from Civil War days would think about the internet?

*. *. *

1901 – First barrel ride down Niagara Falls. Okay, this was some crazy lady — a 63-year-old schoolteacher — whose husband had died in the Civil War, and who needed money. She thought the publicity of her insane stunt would make her rich, so she padded a pickle barrel with cushions, climbed in, had herself towed by a small boat into the middle of the Niagara River, and took the plunge. Her fame was short-lived, and the fortune she had anticipated never materialized. But the fact that she survived her 20 minutes of complete terror remains a testament to the biblical adage that “The Lord preserves the simple . . .” [Psalms 116:6.]

*. *. *

1931 – George Washington Bridge is dedicated. This one is personal, recalling the most terrifying road trip of my life. It took place in the late 1960s or early ‘70s, when I agreed to drive my mother from Washington, D.C., to visit her sister in Rhode Island. I had never made that particular trip before, and carefully mapped out the shortest, most direct route. This, of course, was before the advent of GPS, so when I say “mapped,” I mean it literally.

Well, we packed my two small children and a whole lot of stuff into the car and took off on our family vacation. All was going smoothly until we were in New Jersey, approaching that marvel of engineering, the G.W. Bridge, and I saw dozens of signs directing drivers to . . . Oh! My! God! . . . not one, but two levels — one with eight lanes and the other with six! I had no clue where I was supposed to be, and all of the lanes were filled with cars speeding at what felt like 100 miles an hour.

I think I must have blacked out at some point, because all I remember is my mother — who was trying her best to read the signs and navigate — shouting, “No! Not that exit! That goes to the Bronx Zoo!”

And the next thing I knew, we were in some scary New York neighborhood, where the traffic was bumper-to-bumper, dead-stopped, and I swore that at the very least we were going to have our hubcaps stolen while we sat helplessly watching.

I made many trips to New England in the years that followed — all of them by way of the Garden State Parkway and the New York State Thruway. It adds a bit of time and mileage to the trip, but the Tappan Zee Bridge offers a lovely view . . . and it’s nowhere near the Bronx Zoo.

*. *. *

1945. The United Nations is born. Though the United Nations Charter had been adopted and signed on June 26th, it did not take effect until October 24th of that year. Some 79 years later, I’m happy to say it’s still going strong. Let’s hope, for the sake of humanity, that it stays that way for at least another 79.

*. *. *

1951 – President Truman declares war with Germany is officially over. Wow! I thought that ended in 1945. Actually, the fighting did end then, but the treaty with Germany wasn’t signed for another six years because of some squabbling with — anyone care to guess? — Russia, over the divvying up of Berlin. Some things never change.

*. *. *

And to end on a less impressive note:

1997 – Marv Albert faces sentencing in sexual assault case. Albert, a popular sportscaster, had been charged with sexual assault by one Vanessa Perhach. She claimed he had invited her to his hotel room, suggested she participate in three-way sex, and then bit her on the back when she refused. Kind of funny, actually — but not to Ms. Perhach, nor to Albert, who resigned from his job at Madison Square Garden and was fired from NBC after pleading guilty to assault and battery.

I recall that this was a huge scandal and an unending topic of cocktail-party conversation at the time. By today’s standards, though — when everybody is suddenly “recalling” having been groped (or worse) by one celebrity or another — it all seems rather ordinary.

That’s too bad, really.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/25/24

He died in February in a Siberian prison camp, under unexplained circumstances. Vladimir Putin thought that with the death of Alexei Navalny, he had heard the last of his most worrisome opponent; but he was wrong. He hadn’t counted on the force of martyrdom, or of the will of Navalny’s people.

And he certainly hadn’t counted on the publication of what has been termed Navalny’s “final letter to the world.” It is the story of his life; but more than that, it is a diary of the last years of that life — years spent in the most brutal circumstances imaginable. The book, titled “Patriot,” was started while he was recuperating in Germany after having been poisoned with the Russian nerve agent Novichok. And it was finished during those last years in prison. When they couldn’t kill him with poison, they simply finished him off by means of slow torture.

Alexei Navalny was the reason I began following the stories of the people I call Putin’s Hostages — Americans and other non-Russians who have been arrested in Russia on purely imaginary charges, to be held in prison as collateral for some future exchange.

His beloved wife Yulia has written:

“This book is a testament not only to Alexei’s life, but to his unwavering commitment to the fight against dictatorship — a fight he gave everything for, including his life. . . . Sharing his story will not only honor his memory but also inspire others to stand up for what is right and to never lose sight of the values that truly matter.”

As my old-world Ukrainian grandmother used to say: “From your mouth to God’s ears.”

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/24/24

Unfortunately, that in-between place really exists . . . if you’re a Russian who has been accused of a crime.

The “rock” is a guaranteed conviction (whether you are guilty or innocent) and consignment to the hell of a Russian prison; the “hard place” is a trip to Ukraine to fight in a war for which you have not been trained, and which you may even oppose. Either way, you can kiss your life — or life as you know it — goodbye.

And that in-between place is where former Olympian Andrey Perlov has found himself.

Perlov, now 62, was living quietly in Siberia’s Novosibirsk, working as managing director of the local football club, when police showed up at his home in the early morning hours of March 28th. He was taken into custody, accused of stealing some three million rubles ($32,000) from the club, which he and his family have vehemently denied. He has been detained ever since.

But he has been offered a deal . . . of sorts. Although not a young man, he has been told that he has the option of agreeing to join the Russian military fighting in Ukraine, in return for which the embezzlement charges against him would be “frozen” and potentially dropped when the war ends — if he survives, of course.

It’s that one word — “potentially” — that bothers me. The Russian government is not best known for keeping its promises.

Aside from that, though, is this new Kremlin tactic for rounding up live bodies to throw into their war as fodder for the Ukrainian defensive troops. It goes beyond the recruiting of convicted criminals. Under new legislation, passed in March of this year, both prosecution and defense attorneys are legally obligated to inform people charged with most crimes of their option to go to war instead of to trial and prison. [Olga Ivshina, BBC, October 22, 2024.]

The individuals do — technically, at least — have the right to refuse to go and to take their chances with the courts instead. But they are being pressured to choose the military option, even seeing their families approached and urged to convince them. And if the accused does sign, then the criminal case is suspended within a few days and he leaves almost immediately for the front lines. [Id.]

A rock and a hard place . . .

*. *. *

. . . As a much younger man, Yaroslav Lipavsky, and his family soon learned. At the tender age of 17, he was accused of intentionally inflicting “serious harm to health by a group of persons by prior agreement.” In order to avoid prosecution, he chose the option of signing up with the military as soon as he reached his 18th birthday.

He was sent to Ukraine, and was dead just a week later. [Id.]

*. *. *

But what of those who choose prison over war, as in Andrey Perlov’s case. His daughter Alina told their family’s story:

“He refused and we made quite a big noise in the local media so he was sent to the strict punishment cell, where they brought him the contract again.” [Id.]

She said that when he refused a second time, he was prohibited from seeing or calling his family. When the family did finally see him in court in July, he had lost a lot of weight.

“He tries to keep himself cheerful, but if this goes on, they will break him,” Alina said. [Id.]

When BBC journalists asked Russian authorities about Perlov’s case, and about the pressuring of detainees to join the army, they received no response. [Id.]

Typical.

*. *. *

So — using the old Soviet methods of “convincing” the people to submit to the government’s will — the Putin regime has found a new way of replacing lost troops without depleting the size of its military force: by sacrificing what they consider to be the dregs of society.

Or, as Ebenezer Scrooge so charmingly put it: “If they would rather die, they had better do it and decrease the surplus population.” [Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol, 1843.]

Nice.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/24/24

On the second day of the sixteenth annual summit of BRICS being held at Kazan Russia, President Putin opened the session with the following comments:

“The BRICS strategy in the global arena conforms with the strivings of the main part of the global community, the so-called global majority. This approach is especially relevant in the current conditions when truly radical changes are underway across the globe, including the shaping of a multipolar world.” [Associated Press, October 23, 2024.]

Characterizing BRICS as a counterbalance to the Western-dominated global order, Putin proclaimed the summit as “the largest foreign policy event ever held” by Russia. Some 36 countries were represented — far beyond the ten actual member nations — many by their leaders.

Putin has focused specifically on the creation of a new payment system that would allow Moscow to circumvent the global SWIFT network, thus dodging Western sanctions. At the summit, he accused the U.S. of “weaponizing” the dollar, and said it was a “big mistake.”

“It’s not us who refuse to use the dollar,” he claimed. “But if they don’t let us work, what can we do? We are forced to search for alternatives.” [Id.]

Yes, we get it: that was a not-so-veiled threat.

Referring to the sanctions that have been imposed on Russia since its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he totally ignored — as always — the reason for the sanctions, and described them as illegal. Just more Kremlin double-speak.

He also discussed the creation of a BRICS investment platform that could “become a powerful tool for supporting our economies, and would also provide financial resources to countries of the Global South and East.” [Id.] — thus encompassing Asia, Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East.

None of this was in the least surprising — it’s pretty much what Putin has been touting as BRICS’ goal all along, and directly in line with his and China’s President Xi Jinping’s proposed “new world order.”

The Kremlin’s website, however, carried a brief mention of the summit, which reads like the minutes of a board of directors meeting. It contained two items that did catch my attention, though.

The first was a “restricted-format meeting” limited to nine of the ten BRICS member countries (Saudi Arabia did not send a representative to the summit). It offered nothing about the purpose of that session, but said that the meeting then “continued in an expanded format.” [President of Russia News, October 23, 2024.]

Most interesting was word of the signing of a joint declaration, labeled the Kazan Declaration, a .pdf copy of which was attached — all 33 pages, encompassing 134 items. I will be trying to digest that today . . . if I can stay awake long enough to get through it all.

*. *. *

And so, barring any startling revelations in the Kazan Declaration, day two of the 16th BRICS summit ended without any headline-worthy news, which is probably a good thing.

At least no one declared war on anyone else.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/24/24

Tonight at sundown I lit the annual memorial candle for Merna — my only sister and best friend, who dared to leave me seven years ago tomorrow.

It’s a reminder, not only of the huge hole that losing someone close to you leaves in your soul, but also of the good times you shared for so many years: the youthful fights; the parties in young adulthood; the private jokes and whispered secrets; the travels and shopping trips and countless dinner-and-theater evenings of later years.

You know they’ll never come again . . . but you’re glad to have had them for as long as you did.

Rest well, big sister. I miss you.

Love,
Brendy
xoxo

In the category of “Who do you think you’re fooling?” we once again hear from Viktor Orban. (I know that should be “whom,” but it sounded stuffy, so I took a little literary license.)

But I digress.

I’m truly concerned that Hungary’s Prime Minister is losing his marbles. Because today — in a speech marking the anniversary of the failed 1956 uprising against Soviet repression — he warned the people of Hungary that they must “resist” the European Union (EU), which he said is “trying to topple” his government. [RFE/RL, October 23, 2024.]

“But isn’t Hungary a member of the EU?” . . . I hear you ask.

Well, yes, they are. Which is what is so disturbing. Because Orban — without providing a shred of evidence to back up his allegations — said the EU wants to install a “puppet government” in Hungary because “independent Hungarian politics are unacceptable to Brussels.” He added that the lessons of 1956 “tell us that we can only fight for one thing: Hungary and Hungarian freedom.” [Id.]

He spoke of the “entire European economy . . . [being] drawn into” the war in Ukraine, and of European leaders “indulging in the illusion of winning.” [Id.]

And further — and this is where he really goes off the rails: “We know they want to force us into the war, that they want to impose their migrants upon us . . . and hand over our children to gender activists.” [Id.]

Gender activists? What the hell . . . ??!!!

But he wasn’t through yet. He claimed that there is a plan that, once “victory is achieved on the eastern front,” Ukraine’s reinforced military will enable it to replace the Americans to guarantee the safety of Europe. And apparently that would be a fate worse than death, because, according to Orban,

“It means that we, Hungarians, could wake up one morning and see Slavic [i.e., Ukrainian] soldiers once again coming from the east and being deployed in Hungary. We don’t want that.” [Id.]

*. *. *

None of this is terribly surprising — except for that “gender activists” comment, which seems to have come from some deep, dark corner of his mind — inasmuch as Orban has been playing both sides of the field for years, openly wooing Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping while maintaining his country’s membership in both the EU and NATO. Even the fact that Hungary is the current holder of the rotating presidency of the EU Council has not served to soften his pro-Putin rhetoric.

Later on the same day, at a separate commemoration of the 1956 uprising, opposition politician Peter Magyar addressed Orban’s comments, saying that Hungary had been “tricked and deceived” by the Prime Minister’s Fidesz party. He said that Orban had “no authority to betray the heritage of 1956, has no authority to serve Russian interests.” [Id.]

And yet he continues to do so. It is a harsh reality for a country that has fought so hard for so long against oppression.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/23/24

Poor Rudy Giuliani . . . literally. Not only did he lose a defamation case brought against him by two Georgia election workers; but now he has to part with his most prized possessions in order to satisfy that judgment.

How far have the mighty fallen. Once New York City’s hero of 9-11, he made the fatal mistake of taking on legal representation of Donald Trump, and then actually becoming part of the web of lies and deceit created by his client — something an experienced attorney should know better than to do. Representation is one thing; participation is quite another.

But never mind that; it’s ancient history. Let’s talk about the lifestyle the former New York City Mayor was able to create for himself — though certainly not just on his salary as Mayor, or as Associate U.S. Attorney General, or U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. His valuables include — undoubtedly among numerous other items — a Manhattan penthouse apartment; a condominium in Palm Beach, Florida; a watch given to him by European presidents after the 9-11 attacks; four New York Yankees World Series rings; a signed Joe DiMaggio jersey and other sports memorabilia; and a 1980 Mercedes automobile once owned by actress Lauren Bacall. [Katelyn Polantz, CNN, October 22, 2024.]

And now a Manhattan federal judge has ordered these items, plus a couple of million dollars allegedly still owed Giuliani by the Trump campaign, if he’s ever able to collect it — but excluding the Palm Beach condo and the World Series rings, which are still under consideration — to be turned over to the two women to whom he owes the whopping sum of $150 million. Interestingly, the order also included a TV, furniture, and other jewelry.

Those are some classy luxuries, for sure. And liquidating them should go a long way toward satisfying that rather . . . well . . . exceptional judgment.

One hundred and fifty million dollars??!!! Even in today’s inflated economy, that is one hell of a lot of defamation.

I do not question the court’s verdict in favor of the two plaintiffs. Nor do I question the plaintiffs’ claims of permanent damage done to their reputations and psyches by Mr. Giuliani’s actions. But I have to wonder how the court came up with that $150 million figure? I mean . . . even if neither of the women can hold a job for the rest of their natural lives, how much do they need to make them comfortable and happy for those years?

And frankly, that much money in my possession would just make my life more stressful . . . not less. It’s too much responsibility.

Now, while liquidating assets to pay off a judgment is not an uncommon practice, I have a couple of questions about the items listed. First, the New York penthouse. Is that his only New York residence? If so, shouldn’t he be able to hold onto enough of the proceeds to secure another, more modest apartment for himself? Are they kicking him out onto the street? Or is he sentenced to move in with the Trumps as part of his punishment? To me, that would be far worse than losing Lauren Bacall’s Mercedes.

And that TV. Come on now! The man’s not going to have much else to do other than watch an endless string of Hallmark Christmas movies and the election results. Plus, of course, Trump’s declaration of victory, whether he wins or not. Give the guy a little something to live for, can’t you?

And the furniture. Are we talking about all of it? Maybe he has valuable antique pieces, but at least leave the guy a bed where he can cry himself to sleep at night, and a chair to flop onto to watch . . . oh, wait. He won’t have a TV. Never mind the chair.

Seriously, I’m sure there is some sort of reasoning behind the court’s ruling. I just wonder if, in meting out justice, this one might have simply forgotten where to stop.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/23/24

No, not bricks!

BRICS: the Putin-inspired alliance originally comprised of five founding nations: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. And now — doubled in membership in its 16 years of existence — engaged in its annual summit, this year in Kazan, Russia.

Also participating are the leaders of new members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as leaders of other countries interested in joining, including Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh. [Al Jazeera, October 22, 2024.]

It’s quite an impressive lineup.

The nations represented are said to account for 45% of the world’s population and 35% of the global economy. [Vladimir Soldatkin and Guy Faulconbridge, Reuters, October 22, 2024.]

Its purpose: to override the economic and political “monopoly” — their word — of the West. And from Putin’s and Xi’s point of view, at least, to create a “new world order,” with Russia and China at the forefront.

To do that, the focus at present is on the establishment of an economic structure independent of the U.S. dollar, in order to protect against present and future sanctions such as those under which Russia is now struggling.

I cannot stress strongly enough the potential impact of BRICS on the future of our world if Putin, Xi and the others are able to carry their plans to their ultimate intended conclusion: world dominance. It would be, quite simply, the realization of an Orwellian nightmare.

The summit has only begun its three-day program today, and I’ll be following its progress closely. Please stay tuned.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
10/22/24