When we last dropped in on Washington’s version of the Hatfields and McCoys — could it have been only yesterday? — Steve Bannon had entered the scene to mix things up by suggesting a multi-pronged investigation of Elon Musk, whom he apparently considers to be the country’s Public Enemy #1.

So let’s catch up on the last 24 hours.

Later on Saturday, when asked by NBC News if he thought the relationship was at an end, Donald Trump himself replied, somewhat tersely: “I would assume so, yeah.” [Brandon Drenon, BBC News, June 7, 2025.]

As to Musk’s earlier threats to back Democratic candidates in the next elections, Trump said there would be “serious consequences” if that were to happen. But in a telephone interview with NBC News, he declined to comment further on what those consequences might be.

He did say — as to Steve Bannon’s suggestion of an investigation of Musk — that he had not yet had any discussions on that subject, and added that he had not thought about terminating any of the U.S. government’s contracts with Musk’s companies.

And when asked about the possibility of trying to repair their relationship, he replied:

“No. I have no intention of speaking to him.” [Nandita Bose, Reuters, June 7, 2025.]

The spark that ignited this bonfire seems to have been Musk’s criticism of the “One Big Beautiful Bill” of which Trump is so nauseatingly proud: over 1,000 pages of what Musk — who would like us to believe he’s grown a conscience — called a “disgusting abomination” that would actually increase the budget deficit by some $2.4 trillion dollars over the next ten years. But Trump remains confident that the Senate will pass the bill by the upcoming 4th of July holiday, saying, with his usual brilliant clarity and articulation:

“In fact, yeah, people that were, were going to vote for it are now enthusiastically going to vote for it, and we expect it to pass.” [Id.]

And then the parrot so often seen perched on Trump’s shoulder, JD Vance, tossed in his two cents’ worth of gobbledegook, calling Musk’s criticism a “huge mistake,” and adding:

“I’m always going to be loyal to the president, and I hope that eventually Elon kind of comes back into the fold. Maybe that’s not possible now because he’s gone so nuclear. But I hope it is.”

And then Vance inexplicably described Musk as an “incredible entrepreneur.” [Id.]

I just wish those two — Frick and Frack, or Abbott and Costello, or Trump and Vance, or whatever their names are — would get their stories straight before opening their mouths. Because we members of the public would really like to understand what the hell they’re saying.

Or maybe that’s the whole idea . . .

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/8/25

One of the bloodiest, most notorious battles of Russia’s war against Ukraine took place in the early months of the invasion in Mariupol, a city on the Sea of Azov, where the last heroic defenders held out against the Russian onslaught in the Azovstal steel factory for three long months, from February 24th to May 20th. The difficulty of that battle has been a thorn in the Kremlin’s side for three years, leading Vladimir Putin to designate the Azov Brigade a terrorist organization and to call for its members to face tribunals and possible execution.

Little wonder, then, that those fighters who were taken alive, and remain in Russian captivity, have consistently been passed over for exchange during the bilateral prisoner swaps, including the most recent one on May 25th of this year.

Following completion of the last phase of the exchange of 1,000 prisoners, Denys Prokopenko, commander of the 12th Special Forces Brigade Azov, called the absence of any Azov fighters in the process a “disgrace to the entire state.” [Mykyta Peretiatko, RFE/RL, June 3, 2025.]

While Russia is generally being blamed for refusing to return any of the Azov prisoners, Prokopenko believes that Ukrainian officials are also at fault for sticking with a negotiating “mechanism that stopped working.” He has said:

“This feels like a mockery. If that were truly the case [that Russia was solely to blame], neither I nor other Azov fighters would have returned from captivity. [Id.]

Ukraine’s deputy head of the Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Andriy Yusov, disagreed and accused Russia of purposely complicating the exchange process in order to increase pressure on the Ukrainian government. He argued that “Our prisoners are in Putin’s hands . . . [Russian special services] exploit the prisoner issue for the purpose of warfare against Ukraine.” [Id.]

But, though Yusov is certainly not wrong, Prokopenko maintains that “We must find alternatives, offer them someone more valuable than a contracted soldier. Ukraine is packed with Russian agents; all our special services know this very well.” [Id.]

In other words, Ukraine should up the ante.

Regardless of the reasons for Russia’s continuing to stonewall the return of any members of the Azov Brigade, it is clear that three years is far too long a time to hold them when so many others have been sent home. The Ukrainian, European and U.S. negotiators must make this a priority in their continuing talks.

*. *. *

And in the meantime, here again is our list of those known to be held hostage of the Putin regime throughout Russia, Belarus and Ukraine:

Prisoners of War:

The People of Ukraine
The Azov 12

Political Prisoners:

David Barnes
Ales Bialiatski (in Belarus)
Gordon Black
Andrei Chapiuk (in Belarus)
Antonina Favorskaya
Konstantin Gabov
Robert Gilman
Stephen James Hubbard
Sergey Karelin
Ihar Karney (in Belarus) on
Vadim Kobzev
Darya Kozyreva
Artyom Kriger
Uladzimir Labkovich (in Belarus)
Michael Travis Leake
Aleksei Liptser
Ihar Losik (in Belarus)
Mikita Losik (in Belarus)
Daniel Martindale
Farid Mehralizada (in Azerbaijan)
Nika Novak
Marfa Rabkova (in Belarus)
Igor Sergunin
Dmitry Shatresov
Robert Shonov
Eugene Spector
Valiantsin Stafanovic (in Belarus)
Siarhei Tsikhanouski (in Belarus)
Laurent Vinatier
Robert Romanov Woodland
Vladislav Yesypenko (in Crimea)
Yuras Zyankovich (in Belarus)

. . . and any others I may have missed.

You are not forgotten.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/8/25

As though this week’s exchanges between Donald Trump and Elon Musk weren’t enough to keep us amused, who should come crawling out from under his rock to add to the fun but Trump’s former friend and noted right-wing conspiracy theorist . . . none other than Steve Bannon.

And it sounds as though he may be trying to get back into Trump’s good graces. In addition to pushing for an unconstitutional third term for his ex-boss . . .

. . . he is now taking Trump’s side against Musk by urging the administration to investigate the world’s wealthiest man for a variety of alleged misdeeds, including drug use, being in the pay of the Chinese government, and endangering national security in his role as head of DOGE.

Oh, and by the way — Bannon also questions Musk’s immigration status, and believes he may be subject to deportation.

In his own words:

“They have to do that. You have to take his security clearance. Investigate drug use and investigate his involvement [with China]. And you have to investigate his status as a citizen. If it turned out he overstayed visas and lied about it, it’s not right. It has to be investigated.” [Robert Costa, CBS News, June 6, 2025.]

I don’t know about you, but I haven’t had this much fun since I discovered “Would I Lie To You?” on British TV.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/7/25

In April of this year, the Trump administration caused yet another furor over its tyrannical and unconstitutional methods of dealing with the country’s large — and largely law-abiding — immigrant population . . . this time, in the person of one Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

Abrego Garcia, as you may recall, is a Salvadoran national, married to an American woman, who has been living in the United States since 2019 under a ruling by an immigration judge stating that he could not be deported to El Salvador because a gang there was targeting him and threatening him with death. He was never found to have had any connection with terrorist or other criminal organizations; and for six years, he has regularly checked in with immigration officials as required, and has never been convicted of a crime in the U.S.

But, in direct violation of a federal court order, Donald Trump and his henchmen in the Department of Justice decided he was a danger, labeled him a terrorist, and deported him to El Salvador, where he was immediately incarcerated in that country’s most notorious prison.

An order was issued by federal Judge Paula Xinis to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S., to which Trump adviser Stephen Miller responded on social media:

“Marxist judge now thinks she’s president of El Salvador.” [John Fritze and Devan Cole, CNN, April 7, 2025.]

And when DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni was asked under oath why Abrego Garcia couldn’t be returned to the U.S., he answered frankly:

“The first thing I did when I got this case on my desk is ask my clients the same question.” [Id.]

As a “reward” for his honesty, both Reuveni and his supervisor were placed on leave.

*. *. *

Two months have passed, during which the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody. Donald Trump responded that he would try, but that he couldn’t tell the president of El Salvador what to do. And, to no one’s surprise, Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele followed suit with his own gem:

“I hope you’re not suggesting that I smuggle a terrorist into the United States. How can I smuggle a terrorist into the United States? Of course I’m not going to do it. The question is preposterous.” [Kaitlan Collins and Kevin Liptak, CNN, April 14, 2025.]

Even when Senator Chris Van Hollen and Congressman Glenn Ivey refused to let the matter die, traveling to El Salvador in hopes of effecting the prisoner’s return, nothing happened, despite the government’s grudging admission that the deportation had been the result of an “administrative error.”

But now — after two months of delays — it seems that something has been happening behind the scenes after all: While the administration stalled, a case was being built and an indictment prepared against Abrego Garcia. That indictment — charging him with one count of conspiracy to transport aliens and one count of unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens — was unsealed in the federal district court in Nashville, Tennessee.

Apparently, all the Salvadoran president needed to change his mind was an arrest warrant. According to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi:

“Abrego Garcia has landed in the United States to face justice. This is what American justice looks like.” [Melissa Quinn, Jacob Rosen and Nicole Valdes, CBS News, June 6, 2025.]

Bondi said that the grand jury had found that Abrego Garcia “played a significant role in an alien smuggling ring” involving women and children, and is “a danger to our community,” adding that, if convicted, he would be returned to El Salvador after serving his sentence in the United States. She also claimed that he had played a role in the murder of a rival gang member’s mother, and solicited naked pictures from a minor — though neither of those allegations had been mentioned in the indictment. [Id.]

*. *. *

Whether Abrego Garcia is guilty or innocent will be for a judge and jury to decide. But regardless of the outcome, there is no doubt that this entire matter has been botched from beginning to end, and that this man has already been punished without the due process of law guaranteed him — and each of us — under the U.S. Constitution. As his attorney, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, said in a statement:

“[Due process] means the chance to defend yourself before you’re punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice. [The government] disappeared Kilmar to a foreign prison in violation of a court order. Now, after months of delay and secrecy, they’re bringing him back, not to correct their error but to prosecute him.”

I would hope, as we all would, that he will receive a fair and impartial trial of the charges against him. But I have to ask: Why Tennessee? He lives in Maryland. Where are the alleged crimes supposed to have been committed? At first face, Tennessee seems an odd venue for his trial; and if there is a good reason for it, I’d very much like to know what it is.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/7/25

It’s called deflecting . . . and Donald Trump is an expert, with many decades of experience under his belt.

He used it against Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Kamala Harris, inventing dirt when he couldn’t find any, and magnifying whatever bits and pieces he did find. But those were active political opponents, and everyone knows that politics is a dirty game.

But what purpose does it serve for Trump, now firmly ensconced in the Oval Office once again, to lodge scurrilous charges against former President Joe Biden . . . a man who is now out of the political arena, and who — in what should be his golden years — is fighting a devastating health issue?

In an act of sheer meanness, Trump has ordered an investigation into Biden and his former White House aides, alleging a “conspiracy [to] deceive the public about Biden’s mental state.” [Kelly Ng, BBC News, June 4, 2025.]

His argument is that Biden’s aides’ use of an autopen — a signature device used for decades by other presidents, including Trump himself — was actually a ruse to “conceal Biden’s cognitive decline.” [Id.]

Toward the end of Biden’s presidency, it had become evident that he was slowing down. He was a man in his 80s, who walked a little more slowly, and occasionally stumbled. I do that. He sometimes took a few seconds to find just the right words to make a point. I do that, too. It’s a natural feature of physical aging, and it doesn’t necessarily indicate senility.

Franklin Roosevelt ran the country from a wheelchair. And before him, when Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke while in office, his wife Edith — an unelected non-official — became the country’s “secret president,” managing the Executive Office and deciding which matters to bring to her husband’s attention.

Corporate executives, professors, physicians, and other professionals have aides and assistants to ease the burden of the multitude of routine matters that arise on a daily basis. So do presidents . . . because there simply are not enough hours in the day for one person in a position of authority to handle them all. If Donald Trump had to attend to every minuscule detail himself, when would he ever find time to wage all of his personal battles against people like Biden, Obama, and now Elon Musk?

So why is he doing this, and why now? Is it merely to distract the public from some other issue? Does he consider Biden a continuing threat because of his potential influence over a segment of the voting public? Or — most likely — is he looking for an excuse to invalidate more of Biden’s earlier programs and executive actions?

Whatever his reasons, demeaning an 82-year-old man who has already faced challenges Trump cannot even imagine — the loss of his first wife and young child in a tragic accident, loss of an adult son to cancer, and now himself battling an aggressive form of cancer — is personally and professionally abhorrent. But it is typical of the sort of reprehensible behavior we have come to expect — and, worse, to accept — from a man who has spent a lifetime serving only himself and blithely destroying anyone who gets in his way.

Joe Biden was not a perfect president, because there is no such thing as a perfect person. But he is a man who has served his country to the best of his ability for many decades, and who does not deserve to be hounded by a mean-spirited, vengeful individual who has never had an altruistic thought or given of himself to anyone.

It simply isn’t right.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/6/25

At the risk of becoming annoyingly repetitious, I find myself thoroughly enjoying the continuing saga of the breakup of Washington’s most famous (or infamous?) duo . . . mainly because they seem to have been the only two people on Earth who didn’t see it coming.

While the whole world knew from the start that two such power-mad, egomaniacal narcissists could not possibly maintain such a close relationship for long, it was those very egos that kept each of them from admitting that the other one might dare to challenge him. But that is what happened, and now we are seeing the escalation of what promises to be a protracted, down-and-dirty separation.

What fun!

To recap briefly, first Elon criticized Donnie’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” as being the opposite of what it professed to be. Then Donnie said Elon was ungrateful for all the favors he, Donnie, had done for him, Elon (the richest man in the world, who clearly doesn’t need favors from anyone). Then Elon doubled down and said Donnie should be grateful to him, because it was he, Elon, who had put him, Donnie, in the White House in the first place.

Fighting words, indeed . . . because we all know that Donnie can’t tolerate anyone else’s taking credit for anything. So he fought back yesterday with the biggest weapon in his arsenal: his executive power. He has threatened to attack Elon where it really hurts — in the old profit-and-loss statement — saying:

“The easiest way to save money in our budget, billions and billions of dollars, is to terminate Elon’s governmental subsidies and contracts.” [Anthoy Zurcher, BBC News, June 5, 2025.]

Oh, dear!

But wait . . . Elon has his own armory. First he called for — dare I even say it? — Trump’s impeachment. Next he threatened to prematurely decommission his SpaceX company’s Dragon spacecraft, which the U.S. relies on to shuttle our astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station.

And then, yesterday afternoon, he dropped what he called the “really big bomb” . . . suggesting, though without evidence (yet), that Donnie appears in unreleased files related to late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. [Id.]

Holy . . .

Now it’s getting really personal. And nasty. Though, come to think of it, another disgusting episode from Donnie’s past shouldn’t really come as a huge surprise to anyone. But still, something may have struck a nerve, because later, the White House’s Press Secretary — the always exhilarating Karoline Leavitt — had only this to offer:

“This is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the One Big Beautiful Bill because it does not include the policies he wanted.” [Id.]

In all fairness, Ms. Leavitt has one of the world’s most difficult jobs — right up there with my favorite Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov — requiring them to keep a straight face while delivering the most blatant, outrageous rubbish. In her place — where I would never allow myself to be, but if I were — I would be updating my c.v. about now.

Anyway, Donnie himself wisely avoided mentioning his former friend for the rest of the day, and only posted on his Truth Social site that he didn’t mind Elon’s “turning against him,” but does wish he had quit sooner. [Id.]

And then he made another pitch for his proposed tax and spending bill, and called it a night.

Thank the gods for small favors . . . I’m not sure I could take much more in one sitting.

But happily, there’s still tomorrow to look forward to.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/6/25

Forget the Hollywood megastars; forget the music industry elite. The real power couple of the past year has been seen — not at the glitzy New York clubs, the Met Gala, or the Cannes Film Festival — but in the Oval Office, on the golf course, and at Mar-a-Lago, discussing far weightier subjects than couture fashion or which baby daddy is coupling with which baby momma this week.

We are, of course, talking about that dynamic duo in Washington — Donald Trump and Elon Musk — who have been busy demolishing the U.S. government and carving up the rest of the world.

Or they were a duo until this week, when Musk’s 130-day tenure at DOGE — the quasi-governmental agency created especially for him and his chainsaw gang — came to an end, and he was finally free to speak openly and honestly about Trump’s horrific piece of legislation, bizarrely named the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” (With Trump, everything has to be big and expensive, or it isn’t beautiful.)

Well, when Musk pointed out that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to the U.S. budget deficit, and called it a “disgusting abomination,” the world knew that it was bound to be the start of something big. In Trumpland, no slight goes unanswered, and no insult unpunished. Today, the gloves were off, and Trump came out swinging.

Starting with a mild statement that he was “very surprised” and “disappointed” with Musk for his criticism, he went on:

“Elon and I had a great relationship. I don’t know if we will anymore.” [Mike Wendling, BBC News, June 5, 2025.]

But he wasn’t done. During a news conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz today, Trump addressed Musk’s comments:

“We are doing things in that bill that are unbelievable. I’m very disappointed because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here. All of a sudden he had a problem. He hasn’t said bad [things] about me personally, but I’m sure that’ll be next.” [Id.]

Well, there’s a challenge if I’ve ever heard one. Let the name-calling begin!

He also suggested that Musk was upset about the removal of subsidies and mandates for electric vehicles, as they might affect his Tesla business.

Musk, of course, immediately came back with a denial of that accusation, and posted on X that he had never seen a copy of the budget bill. He also reposted former tweets from Trump in which the latter had promoted a balanced budget.

Then Musk played the ace up his sleeve: He took credit for Trump’s having won the 2024 election in the first place:

“Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude.” [Id.]

Considering the nearly $300 million he contributed to the campaign, and his tireless lobbying (and arm-twisting) on behalf of Trump and some Republican congressional candidates, he does have a point.

And so ends round two of the Fight of the Century between the world’s wealthiest man and the one occupying the most powerful office on the planet.

Wouldn’t you love to know what’s going on behind the scenes as they prepare for round three?

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/5/25

Well, the roommate has moved out, leaving the tenant whose name is on the lease as the sole occupant of the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. And, from all reports, it wasn’t an amicable parting.

It doesn’t appear that any of the presidential china, or any of the golden gewgaws on the mantle and the Resolute desk, were thrown or otherwise damaged. And there have been no reports of physical altercations, or arguments over custody of the Tesla. But at the end of the 130-day cohabitation, it took less than a week for the name-calling to begin.

I am, of course, referring to Elon Musk’s rapid about-face in his analysis of Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” — the one approved by the House of Representatives last month, and now facing scrutiny in the Senate. You know . . . the one that would add nearly $3 trillion to the national debt within the next decade, or an average of almost $300 billion per year. The same bill that is being touted by Trump as saving the American taxpayers gobs of money.

That bill.

Musk hasn’t — not publicly, at least — lobbed any insults at Trump personally. His animus is directed solely at the 1,000+ pages . . . nearly as long as, and even more soporific than, Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” . . . of statistics, calculations, and rationalizations that he describes as a “disgusting abomination,” and says he “can’t stand . . . anymore.”

“Shame on those who voted for it,” he said, adding, “You know you did wrong.” [Anthony Zurcher, BBC, June 4, 2025.]

Then he carried his criticism on, writing on X:

“Bankrupting America is not OK! KILL the BILL.”

Musk does seem to have absorbed some of Trump’s style of communication during his four months in the White House. Stressing that the legislation would add to the U.S. budget deficit that he was initially charged with reducing, he threatened those Republicans who supported or are planning to support it:

“ . . . we [will] fire all the politicians who betrayed the American people” come next year’s midterm elections. [Id.]

Considering that all but three Republican representatives voted for the bill, which only passed by a single vote, that threat — coming from someone who has no qualms about throwing hundreds of millions of dollars into the campaigns of his choice — is likely to carry substantial weight.

At the very least, it should keep a lot of members of both Houses of Congress scrambling to do damage control for quite a while.

There has been no response from Trump as yet . . . just the usual drivel from White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, who claimed that Trump “already knows” Musk’s views on the bill, and added :

“This is one big, beautiful bill, and he’s sticking to it.” [Id.]

Well . . . unless the Senate wakes up and does its job, that is.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/5/25

Two days ago, following Ukraine’s brilliant attacks on Russia’s bomber fleet, I contemplated what Vladimir Putin’s likely response might be, and offered the following thoughts:

“Of course, there is the question of what will happen when the Kremlin has had time to fully process these developments. In the best-case scenario, Putin — always unpredictable — could react rationally, realize that his position has been somewhat weakened, and finally begin to negotiate in earnest. Or he could do what he and every autocrat throughout history have always done: let his megalomania and his temper get the upper hand, and escalate the fight.”

While hoping for the best, I feared that Putin’s evil twin would win the struggle . . . and unfortunately, my fears have been justified.

Today, Donald Trump revealed in a social media post that he had had an hour-long phone conversation with Putin, in which ”President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields.” [Bernd Debusmann, Jr., BBC News, June 4, 2025.]

But then Trump added that they had also “exchanged views on the prospects for restoring cooperation between the countries, which has enormous potential.” [Id.]

If, by “restoring cooperation” you mean acceding to Putin’s demands while he continues blasting the hell out of Ukraine until there is nothing left to defend, then I suppose there might be some potential for a solution. But that’s not a road to peace; it’s a direct route to Ukraine’s total surrender.

For his part, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has challenged Putin to sign an immediate ceasefire and to arrange a face-to-face meeting to work out mutually agreeable peace terms. He said that such a meeting could include both Trump and Turkish President Erdogan, ruling out any further talks between lower-level delegations:

“We are ready for exchanges but to continue diplomatic meetings in Istanbul at a level that does not solve anything further, I think, is pointless. My proposal, which I believe our partners can support, is that we propose to Russians a cease-fire until the leaders meet. . . . We are ready for such a meeting any day.” [RFE/RL, June 4, 2025.]

But Putin was having none of it. Once more going on the offensive, he claimed that Ukraine would “use” the pause to rearm and mobilize more military forces — the precise tactic that he himself has been using for years.

He also pointed to the destruction on May 31 and June 1 of two bridges in Russian regions bordering Ukraine and Belarus, rhetorically asking: “How can we negotiate with those who rely on terror?” [Id.]

Apparently, the man who blithely invaded a sovereign nation without cause — and has spent more than three years terrorizing, kidnapping, torturing, raping and murdering its civilian citizens while also decimating the country’s infrastructure — is incapable of seeing the irony in his own words.

And if Donald Trump really believes that there is “enormous potential” at this point for the restoration of cooperation between Russia and Ukraine, then he is equally blind to the truth, and is once again playing the cards that Putin has dealt him.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/4/25

You’ll notice that I said “if I had to” . . . not “if I could.” Because living a billionaire’s lifestyle would be one of the last things in this world I would choose to do.

I mean, who needs that kind of stress? People always after your money and your favors; the press following you everywhere; houses full of antiques and servants; the public appearances, formal dinners, having to smile constantly . . . feh!

Don’t get me wrong — a couple of million wouldn’t hurt my feelings. But — as with liquor, salt, and even chocolate — you can have too much of a good thing.

Still, if I were forced, for some unimaginable reason, to choose a billionaire with whom to share my life, who would it be? That’s a really tough question, because most of them are such greedy, unfeeling, self-serving, narcissistic jerks, I couldn’t bear to be in the same room with them. Except, possibly, one:

Bill Gates.

Oh, I’m quite sure he has his annoying little personality quirks (don’t we all?). And anyone who has achieved his level of success has to be a dedicated, even obsessive, workaholic. But he has one big thing going for him that the others — Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, and the rest — all seem to lack, and that is: humanity.

Gates estimates that his fortune should be worth around $200 billion by the year 2045, by which time his charitable foundation will be brought to a close, and 99 percent of his wealth will have been given away. He plans to direct most of that (approximately) $198 billion toward aid to Africa — an area where the U.S. government has recently cut assistance, including its former programs to help fight the continent’s devastating AIDS epidemic.

With around $2 billion remaining, he won’t have to worry about the cost of food or medicine in his old age. But, with Warren Buffett and other philanthropists as his inspiration, Gates has a goal quite different from those of most of his financial equals. As he explained it in a blog post:

“People will say a lot of things about me when I die, but I am determined that ‘he died rich’ will not be one of them.” [Farouk Chothia, BBC News, June 2, 2025.]

Of course, the word “rich” means different things to different people. Even one percent of Gates’ fortune is an unfathomable amount of money to most of us.

Yet a “mere” $2 billion must seem like pocket change to someone like Elon Musk, whose big dream is to colonize Mars, or to Jeff Bezos, another “space race” advocate. But Gates has addressed that issue as well, saying that he would rather pay for vaccines than travel into space:

“It’s actually quite expensive to go to Mars. You can buy measles vaccines and save lives for $1,000 per life saved. And so [that] just kind of grounds you, as in — don’t go to Mars.” [Amol Rajan, BBC, February 3, 2023.]

And there you have him: a humanitarian, a billionaire who doesn’t spend his wealth to buy elections, or build rockets that explode and fall back to Earth, or hire women to bear his multitude of children. You have a man who cares about people, about the health of the world’s children, about the environment, and about the future of humanity.

So yes, of all of the uber-rich men in this world, I would choose Bill Gates . . . quirks and all.

If I had to . . .

. . . and if he’d have me.

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
6/4/25