Post Scripts #2

[Since our first Post Scripts on July 13, 2019, readers have continued to respond to Other Aspects posts with interesting comments. Thank you to all who have written. I’ll periodically gather and share items of general interest in these posts called “Post Scripts”. The headings give the name and date of the most recent post being addressed (some posts build upon previous ones). The readers’ comments are in italics, to distinguish from what I write in reply. I edit only in the interest of space and context. Enjoy, and please keep sending your thoughts to KenBossong@gmail.com. Again, if anyone does not wish to be quoted, even anonymously as I’ll be doing it, please just say so when you email me.]

Missing The Trane (7/18/19)

Really, really enjoyed the Coltrane piece. Well-written and an excellent overview of his career, recordings and influences, as well as those he affected.  One of the best short summaries I’ve read about an artist.

Thanks for saying it was “short”, since I can get carried away – especially with a topic like John Coltrane, who deserves a treatise.

Wow, Ken. I just read your Coltrane piece and was blown away. I saw the email linking it earlier in the week, but wasn’t able to read it because I had one helluva busy week. I’m glad I waited until Saturday morning to read it. I could then savor the flowing prose and insights… Even though I knew most of what you wrote of Trane, I liked the way you methodically went through his recordings and evolution. Great perspective.

Thanks for the kind words, and for subscribing. I finally realized how to make that easily available by placing the button up to the right just below the blog’s header. That way, you get new posts without having to do anything.

I’m still hoping to do an in-person presentation of A Love Supreme before the year of its 55th anniversary is over.

The Flores v. Barr Cringe Fest (8/21/19)

I watched the news snippets of the DOJ’s attorney in front of the judges and listened to the judges chastise her for the Trump Administration’s version of what constitutes “safe and sanitary conditions” for minor immigrants. I also read articles following the case. Your legal knowledge and drill down of the case really helped confirm unfortunately what this administration is doing at the border.

I would like to see money spent on better temporary hospitals, housing and vetting stations at the border instead of a wall. Taking care of those people risking their lives to get here while taking time to decide who gets to stay seems logical and humanitarian. We are better than this and what’s happening now. History is not going to be good to this administration especially on the immigration issues, but we shouldn’t be waiting for history to decide the moral responsibility we have as a democratic nation.

How often do we find ourselves saying, “We are better than this”? If there’s one theme to Other Aspects, it’s this: We better be better; it’s up to us. From the same reader a few days later:

Can Trump get rid of the Flores agreement?

Here’s an edited version of how I responded on August 27:

“There is no easy answer to this. It could play out any number of ways. If the Agreement were simply the settlement of a case, that would be one thing. But it’s incorporated into a court order. The executive branch can’t simply ignore or override a court order. Yet, I don’t think res judicata (the thing’s been adjudicated; can’t reopen) applies in the usual way to a case involving ongoing interactions.
A few scenarios:
1) Congress passes legislation comprehensively addressing the issue and obviating Flores. Not happening, which is the subject of my ire going back to the post of 5/10/19.
2) Appropriate agency in executive branch does formal rule-making and issues regulations, which are litigated. This would also involve a lot of time and work.
3) Trump announces he’s defying the court order. Plaintiffs move to hold him in contempt. Mess ensues.
4) The administration does something akin to a hybrid of 2) and 3) not simply defying, but not issuing formal regs either. Perhaps an executive order or something. Litigation ensues.
Looks like 4) has already begun, as one might expect. Trump has announced a plan to abandon Flores, whatever that means, and 19 states have joined in a suit.”

Here’s an update: Shortly after this post, the Trump Administration announced new policies called the “Final Rules”, tossing out the Flores principles (by providing for indefinite detention, diminished safety standards, etc.). Plaintiffs sought continued enforcement of Flores. On 9/27/19 Judge Gee ordered just that, with an injunction against enforcement of the Final Rules. Appeal by the Trump Administration remains pending with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Your Flores blog is the perfect pitch [for a non-technical book about famous legal cases]. In just a few words, you took a complex matter and made it both clear and interesting to read.

Talent and Success in Sports (Part 1, 9/18/19 and Part 2, 10/2/19)

The following is from a reader from inside the Washington D.C. beltway:

Very well done! I enjoyed your analysis despite its “inside Philly BBall” skewing and skewering. We have a process here in Skins Country, too. It consists of:

  • knowing to a certainty every year that the season is a lost cause before any games are played;
  • understanding that Snyder’s strategy is to lose now and lose later;
  • being too ignorant to understand the grammatical subtleties of terms such as “transitive verb;” and
  • being mindful that there is little to choose between “tanking” and monumental incompetence.
    At least we have Max, Steven, Anthony and Juan.

You do have them, and what a remarkably unprecedented World Series they won with the Nationals! I wasn’t kidding about being grateful as an Eagles fan that Dan Snyder owns the Redskins, by the way. Now, if only the Dallas Cowboys could have retained their head coach even longer…The only real difference between tanking and monumental incompetence is intent.

Consider the Kurds and Weigh (10/31/19)

Well said…[Trump] is a deep insult to every veteran who stood up and served our country. I have spoken to my fellow veteran friends about his betrayal of the Kurds and they are livid.
I have run out of adjectives to describe his behavior and am stunned that his “base” cannot see or understand the harm he is doing, much of it irreparable.

Another reader cited a specific line in the post before commenting:

Abandonment of the Kurds to the Turks in Syria is the single most despicable act of a president in my lifetime.

What about the Abandonment of the Iraqis to isis by the prince of darkness? Or how about the thousands of Coptic Christians left to be slaughtered by isis? No help offered … Wouldn’t even allow asylum to the US for them… ask yourself why… Or how about our own soldiers and ambassador left to be slaughtered in Libya to cover up the running of weapons to Syria. Obama let isis run unopposed throughout North Africa while they offered almost daily videos of their beheadings, burning people alive etc… Or maybe we can remember the abandonment of the South Vietnamese in 75 with untold slaughtered by the North Vietnamese after the dems leveled Nixon, then defunded the south’s ability to hold the truce.
[A]t least the Kurds have hundreds of millions in guns and weapons that you and I paid for.   After 19 years of this Middle East crap, The American People are fed up with it.

Prince of Darkness? I don’t recall Miles Davis or Ozzy Osbourne being President.

I believe Obama’s withdrawal of troops from Iraq in 2011 to have been one of his mistakes, premature at best. Perhaps he felt the American people were fed up with this Middle East crap. It was in accord with a status of forces agreement (SOFA) signed by George W. Bush on December 14, 2008 that all US troops would be out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. (Remember the press conference where W had to dodge a couple of shoes flung at him by an Iraqi journalist? That was the one.) The withdrawal followed painstaking analysis in consultation with experts, and months of unsuccessful negotiations with the Iraqi government to keep 3-5000 there. I wish we had. While it would not have prevented the rise of ISIS, 2014 may not have played out so badly had we maintained a presence.

That includes what happened to the Coptic Christians, who have been the victims of persecution for centuries. While 2014 was the worst recent year, the persecution continues to the present. This is one of the outrages in the world that must be addressed by all as simply unacceptable. Of course, we still have wackos who deny the Holocaust.

Obama has called the Libya debacle his “worst mistake”. Gadhafi deserved to be ousted by the US-led NATO intervention (approved by UN resolution), but a lack of planning for what was to happen next left the violent mess it remains. Unfortunately, we failed to learn from W’s declaration of victory in Iraq after toppling Saddam Hussein. We seem astonished when the locals don’t  celebrate by rushing into the streets and setting up an American-style democracy the next day.

Then there was Benghazi, where inadequate security despite warnings left the embassy vulnerable to a deadly attack. The ambassador and three others were murdered; Obama and Hillary Clinton foolishly denied the attack was a terrorist act when they must have known better. Conspiracy theorists had a field day, especially after American arms found their way into the hands of terrorists in Syria. Altogether, Obama may be right that Libya was his worst mistake. Had I been writing a blog back then, my displeasure with Obama’s handling of Libya, Iraq, and other items would have been clear. That doesn’t change my assessment of Trump’s actions.

The misadventures of Vietnam are a whole other ballgame, well beyond the scope of the post. Mistakes go back at least to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, yet another lesson that if you must misrepresent the truth, there is something wrong with your position. The democrats did not level Nixon, however; Nixon’s behavior leveled Nixon. Back then, reprehensible behavior had consequences. It was over for Nixon when Barry Goldwater, a conservative’s conservative, and Hugh Scott told him his Watergate position was indefensible, which it was, though nothing much compared to current presidential behavior. Now, Senate republicans are led by the likes of Mitch McConnell. [Sigh]

The point remains: Any president makes mistakes, but not Trump; just ask him. He don’t need no stinking experts. Issues are easy when all you care about is what’s best for you. (In an unsettling way, actually, this was no mistake. The president deliberately sought to create a diversion from the Mueller report and Ukraine.) Trump’s unique blend of ignorance, arrogance, dishonesty, corruption, and narcissism make him as spectacularly ill-suited for the presidency as a person can be. It’s interesting that his grave flaws are finally dawning on some of his fans due to his atrocious handling of COVID-19, the only crisis of his presidency not of his own making.

As we see how much worse the pandemic gets than it had to be, the withering criticism is richly deserved. I’m still concerned, meanwhile, about what an increasingly desperate candidate for re-election will do as he realizes he was correct in wanting to run against Bernie rather than Joe. Will there be any inspector generals left? Will any act of telling the truth in the executive branch go unpunished? Will the Trump campaign simply merge into the Department of Justice? After the Memorial Day we just had, one shudders to consider the distress and harm this one man can cause leading up to November.

I, Citizen (12/15/19)

I found it very interesting. I especially thought the part where you spoke about Hamilton was amusing since the majority of its viewers/fans are actually kids or young adults…I think I’ll share this with my government teacher from last year…

It should be safe to share my post with a former teacher, since he is no longer grading you. Meanwhile, I should probably ask you to explain some parts of Hamilton to me.

Thoughts on Choosing a College (1/25/20)

Thanks for posting this, Ken, as we are in the college application process for my youngest daughter. At this time the things that hit home for me were in your summary: do not believe there is only one perfect place for your child, the option to transfer later if things don’t work out, and the chemistry or subjective feel according to the student (something I believe applies more to the girls than the boys).

We don’t want 17 or 18-year-olds thinking their lives are ruined if they didn’t get in to good ol’ Alma Mater. Or somewhere a couple friends want to attend (for no particular reason). Or…

As to the chemistry or subjective-feel thing, my two favorite stories on this point involve one girl and one boy. Since writing this post, I’ve been feeling badly for high school seniors who were relying on college visits this spring to make their final decisions. Hopefully, the post’s checklist helps.

Ken, two comments:
1. Community colleges merit mention. Some of the most dynamic programs geared to actually achieving rewarding employment upon graduation are centered here, and the cost is very reasonable. Moreover, it is a good maturation ground for those who need some maturity before moving on to a four-year school.
2. Changing majors is not so easy at places like Cornell and Penn. This is key info that students and parents need to know before they hand over the check.

These are two good thoughts. The second point is generally true at some schools, and may depend on which majors are involved at others. If a school is particularly renowned in one field, securing admission to the college may not automatically mean that major is available to all. Some places just seem to make things more bureaucratic than others, though my overall sense is that these issues have improved over the years. When frustrated, we used to call red tape the “RU screw” at Rutgers in the 70s, but it is much better there now.

McCoy Tyner, Philly’s Pianist Supreme (3/9/20)

I read your excellent ode to McCoy Tyner, then listened to some of his work. I’m afraid my tin ear doesn’t get it, but then it took me until maturity (some would argue that’s still in the future) to appreciate Mozart, Beethoven, Patsy Cline, Husker Du and Meatloaf. Keep the good stuff coming.

Give McCoy another listen sometime. He really is all that. By the way, what did Husker Du? 

Tony Allen, Fela’s legendary drummer, died [on 4/30]. He wasn’t as iconic, but he was every bit as important [as Fela Kuti].

Indeed, what is Afrobeat without the beat? The list of greats we’ve lost recently is getting way too long. In addition to McCoy and Tony, RIP: Jimmy Heath, Lyle Mays, Henry Grimes, Jymie Merritt, Bill Withers, Bucky Pizzarelli, Wallace Roney, Ellis Marsallis, Lee Konitz, Little Richard, Lucky Peterson, Jimmy Cobb.

Dynamic Duos (5/10/20)

One reader already had a suggestion for a duo:

Dolphy and Mingus

They are on the list and a compelling pair. Also under consideration was Charles Mingus and his long-time drummer, Dannie Richmond. Given the volcanic temperament that accompanied Mingus’s genius, it’s astonishing how long and how consistently Danny played with him – and how well.

Multi-reed virtuoso Eric Dolphy, like his friend Bobby Hutcherson, was one-half of a dynamic duo with a number of colleagues, including the two of them together (Out To Lunch and Iron Man, among other truly great albums).

Again, thank you for reading – and writing.

Ken Bossong

© 2020 Kenneth J. Bossong

Post Scripts 1

Other Aspects posts are generating interesting comments. Thank you to all who have written. Thinking it a shame to keep them to myself, I will periodically gather and share items of general interest in a post called “Post Scripts”.

The sub-headings give the name and date of the post being addressed (recognizing that some posts build upon previous ones). The comments are in italics; my replies are not. I will edit only in the interest of space and contextual consistency. Enjoy, and please keep sending your thoughts to KenBossong@gmail.com. Finally, if anyone does not wish to be quoted, even anonymously as I’ll be doing it, please just say so when you email me.

Otis Rush: An Appreciation (1/18/19)

There was considerable response to the Otis Rush tribute. While some were already fans, many said how rewarding a revelation listening to him had been:

I very much enjoyed the Otis Rush remembrance.  Nicely written and complete.  I viewed him as a minor figure until you talked to me about him a few years back and I started listening.

Great tribute to Otis Rush. I look forward to following your blog.

I am not much into jazz and blues–preferring classical, 60s rock and country–but your Otis Rush ode prompted me go to YouTube to watch and listen to what I could find regarding him. I chose the Live at Montreux concert from 1986. You may get me yet.

Good choice for something to watch, with Otis being joined on stage by admirers Eric Clapton and Luther Allison. This concert marked something of a comeback for Otis from some lean years. Make sure you get to hear the best of his Cobra recordings.

Thanks for sharing this. [We] enjoyed your tribute to Otis Rush; we were both struck by how well your voice comes across in your writing.

Your piece on Otis Rush was spot on, as I also think he was truly one of the greats. We all know where Mike Bloomfield got his inspiration from.

Doing the Limbo Inside the Beltway (1/25/19)

I enjoyed reading this and certainly agree with you on a need for no more “How Low can we go!”

Unfortunately, there is no end in sight for “How low can you go?” January, when the post was written, already seems a long time ago.

What Makes Jazz So Endearing and Enduring (3/4/19)

The one on what makes jazz was a nicely done, succinct statement that I printed out and saved for reference.

I really enjoyed the article about Jazz. I have always had a love for it, but had no idea about the depth of Jazz.

Life as a Zero Sum Game: It Ain’t Necessarily So (4/2/19)

I read your blog post and found it very interesting especially your view of the political landscape. One thing that you didn’t mention is that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but not the electoral college which is, I believe, one of the reasons there is so much discontent in the political scene. I have heard people say, so my vote really doesn’t count. I’m not a fan of labeling left vs right. I can identify with both because I have voted for both Republican and Democratic presidents in my lifetime. However, as you stated there is a vitriol and a need to categorize people as either all good or all bad politically lately which equals to your point, 0 Sum.

Another reader used bold to supplement my portrayal of how environmentalists see the other side of the debate:

These huge corporations are legally required to care only about maximizing profit and nothing about the environment beyond regulation. Since environmental damage is not monetarily accounted for in a company bottom line, the choice to befoul our common property is nearly always the one that shareholders require the company to make. There’s nothing they won’t befoul to make a buck, per design. If we leave them to their own devices, the planet will be unlivable before we know it. Therefore, absent correct financial accounting of the environmental damage done, strong environmental regulations are required to ensure that the needs of everyone are balanced with the greed of the shareholders.

Add “civil liability” to “regulation” here. When something goes wrong, environmental clean-up can be hugely expensive, greatly affecting a company’s bottom line. Companies that reflexively choose to befoul are probably making bad business decisions. Ensuring that such decisions are regretted is sound public policy; that one should clean up the mess one creates is axiomatic. The “us vs. them” chasm and the zero-sum game remain unnecessary and counterproductive.

[In response to my open letter to scientists:]

Is this a response to a perceived problem? My take is that the scientists are not the problem and are not the ones who make it political. The consensus on climate change, which has been overwhelmingly consistent on the topic of AGW, does not seem to be enough. Not all of us can “take it” when presented with scientific consensus, apparently.

I don’t demand complete consensus, but the propensity of some “scientific studies” to produce results their sponsors prefer is no coincidence.

It’s Not Too Late To Learn From 2016 (4/18/19)

One reader paired a line in this post with something by Vonnegut years ago, as follows:

“There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don’t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president.” -Kurt Vonnegut

“Perhaps we have made the job of President, or the process of attaining it, so distasteful that no one who would be ideal to serve is willing to seek it.”

I don’t remember reading Vonnegut’s piece “Cold Turkey” in the May 10, 2004 edition of In These Times, but I can’t swear I didn’t, either.

Referring to the portions of the post where I (a) say what voters like me seek in a president is “someone who is smart, sane, honorable, effective, and sensible” and (b) indicate that it should not be a given that the incumbent be the Republican nominee, a reader had this:

I’ll bet you $20 (or whatever alternate wager) that if he’s still in office come primary time, he’s the candidate. He demonstrated clear unfitness for office before 2016. The “enough is enough” moment should have happened a LONG time ago for any smart, sane, honorable, effective, and sensible republican. I have ZERO expectations that anything should change before 2020.

From another reader:

In 1968, Richard Nixon watched the crowds flock to George Wallace rallies and devised the brilliant if inherently evil “Southern Strategy,” an appeal to racism that was hugely successful. The Republican Party has been running on that and its evolutionary progeny ever since. Trump is the apotheosis of that reprehensible scheme. Liberals and what some call “socialists” (they have no idea what real socialism is) a la Bernie Sanders are way out there and thus unacceptable. However, they do not merit the same condemnation as today’s Republicans, who have abandoned the principles of rational conservatism for the crass electoral flavor of the moment. They deserve to be called out for their craven hypocrisy.

I expected plenty of feedback on this post. I was a bit surprised, however, not to hear from people with other reasons to believe the incumbent president should automatically be the nominee. Hopefully it’s clear that the point was not to predict an outcome, but to argue for a much-needed real discussion within the Republican Party.

Immigration – Governing With Nods and Winks (5/10/19)

The seasonal guest worker programs under which what we used to call “migrants” come here to help the harvest was something I grew up around. I visited several migrant camps out of curiosity and observed appalling living conditions. I also observed how hard they worked. Few native-born Americans could match them. [A relative] works in that county and has special responsibility for migrants. She says nothing has changed except a visceral fear among her clients about what Trump’s nativist, faux-hostility will do to their livelihoods.

Recalling a Great Little Sports Story (5/22)

Thanks Ken for making us aware of this story. It goes well beyond sports and sportsmanship, and many happenings in the pro sports world pale in comparison to it.

The Coarse in Our Discourse (6/28/19)

I just read your most recent blog post and your conjuring of [Richard Neustadt’s] Presidential Power struck a chord and brought up a memory that had been buried for decades…I disagree, however, that federalizing the Arkansas National Guard and sending them to Central High School in Little Rock was a sign of weakness. Rather, it was the measured and effective use of a powerful weapon that the Federalists included in their plan for the new country. I commend Eisenhower for doing it. Faubus needed to stand in the schoolhouse door for his own political survival. Words would never have persuaded him otherwise. When we visited the Central High School visitor center and museum that the National Park Service maintains across the street, we were surprised to learn that Faubus was somewhat sympathetic to integration. Sending in the Guard was a “win-win” for all sides, Faubus included.

This one motivated me to read more on Faubus. Sure enough, Orval was a more complex character than first appears. Every account seems to cast him in a different light. While his presentation as the outraged school-segregationist governor was beyond convincing, he had already desegregated public transportation in Arkansas. Was it simply that Orval could abide integration on buses but not for kids in schools, or was the whole thing with Ike and the 101st Airborne just a cleverly choreographed strategy for integrating schools without casualties?

The truth was probably somewhere in between. After all, Orval himself had upped the ante by predicting “blood will run in the streets” if Brown v. Board were enforced, and later closed the integrated school for the ’58-’59 school year.

I, too, commend Eisenhower for doing what he had to do. Neustadt’s central point remains that the most important and impressive power is the power to persuade – even, perhaps especially, for the President of the United States.

Ken Bossong

© 2019 Kenneth J. Bossong