I often refer to things Dr. Timothy Snyder says. Snyder is a history professor at Yale University who specializes in the history of fascistic and authoritarian movements around the world. He has been a welcome and important voice at a time when the United States is witnessing attacks on our democracy from the Republican Party, both within and outside of government.

Snyder recently took to X (formerly Twitter) to talk about comments made by Donald Trump during a political rally in Dayton, OH last weekend. In his speech, Trump referred to people imprisoned for their role in the January 6 attack on the Capitol as “political prisoners” and “hostages.” He even stood and saluted while a revamped version of the “National Anthem” played over loudspeakers. The alternative version of the “National Anthem,” re-named “Justice for All,” was sung by the J6 Prison Choir and featured the voice of Trump himself reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

It’s hard to put into words how sickening and un-American this all is, but Trump wasn’t finished yet. During his address to the gathered crowd, Trump predicted that there would be a “bloodbath” in the country if he does not win the Presidential Election this November. Snyder recognized the scene as something straight out of Nazi Germany. Here’s what he said:

“The thing Trump did in Dayton – celebrating his fascist movement’s dubious “martyrs” – is exactly what Goebbels and Hitler did between the Nazis’ failed coup and their seizure of power. Their song was called the Horst Wessel Song. 

“The Nazis were obsessive about being the victims. Once in power they put up monuments to their “martyrs.” They sang their Horst Wessel Song as they conquered countries and killed millions to say that they, the Nazis, were the real victims and therefore always innocent. 

“Trump’s claim that his people are hostages and political prisoners is meant to justify endless revenge on whomever he wishes as soon as he is in power. That is how this martyrdom thing works. We know it from the history of fascism.

“Trump promised a ‘bloodbath for the country’ if he’s not elected president. Then followed the predictable bout of (self-)deception, claiming Trump’s bloodbath (comment) was out of context…Trump is telling them (and us) that he doesn’t really plan to win the election. As he did in 2016, as he did in 2020, he is telling us that the vote count does not decide the issue for him.”

In his book, On Tyranny, Snyder lays out a 20-point plan to address and defeat the type of anti-democratic efforts being put forth by Trump and his supporters. He begins his book with these words:

“Americans are no wiser that the Europeans who saw democracy yield to fascism, Nazism, or communism. Our one advantage is that we might learn from their experience. Now is a good time to do so.”

In the coming weeks, I will share the 20 lessons Snyder includes in his book. Each lesson will be accompanied by a video Snyder did designed to expand his thoughts and further explain each lesson.

Although I’m incredibly grateful to Snyder for writing the book and creating the video lessons, I’m heartbroken and horrified that we in the United States find ourselves at a place where such a book and video lessons are necessary.

The series on fighting tyranny will begin on Monday, March 25. Each Monday for the next ten weeks, I’ll feature two of Snyder’s 20 lessons. I hope you’ll follow along.

Recently, you may have seen Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) in front of a microphone stumping for former President Donald Trump and asking the gathered crowd, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” Stefanick has been mentioned as a potential choice as Trump’s Vice-President, so you can imagine her answer to that question. But she is not alone in asking it. Trump himself recently took to Truth Social asking the same question. And some version of the question has been asked on practically every news program and in every newspaper and magazine that includes political coverage.

The answer should be obvious. Four years ago, in 2020, we were in the middle of a global Covid pandemic. Schools were closed, we were required to wear masks in most public places. Grocery store shelves were depleted, toilet paper was in short supply, millions of non-essential workers were laid-off from their jobs, and countless businesses were shuttered, many of them permanently.

Weddings had to be cancelled. People couldn’t attend family funerals. And those that were hospitalized—many of them sick with Covid—died alone because visitors were not allowed.

Healthcare professionals were forced to re-use masks because the Trump Administration nearly exhausted the nation’s strategic supply and didn’t make arrangements to restock it. In large cities, refrigerated trucks were used to store corpses, since morgues and funeral homes were over capacity with the bodies of those who had died. Sadly, four years ago at this time, deaths from Covid had just begun. We were counting deaths in the hundreds. Very soon, we would be counting them in the millions.

I’m 64-years old, and in my lifetime, I have never seen a more desperate, horrible time in the United States. To make matters worse, the President and many of his party faithful lied to us, simultaneously claiming that Covid was a hoax, it would go away quickly, it was no worse than the flu, and that it was a biological weapon unleashed on the United States by China. Thanks to Trump’s divisive nature, the reality of Covid and how best to treat it became a political issue as much as a healthcare issue. As a result, the virus impacted the United States much more severely than it did other countries.

Now, four years later, we have weathered the worst of the Covid storm. While still a concern, we now have supplies, treatments, and protocols in place to handle Covid, in schools, the workplace, and in public.

Since those dark days of 2020, our nation has rebounded economically. According to The Economist magazine, economic growth in the United States has outpaced the economy of every other G7 country. Entrepreneurship in the United States is booming. During the first two years of the Biden Administration, new business applications increased 33% over the number filed during the final two years of the Trump Presidency.

Inflation is currently at a reasonable 2% and unemployment remains at record lows. There is a job for any American that wants one. More importantly, wages have grown for 80% of Americans. The only group that has witnessed a wage decrease is the top 20% wealthiest Americans, helping to reduce wealth inequality that had been growing at a significant pace in recent years.

The stock market has also hit record highs in recent months. Although the average American does not own individual stocks, many do have retirement savings (pensions, 401(k)s, IRAs) that are invested in the stock market. These gains may not put food on the table for most Americans, but they do provide peace of mind and the promise of a more comfortable retirement.

Not everything is rosy. Immigration still poses a challenge to the nation, although it isn’t the mess Republicans would have you believe. In fact, the Senate passed a bi-partisan immigration bill—the toughest in our nation’s history—but Trump has asked Republicans not to take up the bill in the House so he can use immigration as a political issue in his campaign to re-take the White House.

We also see a rise in neo-Nazism, white supremacy, Christian Nationalism, fascism, and other attacks on our democracy. In his campaign for President, Trump has detailed a plan for further attacks on our democracy and on our freedoms, embracing political violence and the un-American values espoused by these groups.

On the world stage, NATO has never been stronger, yet we (the United States) are currently failing to help Ukraine in their battle to repel Russia’s unprovoked attack. In addition, the situation in the Middle East worsens and China continues to be a threat to Taiwan, but Republicans in the House refuse to do more than issue strong statements and condemnations.

Even with these challenges, it is clear that the vast majority of Americans are objectively better off today than they were four years ago. That is an inconvenient truth for Donald Trump and his surrogates who preach doom and gloom as a campaign strategy. Despite their claims, by almost any metric, both domestically and internationally, we are in a far better place today than we were in 2020. I don’t want to go back. How about you?

The Presidential Greatness Project is a periodic survey done of current and recent members of the Presidents & Executives Politics Section of the American Political Science Association. The 2024 version of the survey was completed during the final two months of 2023 and was overseen by Dr. Brandon Rottingham of the University of Houston and Dr. Justin S. Vaughn of Coastal Carolina University.

According to the Presidential Greatness Project report:

“The primary purpose of this survey was to create a ranking of presidential greatness that covered all presidents from George Washington to Joe Biden. To do this, we asked respondents to rate each president on a scale of 0-100 for their overall greatness, with 0=failure, 50=average, and 100=great. We then averaged the ratings for each president and ranked them from highest average to lowest. “

Who was the best and who was the worst? We’ll get to that in a minute. But what I found most interesting was the differences (or lack of difference) in how Republicans and Democrats voted, as well as between those that identified as conservative compared to those that identified as liberal. The results are really fascinating.

Let’s start with the overall results:

Top 5 Presidents Overall

Abraham Lincoln (93.87)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (90.83)
George Washington (90.32)
Theodore Roosevelt (78.58)
Thomas Jefferson (77.53)

The top five don’t really surprise me. What does surprise me is the huge fall off in score from the top three Presidents to the fourth and fifth ranked. Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Washington are held in much higher esteem than any of the other Presidents.

Next, let’s look at the bottom five presidents overall beginning with the worst:

Five Worst Presidents Overall

Donald Trump (10.92)
James Buchanan (16.71)
Andrew Johnson (21.56)
Franklin Pierce (24.60)
William Henry Harrison (26.01)

One thing that has always amazed me is the way current Trump supporters claim that Donald Trump was one of the greatest Presidents in history. The folks that actually study the accomplishments of Presidents disagree strongly. I suspect that at this juncture, Trump supporters will be saying that the former POTUS scored so low because the pin-headed academics that voted in this survey are all a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals. If that’s true, then we should see those scholars who identify as Republican and/or conservative rank Trump differently. Let’s see if that happens.

Next, let’s see how the rankings break down based on party affiliation. Let’s start with Republicans:

Top 5 Presidents Ranked by Republicans

George Washington  (96.94)
Abraham Lincoln (94.31)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (86.75)
Theodore Roosevelt (81.31)
Ronald Reagan (80.56)

It’s a little odd to me that overall, Lincoln ranked first, but among his fellow Republicans, he ranked second. Perhaps that goes to show how different the Republican Party is today compared to what they stood for in the mid-1800s.

It’s also a little surprising to see FDR rank so highly among Republicans. Not only was he a Democrat, but he is one of the most progressive Democrats to ever serve, ushering in social programs that many Republicans now find repugnant.

Finally, it should not be surprising to see Ronald Reagan rank so high among Republicans. After all, he is considered the father of the new conservative movement, and despite the fact that he is often pilloried by MAGA Republicans, he is still held in high regard among Republicans writ large.

Who did Republicans say were the five worst Presidents:

Bottom 5 Presidents Ranked by Republicans

James Buchanan (14.50)
Andrew Johnson (23.88)
Franklin Pierce (27.00)
William Henry Harrison (29.13)
Donald Trump (31.38)

Even among self-described Republicans, Donald Trump is considered one of the five worst Presidents in history. It will be interesting to see where he ranks among conservatives.

Next, Let’s look at how Democrats rank the top five Presidents:

Top 5 Presidents Ranked by Democrats

Abraham Lincoln (94.73)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (93.13)
George Washington (90.19)
Theodore Roosevelt (81.31)
Thomas Jefferson (78.88)

We see the same Presidents come up time and again on the “best ranked list” regardless of who is doing the ranking. The exception is Ronald Reagan, who Democrats ranked as the 18th best President; definitely not as high as Republicans ranked him, but still in the top half, which is respectable.

These are the Presidents who Democrats ranked as the worst in history:

Bottom 5 Presidents Ranked by Democrats

Donald Trump (6.66)
James Buchanan (16.33)
Andrew Johnson (20.00)
Franklin Pierce (23.27)
William Henry Harrison (25.96)

Republicans and Democrats agree that Trump is one of the worst presidents in history. The only difference is, Democrats think he is the worst ever, while Republicans think he is one of the worst, but not the absolute worst. BTW, Trump’s score among Democrats is not lost on me.

How about self-described conservatives? Who do they think are the top five Presidents?

Top 5 Presidents Ranked by Conservatives
George Washington (97.10)
Abraham Lincoln (91.29)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (87.00)
Thomas Jefferson (81.19)
Ronald Reagan (79.14)

The only difference between the top five Presidents as ranked by Republicans and those ranked by conservatives is Republicans had Theodore Roosevelt ranked fourth, while conservatives had Thomas Jefferson ranked fourth. Otherwise, their lists are the same.

Again, FDR makes the conservatives list of top five Presidents. The survey doesn’t provide insight into this phenomenon. I find it interesting and would like to understand it better.

For conservatives, these were the five worst Presidents in history:

Bottom 5 Presidents Ranked by Conservatives

James Buchanan (17.57)
Franklin Pierce (25.81)
Donald Trump (26.76)
William Henry Harrison (27.85)
Andrew Johnson (28.57)

Republicans and conservatives agree on the bottom five Presidents in history, but they don’t agree on the ranking of those five worst presidents. Once again, Donald Trump makes the list of the five worst Presidents.

I think it’s worth mentioning that conservatives rank Trump lower than self-identified Republicans do. Should this be surprising? I don’t think so.

Self-identified conservatives are more closely married to a political philosophy than Republicans. To simplify this point, Republicans are a political party focused on winning elections. Conservatives are a group that is less concerned with political victories than with political philosophy. Naturally, there is some cross-over in both of these descriptions, but the point is that conservatives likely view Trump more harshly than Republicans because he is not a true believer.

Trump is not conservative. In fact, he has no core values or beliefs. He is an opportunist who will use any group–be it evangelicals, social conservatives, military hawks, country club Republicans, etc.–to get what he wants. He’ll also abandon any of these groups if he thinks it will help his cause. Conservatives, at least the conservatives involved in this project, see Trump for who he is. That’s why they are so critical of him in this survey.

Let’s next look at how liberals rank the top five Presidents:

Top 5 Presidents Ranked by Liberals

Abraham Lincoln (93.60)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (91.39)
George Washington (88.75)
Theodore Roosevelt (78.17)
Thomas Jefferson (77.22)

The usual suspects again make the top five list. Who made the liberal’s worst five list?

Bottom 5 Presidents Ranked by Liberals

Donald Trump (6.97)
James Buchanan (16.24)
Andrew Johnson (20.36)
Franklin Pierce (23.50)
William Henry Harrison (24.63)

Republicans, Democrats, conservatives, and liberals agree that Donald Trump is one of the worst, if not the absolute worst, President in history. It’s hard to argue with these findings.

Mount Rushmore

Survey Respondents were asked who should be the next face on Mount Rushmore. Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt are the faces currently on Mount Rushmore. Who did respondents say should be next to join them?

Unsurprisingly, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was chosen by a wide margin (65.4%). Next was Barack Obama (11%), and a three-way tie between Dwight Eisenhower, James Madison, and John F. Kennedy (4%).

I happen to like Barack Obama, but I don’t think he was a great President. I might be wrong. Here’s how he was ranked by the various category of voters:

Overall — 7
Republicans — 15
Democrats — 6
Conservatives — 13
Liberals — 6

For me, this may be the biggest surprise of the entire survey. It’s not surprising that Democrats and liberals ranked Obama highly, but it’s hard to fathom that Republics and conservatives ranked him well in the top half of all Presidents. That’s an eye-opening surprise to me.

Most Polarizing

Respondents were asked to rank Presidents from the most polarizing to the least polarizing. Here are the results (average polarization rank):

Top 5 Most Polarizing Presidents

Donald Trump (1.4)
Andrew Johnson (3.1)
Andrew Jackson (3.4)
Barack Obama (3.5)
Richard Nixon (3.5)

Presidents who were considered almost as polarizing as these top five were Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Joe Biden, and Abraham Lincoln.

I’m trying to wrap my head around these rankings, and I have to admit I’m having a little trouble. I’m not surprised that Donald Trump tops the list. In my lifetime, there has never been a President that was nearly as polarizing. However, I’m surprised to see Barack Obama on the list, with Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Joe Biden close behind. Even Richard Nixon is a bit of a surprise. It seems to me that there might be some recency bias going on here.

Abraham Lincoln also seems like an outlier on this list. Of course, he was on one side of the bloodiest war in our nation’s history, so he was certainly polarizing in that regard. Nearly half the nation hated him. So, maybe it’s not so surprising.

Least Polarizing

According to respondents, the least polarizing Presidents in U.S. history are:

Top 5 Least Polarizing Presidents in History

George Washington (1.5)
Abraham Lincoln (1.8)
Dwight Eisenhower (2.7)
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (2.9)
James Monroe (3.1)

These top five least polarizing Presidents were followed closely by William Henry Harrison, Gerald Ford, and Theodore Roosevelt.

Let’s start with the elephant in the room. How can Abraham Lincoln be one of the most polarizing and least polarizing Presidents in history? This is how surveys go when there is a large split in opinions among the respondents. One group of respondents felt strongly that Lincoln was polarizing, while another group felt he was among our least polarizing Presidents. I think both groups can justify their position.

Under Lincoln, the country broke up, states seceded, there was a great and bloody civil war. Many people in the country blamed Lincoln for the war. They didn’t believe the cause of emancipating the slaves or preserving the Union was worth the cost of so many lives. You can see how that would have caused polarization.

On the other hand, Lincoln did a masterful job of uniting a very divided government, including his own cabinet. The country was being pulled in many different directions, and it was Lincoln’s skill of negotiation and compromise that kept the government together. Lincoln also re-united the nation, a task that was seemingly impossible at the time. It makes sense that people see him as among our least polarizing Presidents.

I’m not sure what to make of William Henry Harrison being on the least polarizing list while also being considered one of our country’s worst presidents. Can it be that he did a horrible job but didn’t rub anyone the wrong way?

I think it probably has to do with the fact that Harrison was only President for 31 days, the shortest Presidential tenure in history. Depending on who you believe, Harrison either caught a bad cold while giving an especially long-winded speech at his inauguration, the cold eventually turning into pneumonia, or he died of enteric fever, a bacterial infection known more commonly now as Typhoid fever.

Is it just me, or does it seem unfair to rank Harrison as one of the worst Presidents in history when he was only President for 31 days, and much of that time was spent too ill to work? I mean, give the guy a break.

Most Underrated

Respondents to the Presidential Greatness Project survey were also asked who they thought were the most underrated and most overrated Presidents. Here are the top five most underrated:

Top 5 Most Underrated Presidents

Jimmy Carter (2.2)
Lyndon Johnson (2.3)
Ulysses Grant (2.4)
Dwight Eisenhower (2.8)
George H.W. Bush (2.9)
Joe Biden (2.9)

I think there is a good case to be made for all of these Presidents as being underrated. The presidency of Jimmy Carter in particular is being re-examined and re-evaluated by scholars, and they are finding that far from leading an American malaise (a term he never used), he actually ushered the country through a very difficult economy and fraught foreign policy period.

More recently, Joe Biden has almost criminally not received credit for the job he has done over the past three-plus years. If you’ve read my political stories before, you know I’m not the world’s biggest Joe Biden fan,. But there’s no denying that he inherited a horrible situation from his predecessor and has turned the country and the economy around. We have one of the strongest economies in history, we produce more oil than ever before, wages are trending up, and he has not only held NATO together during the Russian-Ukraine war, he has strengthened and expanded it. Sure, he’s had a couple of missteps, but overall, he has done a fantastic job. Yet, according to polls, he has not received the credit he deserves and he is in danger of losing the upcoming Presidential race to the very guy that ruined our economy and damaged our relationship with our allies. It defies explanation.

Who are the most overrated Presidents in history?

Overrated Presidents

Top 5 Most Overrated Presidents

Ronald Reagan (2.1)
Andrew Jackson (2.3)
John F. Kennedy (2.4)
Thomas Jefferson (2.5)
Donald Trump (2.7)

I don’t know what to make of Reagan being at the top of these rankings, although I suspect that Democrats and liberals were united in ranking him as the most overrated President in history. To be certain, Reagan is a darling of the right and is credited with creating or championing or passing into law, all that Republicans and conservatives hold dear. I think the push to name him the most overrated President in history is overblown, but I guess I understand it.

JFK was viewed as near-royalty when he was in office. He was adored by the public as much, if not more, for the perception surrounding him and his family as he was for his politics. But a more sober examination of his presidency reveals many more missteps and errors than we knew at the time. Many scholars portray Kennedy as a man in over his head. True, he didn’t cause World War III, but there were times when he came close, either because of his inexperience or misunderstanding of the situation. I understand Kennedy’s inclusion on this list.

Jefferson has fallen out of favor with scholars in recent years, in no small part because he was a slaveholder who impregnated at least one of his slaves (Sally Hemmings) several times, then forced the offspring into slavery. On the one hand, that has more to do with his personal than his professional life. But I think scholars view it as, while not part of his presidency, it is part of his legacy, which they now feel has been overrated. It’s hard to argue with their reasoning.

Finally, Trump’s inclusion on this list gives us an idea of how really terrible he was. Not only is he considered one of the worst Presidents in history, but the people who ranked him as one of the worst also feel he is still overrated. Now, that’s bad.

Part of the problem with Trump is that, to this day, he takes credit for programs and laws that he was not involved with. For instance, he constantly takes credit for an improvement to veterans medical benefits that actually was put into law in 2014, two years before he was elected to office.

Another example is how right now, Trump is taking credit for the record high prices on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and NASDAQ. This, despite the fact that in 2020, Trump predicted that if Biden were to win the election, the stock market would tank. Not only did the stock market not tank, it’s soaring. So, Trump has changed his tune, claiming that the stock market is doing so well because investors know he’ll soon be back in the White House.

If nothing else, the survey shows that Donald Trump was a historically bad president. Across all party affiliations and political beliefs, Trump was ranked as one of our nation’s very worst Presidents.

It’s official! Congratulation to Donald Trump, the Presidential Greatness Project’s worst President in American history.

Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) gave the Republican response to President Biden’s State of the Union address this past week. In her overly dramatized speech, Britt painted a dystopian view of the United States, complete with the country being “invaded” by illegal immigrants, cities rendered unsafe and plundered due to rampant crime, and our economy in ruins, all thanks to an ineffective President Biden.

Unfortunately for Britt, the data does not support her assertions. For instance, crime has decreased nationally during Biden’s tenure in the White House.  FBI statistics indicate that crime is down significantly since Biden took office. Violent crime is down 8% since 2020, and property crime is down 6.3%, the lowest it has been since 1961.

Likewise, despite what Britt and Republicans would have you believe, by nearly every measure, the economy is strong. Inflation is at acceptable levels, unemployment is at record low levels, wages are up, and the stock market has reached record highs.

But what I’d like to focus on is the story Britt told to illustrate what the crisis at our Southern border means for the average American.

Here’s what she said:

“We know that President Biden didn’t just create this border crisis. He invited it with 94 executive actions in his first 100 days. When I took office, I took a different approach. I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That’s where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped. The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoe box of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end. We wouldn’t be okay with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.”

Britt claimed that she visited the Southern border in 2023 and spoke to a young woman who had been sex trafficked by drug cartels beginning when the woman was just twelve years old. She was sexually assaulted everyday in a tiny room. Britt intimated that this sexual assault occurred in the United States, although she wasn’t specific. It was a horrible story and Britt blamed it on President Biden’s immigration policies. There’s just one problem. Britt misrepresented the whole story.

The woman Britt was speaking of is named Karla Jacinta Romero. She was truly sexually trafficked by drug cartels. In fact, she testified before Congress about her ordeal, which appears to be where Britt heard her story, not at the border. However, Romero was not sexually assaulted in the United States. Her story took place in Mexico. And it took place beginning in 2004 and ending in 2008, when George W. Bush, not Joe Biden, was President.

Here’s more on Britt’s lies about the sexual assault of Romero:

@katzonearth

This isn’t going to make her like TikTok more. #katiebritt #sotu #stateoftheunion #lies #politicians #biden2024 #trump2024 #immigration #traffickingawarenes #mexico #bordersecurity #fyp

♬ original sound – Jonathan M. Katz

Think about the process Britt had to go through to craft this story for her speech. She knew the truth and understood that the story was not reflective of our current border crisis. So, she had to twist the truth, telling the story in such a way that it sounded like she was making her point–that Biden was to blame for the border crisis–when, in fact, the story had nothing to do with either Biden or the border crisis. Britt had to intentionally lie, and she was willing to do it to promote her own political career. It was an ugly, shameful, and dangerous decision.

And keep in mind, Britt was willing to use Romero’s story for political gain at the same time she and her Republican colleagues are pushing to keep people like Romero out of the country. In addition, the GOP is also opposed to allowing victims of rape, like Romero, from ending a pregnancy that results from rape. This is the height of hypocrisy and cynicism.

The type of misinformation Britt foisted on the nation in her speech has become textbook propaganda for Republicans looking to retake power. Sen. Britt knew that the story she was telling was not true and that she was misrepresenting Romero’s sexual assault for political gain. Yet, that didn’t stop her from sharing the story in an attempt to damage a political opponent.

Unfortunately, people who support former President Trump and his MAGA agenda either don’t know or don’t care about Britt’s misinformation. To these people, it doesn’t matter that crime is down, the economy is strong, or that the sexual assault story Britt told isn’t true. They will deny the truth, or ignore it completely, in order for the narrative to conform to their preconceived beliefs. And Britt and the Republicans are only too happy to keep their supporters angry and misinformed in order to keep them within the MAGA tribe.

There is a big difference between political spin and outright lies. What Britt did during her speech involved outright lies. It’s not spin to say crime is up when crime is down. It’s not spin to say the economy is in ruins when it is actually quite strong. And it’s not spin to change the date and location of a sexual assault to make political points.

In 2012, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), as Chair of the Democratic National Committee, lied about presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s position on abortion in a fundraising email the DNC sent out to supporters. Sometime later, she lied about the amount of money Romney had spent on negative campaign ads. The purpose of those lies was to misinform voters and benefit Democrats.

Wasserman Schultz wasn’t spinning these issues. She didn’t misunderstand the issues. She lied. The exact same thing can be said about Sen. Katie Britt. It was wrong when Wasserman Schultz did it and it’s wrong now. Wasserman Schultz was forced to step down as the DNC Chair. Will any Republicans denounce Britt’s lies, or will they, as I suspect, defend and amplify them?

Welcome to a new season of my favorite racing series. IndyCar kicks off their season this weekend in St. Petersburg. And despite the fact that I am living in St. Petersburg this winter, I will not be there. Instead, I’ll be hanging out with my kids in Nashville. I’d rather be with my kids, but just a word of warning to them: You’d better be entertaining.

With the season just getting underway, I wanted to share my predictions for the top 20 in the championship, as well as the top ten finishers in the Indy 500. I know the 500 isn’t until May, but why put off until late May what you can get done in early March? Words to live by.

Let’s start with the top 10 Indy 500 finishers:

108th Running of the Indianapolis 500

1. Kyle Kirkwood
2. Scott McLaughlin
3. Colton Herta
4. Marcus Ericsson
5. Josef Newgarden
6. Alexander Rossi
7. Scott Dixon
8. Christian Lundgaard
9. Conor Daly
10. Pato O’Ward

And here are the top 20 for the 2024 IndyCar season:

Predicted 2024 IndyCar Standings

1. Scott McLaughlin
2. Pato O’Ward
3. Scott Dixon
4. Marcus Ericsson
5. Alex Palou
6. Josef Newgarden
7. Colton Herta
8. Alexander Rossi
9. Will Power
10. Felix Rosenquist
11. Christian Lundgaard
12. Kyle Kirkwood
13. Marcus Armstrong
14. David Malukas
15. Graham Rahal
16. Tom Bloomquist
17. Rinus Vekay
18. Romain Grosjean
19. Linus Lundqvist
20. Santino Ferrucci

Congratulation to Kyle and Scott. Enjoy the season!

In November of last year, I share the 25 saddest songs I had ever heard. Granted, I haven’t heard all sad songs. In fact, there are entire genres I am unfamiliar with. So, let me stipulate up front that these lists are just my opinion and that my purview is not only subjective, but very limited.

When I wrote my first list of the 25 saddest songs ever written, I actually was working from a list of more than 75 sad songs. I picked 25 at random, but the songs on this list (and the forthcoming volume 3 of the list) are just as deserving of recognition.  Accordingly, here are 25 more sad songs for your consideration. Listen to a few tonight and cry yourself to sleep.

26. Missing You
Written by: John Waite, Mark Leonard, & Charles Stanford
Performed by: John Waite

“Missing You” came out in July 1984. If I saw it once on MTV, I saw it a thousand times. (For readers under 50 years of age, MTV got its start playing nothing but music videos. It started a revolution in the music industry, matching a video with a song. It became so popular that some musicians conceived of the video before creating the song. It was a simpler time.) Although I like the John Waite video for the song, I look for reasons to watch and listen to Allison Krauss. So, here’s Allison Krauss and John Waite doing a duet of “Missing You.”

Every time I think of you
I always catch my breath
And I’m still standing here
And you’re miles away
And I’m wondering why you left
And there’s a storm that’s raging
Through my frozen heart tonight

I hear your name in certain circles
And it always makes me smile
I spend my time
Thinking about you
And it’s almost driving me wild
And that’s my heart that’s breaking
Down this long distance line tonight

I ain’t missing you at all
Since you’ve been gone away
I ain’t missing you
No matter
What my friends say

There’s a message in the wild
And I’m sending you this signal tonight
You don’t know how desperate I’ve become
And it looks like I’m losing this fight

In your world I have no meaning
Though I’m trying hard to understand
And it’s my heart that’s breaking
Down this long distance line tonight

But I ain’t missing you at all
Since you’ve been gone away
I ain’t missing you
No matter what I might say

And there’s a message that I’m sending out
Like a telegraph to your soul
And if I can’t bridge this distance
Stop this heartbreak overload

‘Cause I ain’t missing you at all
Since you’ve been gone away
I ain’t missing you
No matter what I might say

I ain’t missing you (I ain’t missing you)
No way
Since you’ve been gone away (I can lie to myself these days)
I ain’t missing you

And there’s a storm that’s raging
Through my frozen heart tonight

And I ain’t missing you at all
Since you’ve been gone away
I ain’t missing you
No matter what my friends say

I ain’t missing you
I ain’t missing you (I can lie to myself these days)
I ain’t missing you at all, I ain’t missing you (No way, baby)

No matter what my friends say (I’m doing fine here)
And I ain’t missing you at all
I ain’t missing you
I keep lying to myself every time I think of you

I’m okay
I’m doing fine here from day to day
I ain’t missing you
I can lie to myself

27.  Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald
Written by Gordon Lightfoot
Performed by: Gordon Lightfoot

“Does any one know where the love of God goes
When the waves turn the minutes to hours?”

In November 1975, I was fifteen years old. That’s probably a little old to develop irrational fears, yet that’s exactly what happened to me. In that month and year, I became afraid of Lake Superior (“the big lake they call Gitche Gumee”). Why? That’s the month the U.S.S. Edmund Fitzgerald sank in Lake Superior, taking with it twenty-nine souls.

I grew up near Chicago and was fairly accustomed to being around Lake Michigan. But where Lake Michigan seemed fun and inviting, Lake Superior seemed frightening, a place to avoid. Like I said, it was an irrational fear. Thankfully, I’m almost over it.

Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald

28. I Can’t Make You Love Me
Written by: Mike Reid and Allen Shamblin
Performed by: Bonnie Raitt

I love the story behind the writing of “I Can’t Make You Love Me.” Like many good songwriters, Allen Shamblin was born in Nashville and Mike Reid played in the NFL. Wait…what? That’s right. Before becoming a successful songwriter, Mike played college football at Penn State. He was so good, he finished fifth in Heisman Trophy voting as an offensive lineman. He went on to become a first round pick in the NFL draft, going to the Cincinnati Bengals. He also played gangster Big Julie in the Penn State production of Guys and Dolls. Mike Reid was nothing if not versatile.

“I Can’t Make You Love Me” tells the heartbreaking story of a guy (or in Bonnie Raitt’s singing, a girl) who is losing the person he loves. They spend one more night together and he tells her “Morning will come, and I’ll do what’s right. Just give me ’til then to give up this fight.” I’m starting to get weepy just thinking about it.

Turn down the lights
Turn down the bed
Turn down these voices inside my head
Lay down with me
Tell me no lies
Just hold me close, don’t patronize
Don’t patronize me‘Cause I can’t make you love me if you don’t
You can’t make your heart feel something it won’t
Here in the dark, in these final hours
I will lay down my heart and I’ll feel the power
But you won’t, no you won’t
‘Cause I can’t make you love me, if you don’t

I’ll close my eyes, then I won’t see
The love you don’t feel when you’re holding me
Morning will come and I’ll do what’s right
Just give me till then to give up this fight
And I will give up this fight

‘Cause I can’t make you love me if you don’t
You can’t make your heart feel something it won’t
Here in the dark, in these final hours
I will lay down my heart and I’ll feel the power
But you won’t, no you won’t
‘Cause I can’t make you love me, if you don’t

29. For The Good Times
Written By: Kris Kristofferson
Performed by: Johnny Cash (among others)

I love Kris Kristofferson’s story. He was an Army brat who moved around a lot. He attended Pomona College, where he played football, rugby, and ran track & field. Upon graduation from Pomona, he attended University of Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship (that’s a big deal), While at Oxford, he played rugby and was on the boxing team. It was also at Oxford where he started writing songs, playing guitar, and singing.

Before pursuing a full-time music career, Kristofferson joined the Army, became a helicopter pilot, and rose to the rank of captain. In 1965, he started spending time in Nashville where he tried to sell his songs. He gave a demo tape to June Carter, wife of Johnny Cash, and asked her to give the tape to the popular Cash. She did, but Cash threw it on a pile with other demos and ignored it.

After not hearing from Cash for some time, Kristofferson flew a helicopter to Cash’s house and landed on his front lawn. That got Cash’s attention, and the rest is history. Kristofferson went on to become a successful songwriter (winning Songwriter of the Year in 1970), singer (recording 17 albums), and actor. He also went on to sit across the aisle from me at the premier of his film, Bloodworth. He does not tell that story nearly as often as I do. We did not speak.

For the Good Times

Don’t look so sad, I know it’s over
But life goes on and this old world will keep on turning
Let’s just be glad we had some time to spend together
There’s no need to watch the bridges that we’re burning

Lay your head upon my pillow
Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowin’ soft against the window
And make-believe you love me one more time
For the good times

I’ll get along, you’ll find another
And I’ll be here if you should find you ever need me
Don’t say a word about tomorrow or forever
There’ll be time enough for sadness when you leave me

Lay your head upon my pillow
Hold your warm and tender body close to mine
Hear the whisper of the raindrops blowin’ soft against the window
And make-believe you love me one more time
For the good times

30. Eleanor Rigby
Written By: Paul McCartney and John Lennon
Performed by: The Beatles

I once heard Paul McCartney talk about how he came up with the song “Eleanor Rigby.” In a nutshell, he wanted to tell a story about the lives of lonely people. He came up with Eleanor Rigby (who began life as Daisy Hawkins), an old-maid type woman, and Father McKenzie (who began life as Father McCartney), a church vicar who presides over a small congregation of lonely people. It really brought home for me how sad the song really is.

Eleanor Rigby

Ah, look at all the lonely people
Ah, look at all the lonely people

Eleanor Rigby picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been
Lives in a dream
Waits at the window, wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door
Who is it for?

All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?

Father McKenzie writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear
No one comes near
Look at him working, darning his socks in the night when there’s nobody there
What does he care?

All the lonely people
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
Where do they all belong?

Ah, look at all the lonely people
Ah, look at all the lonely people

Eleanor Rigby died in the church and was buried along with her name
Nobody came
Father McKenzie wiping the dirt from his hands as he walks from the grave
No one was saved

All the lonely people
(Ah, look at all the lonely people)
Where do they all come from?
All the lonely people
(Ah, look at all the lonely people)
Where do they all belong?

31. Crying
Written by Roy Orbison
Performed by Roy Orbison

It stands to reason that a song called “Crying” should be sad. It helps that Roy Orbison’s multi-octave voice is on full displaying in the song. I think it was “Crying” that Bruce Springsteen (a big fan of Orbison’s) was singing about in “Thunder Road” when he sang “Roy Orbison singing for the lonely. Hey, that’s me and I want you only.” If it’s good enough for Bruce, it’s good enough for me.

Crying

32. Atlantic City
Written by Bruce Springsteen
Performed by Bruce Springsteen

In 1981, Bruce Springsteen started recording songs for his solo album (i.e. without The E Street Band), Nebraska. He was sitting in his home studio (i.e. his bedroom) working on a song that was then titled “Fist Full of Dollars,” a homage of sorts to Clint Eastwood’s movie of the same name. Eventually, the song became “Atlantic City.” Like most of the rest of the Nebraska album, “Atlantic City” is pared down, spare, and gritty. There’s nothing pretty about it, and you have to look pretty hard to find anything that’s hopeful. Bruce Springsteen can really write a sad song.

Atlantic City

Well, they blew up the chicken man in Philly last night
And they blew up his house, too
Down on the boardwalk, they’re getting ready for a fight
Gonna see what them racket boys can do
Now there’s trouble busing in from out of state
And the D.A. can’t get no relief
Gonna be a rumble out on the promenade
And the gambling commission’s hanging on by the skin of its teeth

Well, now, everything dies, baby, that’s a fact
But maybe everything that dies someday comes back
Put your makeup on, fix your hair up pretty
And meet me tonight in Atlantic City

Well, I got a job and tried to put my money away
But I got debts that no honest man can pay
So I drew what I had from the Central Trust
And I bought us two tickets on that Coast City bus

Well, now, everything dies, baby, that’s a fact
But maybe everything that dies someday comes back
Put your makeup on, fix your hair up pretty
And meet me tonight in Atlantic City

Now, our luck may have died, and our love may be cold
But with you, forever, I’ll stay
We’re going out where the sand’s turning to gold
So put on your stockings, baby, ’cause the night’s getting cold

And everything dies, baby, that’s a fact
But maybe everything that dies someday comes back

Now I been looking for a job, but it’s hard to find
Down here, it’s just winners and losers and “Don’t get caught on the wrong side of that line”
Well, I’m tired of coming out on the losing end
So, honey, last night, I met this guy, and I’m gonna do a little favor for him

Well, now, everything dies, baby, that’s a fact
But maybe everything that dies someday comes back
Put your makeup on, fix your hair up pretty
And meet me tonight in Atlantic City

33. Dancing in the Dark
Written by: Bruce Springsteen
Performed by: Bruce Springsteen/Sam Fender

It’s a Springsteen two-for!

If you’re of a certain age, you probably remember the video for Springsteen’s Dancing in the Dark. It’s upbeat, and Bruce is looking buff, dancing around the stage. As you may know, this is the song where a not-yet-famous Courtney Cox (of Friends fame) comes up on stage and dances with the Boss. It seems like a celebration.

But listen to the lyrics. They tell a very different story. In addition to the Boss’s version, here’s Sam Fender reimagining Springsteen’s song. Do your best not to cry.

Dancing in the Dark

I get up in the evening
And I ain’t got nothing to say
I come home in the morning
I go to bed feeling the same way

I ain’t nothing but tired
Man, I’m just tired and bored with myself
Hey there baby, I could use just a little help
You can’t start a fire
You can’t start a fire without a spark
This gun’s for hire
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark

Message keeps getting clearer
Radio’s on and I’m moving ’round the place
I check my look in the mirror
I wanna change my clothes, my hair, my face

Man, I ain’t getting nowhere
I’m just living in a dump like this
There’s something happening somewhere
Baby, I just know that there is

You can’t start a fire
You can’t start a fire without a spark
This gun’s for hire
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark

You sit around getting older
There’s a joke here somewhere and it’s on me
I’ll shake this world off my shoulders
Come on, baby, the laugh’s on me

Stay on the streets of this town
And they’ll be carving you up all right
They say you gotta stay hungry
Hey, baby, I’m just about starving tonight

I’m dying for some action
I’m sick of sitting ’round here trying to write this book
I need a love reaction
Come on now, baby, gimme just one look

You can’t start a fire
Sitting ’round crying over a broken heart
This gun’s for hire
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark

You can’t start a fire
Worrying about your little world falling apart
This gun’s for hire
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark
Even if we’re just dancing in the dark
Hey, baby

34. Only Love Can Break Your Heart
Written by: Neil Young
Performed by: Neil Young

As I’ve grown older, I’ve become more of a Neil Young fan. That wasn’t always the case. Even as much as I liked Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young, I really didn’t like Young all that much. I still can’t say I’m a huge fan, but I really have come to appreciate his music.

“Only Love Can Break Your Heart” is a beautiful song. It may not be as sad as some of the other songs on the list, but I think it still belongs. Give it a listen.

Only Love Can Break Your Heart

When you were young
And on your own
How did it feel to be alone?
I was always thinking of games
That I was playing
Trying to make the best of my time

But only love can break your heart
Try to be sure right from the start
Yes, only love can break your heart
What if your world should fall apart?

I have a friend I’ve never seen
He hides his head inside a dream
Someone should call him and see
If he can come out
Try to lose the down that he’s found

But only love can break your heart
Try to be sure right from the start
Yes, only love can break your heart
What if your world should fall apart?

I have a friend I’ve never seen
He hides his head inside a dream

Yes, only love can break your heart
Yes, only love can break your heart
Yes, only love can break your heart
Yes, only love can break your heart
Yes, only love can break your heart

36. I Will Always Love You
Written by: Dolly Parton
Performed by: Dolly Parton/Whitney Houston

Can we just take a moment to celebrate the awesomeness of Dolly Parton? She’s a national treasure. She has done a lot of great songs, a lot of sad songs, but it was Whitney Houston that really brought this song to life. Watch the two videos below. Dolly’s is good. Whitney’s is out of this world.

The very first stanza of the song tells the story. “If I should stay, I would only get in your way. So I’ll go, but I know I’ll think of you every step pf the way.” They’re breaking up, but she doesn’t want to. She’s doing it for him. #Sad.

I Will Always Love You

If I should stay
I would only be in your way
So I’ll go but I know
I’ll think of you every step of the way

And I will always love you
I will always love you

You
My darling, you
Mmm-mm

Bittersweet memories –
That is all I’m taking with me
So good-bye
Please don’t cry:
We both know I’m not what you, you need

And I… will always love you
I… will always love you
You, ooh

I hope life treats you kind
And I hope you have all you’ve dreamed of
And I’m wishing you joy and happiness
But above all this, I wish you love

And I… will always love you
I will always love you
I will always love you
I will always love you
I will always love you
I, I will always love you
You
Darling, I love you
I’ll always
I’ll always love you

37. My Heart Will Go On
Written by: James Horner and Will Cummings
Performed by: Celine Dion

When I think about “My Heart Will Go On,” I think about my daughter. She was just two years old in 1997 when the song came out, and she loved it. I remember one day, sitting at my in-laws’ house, and my daughter wanted to play the song over and over and over. She sang along with Celine Dion, and I was surprised that at just two years old, she was pretty good. Of course, I’m not biased.

“My Heart Will Go On” was from the movie Titanic, which was about a forbidden love affair that ended with Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio’s character) drowning in frigid cold waters after the Titanic–the “unsinkable ship,”–hits an iceberg and sinks. Sad stuff indeed.

My Heart Will Go On

Every night in my dreams
I see you, I feel you
That is how I know you go on

Far across the distance
And spaces between us
You have come to show you go on

Near, far, wherever you are
I believe that the heart does go on
Once more you open the door
And you’re here in my heart
And my heart will go on and on

Love can touch us one time
And last for a lifetime
And never let go ’til we’re gone

Love was when I loved you
One true time I hold to
In my life we’ll always go on

Near, far, wherever you are
I believe that the heart does go on
Once more you open the door
And you’re here in my heart
And my heart will go on and on

You’re here, there’s nothing I fear
And I know that my heart will go on
We’ll stay forever this way
You are safe in my heart
And my heart will go on and on

38. How Can You Mend a Broken Heart
Written by: Barry Gibb & Robin Gibb
Performed by: Bee Gees/Al Green

The Bee Gee are underrated. There, I said it. For people my age, when we were young, the Bee Gees were looked at as a disco group. And we were not fans of disco. But if you look at the Bee Gees entire discography, it’s obvious that they were much more than just a disco group. They were a great band.

Al Green (before he was Rev. Al Green) did a cover of “How Can You Mend a Broken Heart” and made it his own. Man, did he ever make it his own. Take a look at the video to see what I mean.

How Can You Mend a Broken Heart

I can think of younger days when living for my life
Was everything a man could want to do
I could never see tomorrow
But I was never told about the sorrows

And, how can you mend a broken heart?
How can you stop the rain from falling down?
How can you stop the sun from shining?
What makes the world go ’round?
How can you mend this broken man?
How can a loser ever win?
Please help me mend my broken heart and let me live again

I can still feel the breeze that rustles through the trees
And misty memories of days gone by
We could never see tomorrow
No one said a word about the sorrow

And how can you mend a broken heart?
How can you stop the rain from falling down?
How can you stop the sun from shining?
What makes the world go ’round?
And how can you mend this broken man?
How can a loser ever win?
Please help me mend my broken heart and let me live again

39. Someone You Loved
Written by: Lewis Capaldi
Performed by: Lewis Capaldi

“Some You Loved” is sad on a couple of different levels. First, the lyrics tell the story of a guy who used to be in a relationship, still wants to be in the relationship, but isn’t in the relationship anymore. And he’s struggling with that fact. He fell in love, let his guard down, and now he’s dealing with the pain.

But it’s the writer and performer’s life that is even more sad. Lewis Capaldi is a Scottish musician who burst onto the scene with “Someone to Love.” But shortly after realizing his dream of become a successful musician, he was diagnosed with Tourette’s Syndrome and debilitating anxiety. Medicine can help both ailments, but it dulls his faculties, making it difficult to write songs and impossible to perform them the way he wants. Sometimes it’s easier not to realize your dream than it is to realize it and have it ripped away.

Someone You Loved

I’m going under and this time I fear there’s no one to save me
This all or nothing really got a way of driving me crazy

I need somebody to heal
Somebody to know
Somebody to have
Somebody to hold
It’s easy to say
But it’s never the same
I guess I kinda liked the way you numbed all the pain

Now the day bleeds
Into nightfall
And you’re not here
To get me through it all
I let my guard down
And then you pulled the rug
I was getting kinda used to being someone you loved

I’m going under and this time I fear there’s no one to turn to
This all or nothing way of loving got me sleeping without you

Now, I need somebody to know
Somebody to heal
Somebody to have
Just to know how it feels
It’s easy to say
But it’s never the same
I guess I kinda liked the way you helped me escape

Now the day bleeds
Into nightfall
And you’re not here
To get me through it all
I let my guard down
And then you pulled the rug
I was getting kinda used to being someone you loved

And I tend to close my eyes when it hurts sometimes
I fall into your arms
I’ll be safe in your sound til I come back around

For now the day bleeds
Into nightfall
And you’re not here
To get me through it all
I let my guard down
And then you pulled the rug
I was getting kinda used to being someone you loved

But now the day bleeds
Into nightfall
And you’re not here
To get me through it all
I let my guard down
And then you pulled the rug
I was getting kinda used to being someone you loved

I let my guard down
And then you pulled the rug
I was getting kinda used to being someone you loved

40. The Boxer
Written by: Paul Simon
Performed by: Simon & Garfunkel

For most of my life, I have believed that “The Boxer” begins with the lines “I am just a poor boy, though my story’s seldom told. I have squandered my existence for a pocket full of mumbled sunshine promises.” As you can see below, I was wrong. That, in and of itself is sad.

But the lyrics are the story here. The song’s narrator tells about his efforts to overcome loneliness and poverty, then switches to a third-party lament about a boxer who “carries the reminder of every glove that laid him down or cut him till he cried out.” Is the boxer a metaphor for what the narrator is going through? It seems that way to me. Either way, it’s powerful stuff.

The Boxer

I am just a poor boy
Though my story’s seldom told
I have squandered my resistance
For a pocketful of mumbles
Such are promises
All lies and jest
Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest

When I left my home and my family
I was no more than a boy
In the company of strangers
In the quiet of a railway station
Running scared
Laying low, seeking out the poorer quarters
Where the ragged people go
Looking for the places only they would know

Lie-la-lie…

Asking only workman’s wages
I come looking for a job
But I get no offers
Just a come-on from the whores on Seventh Avenue
I do declare there were times when I was so lonesome
I took some comfort thereLie-la-lie…

Then I’m laying out my winter clothes
And wishing I was gone
Going home
Where the New York City winters aren’t bleeding me
Leading me
Going home

In the clearing stands a boxer
And a fighter by his trade
And he carries the reminders
Of every glove that laid him down
Or cut him ’til he cried out
In his anger and his shame
“I am leaving, I am leaving”
But the fighter still remains

Lie-la-lie…

41. Something in the Way
Written by: Kurt Cobain
Performed by: Nirvana

Truth is, I had never heard “Something in the Way” before someone suggested to me that it should be on my list. I listened to it. Sure enough, it’s sad. I think it’s about a homeless person, but I’m honestly not sure.

That’s it. That’s the whole story.

Something in the Way

Underneath the bridge
Tarp has sprung a leak
And the animals I’ve trapped
Have all become my pets
And I’m living off of grass
And the drippin’s from the ceiling
It’s okay to eat fish
‘Cause they don’t have any feelings

Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm
Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm
Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm

Underneath the bridge
Tarp has sprung a leak
And the animals I’ve trapped
Have all become my pets
And I’m living off of grass
And the drippings from the ceiling
It’s okay to eat fish
Cause they don’t have any feelings

Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm
Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm
Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm
Something in the way, mmm
Something in the way, yeah, mmm

42. Wicked Game
Written by: Chris Isaak
Performed by Chris Isaak/Tenacious D

If you’re around my age, you probably remember this song as the one with the uncomfortably sexy video of an impossibly handsome Chris Isaak chasing a beautiful, topless woman around the beach, the whole time singing about how he doesn’t want to fall in love. He claims the woman is playing a wicked game, drawing him in, letting him dream about her, making him fall in love. He knows the world is going to break his heart, but he can’t help himself. Then the song ends with the words, “Nobody loves no one.” That’s sad, isn’t it?

Chris Isaak does the OG version of this song. His video looks like one of those black and white perfume commercials that makes no sense. I really like the cover done by Tenacious D. Sometime I forget how really talented Jack Black is.

Wicked Game

The world was on fire and no one could save me but you
It’s strange what desire will make foolish people do
I never dreamed that I’d meet somebody like you
And I never dreamed that I’d lose somebody like you

No, I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
No, I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
With you, with you (With you)
(This world is only gonna break your heart)

What a wicked game we play, to make me feel this way
What a wicked thing to do, to let me dream of you
What a wicked thing to say, you never felt this way
What a wicked thing to do, to make me dream of you

And I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
No, I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
With you

The world was on fire and no one could save me but you
It’s strange what desire will make foolish people do
I never dreamed that I’d love somebody like you
And I never dreamed that I’d lose somebody like you

No, I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
No, I don’t wanna fall in love
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
With you (With you)
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
With you (With you)
(This world is only gonna break your heart)
No, I… (This world is only gonna break your heart)
(This world is only gonna break your heart)

Nobody loves no one

43. Unchained Melody
Written by: Alex North & Hy Zaret
Performed by: The Righteous Brothers

This one is a classic. And although it seems like I’ve known this song my entire life (it was first recorded by Todd Duncan in 1955), I never knew why it was called “Unchained Melody.” The answer was uninspiring. It seems that the song was written for the movie Unchained, and because of that, was tentatively titled “Unchained Melody.” I don’t know if the writers didn’t think much of the song or they just got busy, but they never bothered to rename it. It’s a great song and it deserved better.

The song was recorded hundreds of times by singers including George Benson, Neil Diamond, Leo Sayer, and even U2. But there are two versions that stand out. The Righteous Brothers version really put the song on the map, and their version found new life in the movie Ghost. The Elvis Presley cover is like nothing else, putting his soaring vocals on full display. I challenge you to watch the video and not get chills.

Unchained Melody

Oh, my love
My darling
I’ve hungered for your touch
A long, lonely time

And time goes by so slowly
And time can do so much
Are you still mine?

I need your love
I need your love
God speed your love to me

Lonely rivers flow to the sea, to the sea
To the open arms of the sea
Yes, lonely rivers sigh, “Wait for me, wait for me
I’ll be coming home, wait for me”

Oh, my love
My darling
I’ve hungered, hungered for your touch
A long, lonely time

And time goes by so slowly
And time can do so much
Are you still mine?

I need your love
I, I need your love
God speed your love to me

44. Yesterday
Written by: Paul McCartney and John Lennon
Performed by: The Beatles

“Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away. Now it look as though they’re here to stay. I believe in yesterday.” You don’t need much more than that to know the story the singer s telling.

Writing the song was not nearly as sad as the song itself. According to Paul McCartney, the song came to him one night in a dream. But the lyrics were unfinished. Originally, the song started with the lines “Scrambled eggs/Oh my baby how I Iove your legs/Not as much as I love scrambled eggs.” McCartney knew the scrambled eggs lyrics weren’t going to stay, but he kept them as a placeholder until he found something more suitable. I’ll never be able to eat scrambled eggs again without thinking about this song.

Yesterday

Suddenly, I’m not half the man I used to be.
There’s a shadow hanging over me.
Oh, yesterday came suddenly.

Why she had to go?
I don’t know, she wouldn’t say.
I said something wrong.
Now I long for yesterday.

Yesterday love was such an easy game to play.
Now I need a place to hide away.
Oh, I believe in yesterday.

Why she had to go?
I don’t know, she wouldn’t say.
I said something wrong.
Now I long for yesterday.

Yesterday love was such an easy game to play.
Now I need a place to hide away.
Oh, I believe in yesterday.

Mm mm mm mm mm mm mm.

45. I Will Remember You
Written by: Sarah McLachlan, Seamus Egan, and Dave Merenda
Performed by: Sarah McLachlan

Is it just me, or can you not hear a Sarah McLachlan song without thinking of those ultra-sad ASPCA commercials that show scared and hungry dogs living in horrible conditions. Every time I see one, I want to yell at the cameraman, “Put the camera down and help those poor dogs.” But no, the cameraman can’t help the dogs. Only your donation of just $19/month can do that.

Anyway, this is a sad song. Now, all I can think about are those poor dogs.

I Will Remember You

I will remember you
Will you remember me?
Don’t let your life pass you by
Weep not for the memories

Remember the good times that we had?
I let them slip away from us when things got bad
How clearly I first saw you smilin’ in the sun
Wanna feel your warmth upon me, I wanna be the one

I will remember you
Will you remember me?
Don’t let your life pass you by
Weep not for the memories

I’m so tired but I can’t sleep
Standin’ on the edge of something much too deep
It’s funny how we feel so much but we cannot say a word
We are screaming inside, but we can’t be heard

But I will remember you
Will you remember me?
Don’t let your life pass you by
Weep not for the memories

I’m so afraid to love you, but more afraid to lose
Clinging to a past that doesn’t let me choose
Once there was a darkness, deep and endless night
You gave me everything you had, oh you gave me light

And I will remember you
Will you remember me?
Don’t let your life pass you by
Weep not for the memories

And I will remember you
Will you remember me?
Don’t let your life pass you by
Weep not for the memories
Weep not for the memories

46. Wildfire
Written by: Michael Martin Murphey and Larry Cansler
Performed by: Michael Martin Murphey

I first met Michael Martin Murphey in 2003. He had recently moved to my area of Wisconsin from his home state of Texas after marrying a woman from our neighboring town. I was the president of our local Rotary Club at the time and Michael was interested in joining.

I think I may have been the only member of our Rotary Club who knew who Michael was. At that first meeting he introduced himself and  said he was a musician. “What kind of music do you play” someone asked him. He asked, “You heard of country and western?” Everyone said they had. “And you know what country music is?” Again, everyone say they did. “Well, I do the western kind.” I’ve had the great good fortune to hear Michael perform “Wildfire” three or four times since then, both solo and with his band.

“Wildfire” is a terrific song that tells a sad story about a horse named Wildfire that gets loose in a blizzard and runs off.  Wildfire’s owner chases after the horse, but they both die in the heavy snow. The song goes on, switching to the prospective of a farmer who knows the story of Wildfire and his owner, and fears–or maybe wants–them to come take him away from the sodbusting life.

Wildfire

She comes down from yellow mountain
On a dark, flat land she rides
On a pony she named wildfire
With a whirlwind by her side
On a cold Nebraska night

Oh, they say she died one winter
When there came a killing frost
And the pony she named wildfire
Busted down his stall
In a blizzard, she was lost

She ran calling wildfire
Calling wildfire
Calling wildfire

So by the dark of the moon, I planted
But there came an early snow
Been a hoot-owl howling outside my window now
‘Bout six nights in a row
She’s coming for me, I know
And on wildfire we’re both gonna go

We’ll be ridin’ wildfire
Ridin’ wildfire
Ridin’ wildfire

On wildfire we’re gonna ride
Gonna leave sodbustin’ behind
Get the hard times right on out of our minds
Riding wildfire

47. Stay With Me
Written by: Sam Smith, Kames Napier, William Phillips, Tom Petty, Jeff Lynne
Performed by: Sam Smith

“Stay With Me” is Sam Smith’s most popular song. But it’s birth was a controversial one. After it was released, Tom Petty’s estate contacted Smith claiming that “Stay With Me” sounded suspiciously like Petty’s single “I Won’t Back Down,” which had been written by Petty and Lynne. Turns out they were right. Petty and Lynne got co-writing credit and 12.5% of the proceeds from the song.

Stay With Me

Guess it’s true, I’m not good at a one-night stand
But I still need love ’cause I’m just a man
These nights never seem to go to plan
I don’t want you to leave, will you hold my hand?

Oh, won’t you stay with me?
‘Cause you’re all I need
This ain’t love, it’s clear to see
But, darling, stay with me

Why am I so emotional?
No, it’s not a good look, gain some self-control
And deep down I know this never works
But you can lay with me so it doesn’t hurt

Oh, won’t you stay with me?
‘Cause you’re all I need
This ain’t love, it’s clear to see
But, darling, stay with me

Oh, won’t you stay with me?
‘Cause you’re all I need
This ain’t love, it’s clear to see
But, darling, stay with me

Oh, won’t you stay with me?
‘Cause you’re all I need
This ain’t love, it’s clear to see
But, darling, stay with me

48. The Living Years
Written by: B.A. Robertson and Mike Rutherford
Performed by: Mike + The Mechanics

The song was inspired by the fact that both Robertson and Rutherford lost their fathers when they were young. The similarity got the two talking, and they realized how the previous generation had wanted to follow in their fathers’ footstep, but then things changed and young men suddenly didn’t want to be like their fathers. For the songwriters, the change wasn’t brought on by anything the fathers had done. It was just a cultural shift. But the change negatively impacted relationships between fathers and sons.

I especially like the lyric “I wasn’t there that morning/When my Father passed away/I didn’t get to tell him/All the things I had to say.” Every time I hear it, I think of my own dad.

The Living Years

Every generation
Blames the one before
And all of their frustrations
Come beating on your door

I know that I’m a prisoner
To all my Father held so dear
I know that I’m a hostage
To all his hopes and fears
I just wish I could have told him in the living years

Crumpled bits of paper
Filled with imperfect thought
Stilted conversations
I’m afraid that’s all we’ve got

You say you just don’t see it
He says it’s perfect sense
You just can’t get agreement
In this present tense
We all talk a different language
Talking in defense

Say it loud, say it clear
You can listen as well as you hear
It’s too late when we die
To admit we don’t see eye to eye

So we open up a quarrel
Between the present and the past
We only sacrifice the future
It’s the bitterness that lasts

So don’t yield to the fortunes
You sometimes see as fate
It may have a new perspective
On a different date
And if you don’t give up, and don’t give in
You may just be O.K.

Say it loud, say it clear
You can listen as well as you hear
It’s too late when we die
To admit we don’t see eye to eye

I wasn’t there that morning
When my Father passed away
I didn’t get to tell him
All the things I had to say

I think I caught his spirit
Later that same year
I’m sure I heard his echo
In my baby’s new born tears
I just wish I could have told him in the living years

Say it loud, say it clear
You can listen as well as you hear
It’s too late when we die
To admit we don’t see eye to eye

49. From His Window
Written by: John Smith
Performed by: John Smith

John Smith is a friend of mine from Trempealeau, WI. He’s a terrific singer-songwriter who also leads trips to Ireland (something I want to go on one of these days). John’s song “From His Window” is autobiographical, about his father who had Alzheimer’s. John’s dad was in a nursing home, and although he didn’t always remember John, he did enjoy when John visited. In the song, John had spent some time with his dad, but had to leave. John went out to his car, and as he was pulling out of the parking lot, he looked back, and his dad was in his window, waving, watching John drive away. It’s a heartbreaking song.

John tells the story about playing “From His Window” in a pub in Ireland several years ago. As often happened, tears were flowing by the end of the song. The audience in the pub applauded, and in the quiet after the applause died down, a lone voice from the back of the room called out to John in an Irish brogue, “That’s a good one, John. But can you play us a sad song?”

I would encourage you to watch the video for John’s song. But let me warn you, you might want to have some tissues handy. I think you’ll need them

From His Window

He stands by the window
He watches cars go by
He waves at everybody
He’s just a friendly guy

He doesn’t know what day it is
He doesn’t talk much anymore
Sometimes he cries when he means to laugh
Doctors say he can’t tell that

And I come to visit
I take him out on drives
He wants to go home with me
Evertime

But the nurses come to take him
Back to his room that’s waiting
And I fight to keep my tears inside
From his window, he waves goodbye

Where have the years all gone to
It seems like only yesterday
We used to dance upon his shoes
Back on Sunday afternoons

He was a mountain standing tall
Doing his best to raise us all
We always had enough to eat
He worked two jobs to make ends meet

But now it seems he can’t remember that
And it’s hard for the rest of us to understand
But when I come to visit, he knows my name and he says it
And I fight to keep my tears inside

From his window
He waves goodbye

But when I come to visit, he knows my name and he says it
And it makes me glad I made the drive
From his window
He waves goodbye

From his window
He waves goodbye

50. Danny Boy
Written by: Frederic Weatherly
Performed by: Various

There are several different stories about how “Danny Boy” came into existence. What is known is that the lyrics were written in 1910 by British lawyer and lyricist (This two job descriptions rarely goes together) Frederic Weatherly. The music for “Danny Boy comes from “Londonderry Air,” but it’s unknown exactly how the lyrics and music came together.

Although it’s hard to know exactly the meaning behind the lyrics, it is believed that they are a message from a family to a son going off to war. Considering that the song was written in 1910, the war was likely World War I.

A million different artists have recorded “Danny Boy,” and it was a little hard choosing exactly with version to include here. In the end, I decided to share a traditional version of the song by Jim McCann and The Dubliners, as well as a wonderful, over-the-top version by Tom Jones.

Danny Boy

Oh, Danny boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling
From glen to glen, and down the mountain side.
The summer’s gone, and all the roses falling,
It’s you, it’s you must go and I must bide.
But come ye back when summer’s in the meadow,
Or when the valley’s hushed and white with snow,
It’s I’ll be there in sunshine or in shadow,—
Oh, Danny boy, Oh Danny boy, I love you so!

But when ye come, and all the flowers are dying,
If I am dead, as dead I well may be,
Ye’ll come and find the place where I am lying,
And kneel and say an Avé there for me.
And I shall hear, though soft you tread above me,
And all my grave will warmer, sweeter be,
For you will bend and tell me that you love me,
And I shall sleep in peace until you come to me!

It has become fashionable as of late for Republicans–especially the MAGA variety–to claim that the United States is not a democracy, but is instead a constitutional republic. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) made a big splash when he wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that the United States is not a democracy. He followed up that tweet with an op-ed in which he tried to support his point with a lot of words, but was never quite able to make the case.

The reason Sen. Lee failed to make his case is because there is almost no difference in the way we understand the words “democracy” and “republic.” For instance, the American Heritage Dictionary defines “republic” as:

“A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.”

That describes what we have in the United States.

The definition of “democracy” is:

“Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.”

That applies to us too.

So, which are we? Is the United States a democracy or a republic? Yes.

People who argue that the United States is a republic, not a democracy, don’t seem to understand that they are virtually the same thing. They mean the same thing to us today, and they meant the same to the Founders.

What supporters of the “We are a republic, not a democracy” way of thinking would have you believe is that a democracy requires every citizen to have a say in the running of the government. What they are referring to is direct or pure democracy. That’s not the kind of democracy we have (although ballot initiatives and referendum could fairly be described as direct democracy).

What we have in the United States is a representative democracy. It is what most Americans think of when we say “democracy” and it is what the Founders were thinking of when the United States was created.

One of those Founding Fathers, and one of our first Supreme Court Justices, James Wilson, compared the three forms of government–monarchical, aristocratical, and democratical–saying that only in a democracy is the sovereign power “inherent in the people, and is either exercised by themselves or by their representatives.”

Chief Justice John Marshall echoed Wilson’s sentiments when he was leading the fight to ratify the Constitution in Virginia. He called the form of government being implemented a democracy, and compared it favorably against despotism. He did not add the qualifier “representative” to his description of the democracy. It was understood by Founders and citizens alike that when the term “democracy” was used, a representative democracy was being referred to.

The “republic, not democracy” crowd likes to point to James Madison’s comments in Federalist 10, Federalist 14, and Federalist 51, in which he speaks with disfavor about democracy. “In a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently, will be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region.” (Federalist 14)

But a full reading of the text reveals that Madison was talking about direct democracy in these instances. The idea of democracy was appealing to the founders, but they rightly feared that majority rule could turn into mob rule when the passions of the citizenry was inflamed.

Alexander Hamilton, Madison’s co-author in the Federalist Papers, addressed this concern in a letter to Gouverneur Morris when he wrote, “A representative democracy, where the right of election is well secured and regulated & the exercise of the legislative, executive and judiciary authorities, is vested in select persons, chosen really and not nominally by the people, will in my opinion be most likely to be happy, regular and durable.”

It was not unusual for the Founders to use the terms “democracy” and “republic” interchangeably. For instance, both Madison and Hamilton wrote about Rome, referring to it as a “republic” despite the fact that it was a direct democracy. The synonymous use of the words was common and occurred throughout the Federalist Papers.

This interchangeability became the consensus view among the Founders. Throughout their public writings, private papers, and speeches, they referred to the United States as both a democracy and a republic. By the time the Constitution was completed, there was no confusion about what a speaker meant when he used either term.

The Founders wanted power over the government to rest in “the people” (or more accurately, the Founder’s limited view of “the people”), but they understood that they needed a constitution that set out the rules for a more sober democracy, and checks and balances between the three branches of government that would restrain the power of any one branch.

What the Founders set up has been variously referred to as a “democracy,” a “republic,” a “constitutional democracy,” a ‘constitutional republic,” a representative democracy,” a “representative republic,” and a “democratic republic.” All different terms. They all mean the same. Technically, you could call the United States a “constitutional representative democratic republic” and you’d be correct.

By the mid-1800s, the thought of a direct democracy was all but gone. No one thought of “direct democracy” when they heard “democracy.” In fact, there was no distinction between “democracy” and “republic.”

President Abraham Lincoln, in the days leading up to the Civil War, gave a speech in which he referred to the war as a “great test of popular government,” and used the words “constitutional republic” and “democracy” synonymously to describe our American form of government.

Today, no one is confused by what is meant when we call our form of government a democracy or a republic. Either way, we think the exact same thing as we would if the other term had been used instead.

The more interesting question to me is, why does Sen. Mike Lee and other MAGA Republicans want to make us believe that the United States is a republic instead of a democracy, or that there is a significant difference between the two? I think the answer is pretty simple and straight forward.

If you’re familiar with what former President Donald Trump intends to do if he finds his way back to the White House, then you know that much of his agenda is anti-democratic. He wants to restrict the ability of some people to vote. He wants to use the military to quell protests. He wants to usher in a government based on Christian Biblical principles. He wants to fire as many as 50,000 government employees and replace them with his loyalists (i.e. people who will carry out his agenda, whether it’s legal or not). He wants to arrest and jail his political opponents. He has advocated for all of these policies, and they are all anti-democratic.

It will be a lot easier to implement anti-democratic laws and policies if MAGA officials can convince the country that we’re not a democratic nation. If we’re not a democracy, then MAGA’s anti-democratic laws and policies won’t be overthrowing our democracy. They’ll just be laws and policies, no different from what we’ve seen in the past.

Of course, they will be very different from what we’ve seen in the past. But if Donald Trump, Mike Lee, and other MAGA leaders can disabuse us of the notion that we are a democracy, and can damage or destroy our trust in democratic institutions such as the DOJ, FBI, administrative agencies, the legislature, and the judiciary, then it will be much easier to do away with these institutions completely or replace them with anti-democratic institutions much more friendly to the MAGA agenda.

The next time you hear someone tell you that the United States is not a democracy, and they try to convince you that we’re a republic, ask them to explain the difference. If they’re honest, they won’t be able to. Their argument is a distinction without a difference.

I’ve been writing more about political issues recently. Part of the reason for this is that my interest in politics has piqued in the past few years. Also, it is my belief that the upcoming election in November may be the most important in our history. In fact, I am convinced that our democracy is on the line. And once we lose our democracy, there is no legal way to get it back.

But I have to admit, I’m not always comfortable sharing my political opinions. Politics, along with religion, are often controversial topics. So, when I share my political opinions, I try to be as civil and non-judgmental as possible. My goal is to be part of a meaningful conversation, bringing light, rather than just heat, to the discussion.

Alexandra Hudson is the founder of Civic Renaissance, an intellectual community dedicated to beauty, goodness, and truth. She is a frequent writer and speaker on issues involving civility, and she recently wrote the book, The Soul of Civility: Timeless Principles to Heal Society and Ourselves. Hudson was recently interviewed by Preet Bharara on his podcast, Stay Tuned with Preet. Bharara asked Hudson about how we could interject more civility into our political process and dialogue, which tends to be more uncivil, even violent, now than at almost any time in the past.

Here’s what Hudson had to say:

“My main piece of advice is to talk about politics less. It’s kind of counter intuitive, but in order to save our democracy, to save our public square, we actually have to relegate it to its proper place.

“I argue in the final chapter of my book, it’s called “On Misplaced Meaning and Forgiveness,” that as these traditional touchstones of meaning in modern life , but also across human history—things like friendship, family, faith—they have been on the decline in recent decades. And too often, people have relocated their ultimate source of identity—their meaning—in political issues. They’ve made an idol of religion out of politics. And there are three symptoms of this that I see, and as a result, is bad for our souls and for democracy.

Several symptoms of this misplaced meaning that I see are:

1. “That fact that previously apolitical venues now have a political dimension. You know, which sports teams you root for, where you live, where you send your kids to school, where you grocery shop, where you get your newspaper. Politics has invaded every aspect of our lives. That is atypical, and it is not good for our souls, not good for democracy. We’re overdoing democracy and undermining it as a result.
2. “Another symptom of this misplaced meaning that I see is the way in which people can go from 0-60, you know, just happy to raging like you’ve never seen before, at the broaching of one issue that is really dear to them, which they feel is being treated with insufficient reverence…Something small is like kindling on the fire of our souls. The frustration builds and builds…
3. “The third point is, because we made politics matter too much in our lives, another sad thing that I’ve seen time and time again is the end of life-long family relationships, friendships, people cutting one another off based on who they vote for, their position on XYZ public issue. And that to me is a symptom, as Plato would say, of disordered loves. We’ve let things that are not as important become the most important thing to us. We’ve let that displace real beautiful, central things to the level of happiness and joy in our lives like friendship and family relationships. And we’ve essentialized other people, and degraded them by reducing them to one aspect of who they are, who they voted for or their view on one issue. We have to, in order to do public life better, and life together better, we have to recover a love of things that are nonpolitical and noncontroversial in nature. So, in order to talk better to your uncle at the dinner table about Covid or Donald Trump, maybe you start about a shared love first. If you must talk about those things—and again, my general thoughts and recommendations it to not—but if you must, talk about your kids first, or something joy filled and beautiful. Establish that trust and connection first. Because that is the problem of where we are today. We have no level of trust. We have no level of basic affection for our fellow citizens across differences. And that’s doing a disservice to how we are talking about the hard issues, and how we’re talking about the difference.

“I had the privilege of speaking, just last week, at the Alabama Supreme Court about these ideas (of civility and civil disobedience). It was right next door to Dr. King’s church on Dexter Avenue where he also preached and worked through these ideas. And, just a stone’s throw from where Rosa Parks was kicked off the bus and subsequently arrested for failing to sit at the back of the bus.

“So, I was speaking, as you might imagine, it was a very illustrious group of educators, jurists, and lawyers, predominately white males, and I spoke about protest. I spoke about civil disobedience as a duty of citizenship. I have a whole chapter in my book dedicated to civil disobedience. Sometimes, citizenship requires speaking truth to power, calling out the hypocrisy of an unjust status quo.

“Rosa Parks broke a specific law, a specific Jim Crow-era law, but her conduct was in accordance with what Martin Luther King Jr. might refer to as the eternal, immortal law. She broke a bad law for the sake of a higher principle, upholding the rule of law, the eternal law. We have that obligation to do so as well.

“So, Dr. King is very central to my theory of civility, as a duty of citizenship, and why we have an obligation to speak truth and to take action sometimes—even when it’s costly, even when it’s uncomfortable—but doing so in ways that are still respectful of the dignity and personhood of others.

“The Imago Dei, this notion that man is created in God’s image that was central to Dr. King’s theory of personhood and his whole philosophy of non-violent civil disobedience. It informed his conduct. It compelled him to take action. But it also took certain action off the table, at the same time. For example, he knew that he could never degrade the personhood of another through violence or ad hominem attacks, or through destroying their property. That was dehumanizing. And that would be contradictory and undermine his entire project to begin with. So, Dr. King is central and a hero of civility throughout my book.”

—————————————————

I ‘m not sure how I feel about Hudson’s thoughts. Certainly, I’d like to see more civility in our rhetoric and behavior, particularly in politics. I agree completely with Hudson when she points out that we have elevated politics to a level of importance that has displaced and degraded the normal connections we have to one another through friendship, family, and faith. I think we all have stories, regardless of where we find ourselves on the left-right political spectrum, of damaging or losing relationships with those that used to be an important part of our lives. In my sixty-plus years, I have never seen anything like it.

On the other hand, I’m not sure I can agree with her that the way to inject more civility into our society is to talk less about politics and democracy. With democracy under attack, not just in the United States but around the world, discussing the importance of democracy and how we can save it, seems like an important, even necessary, thing to do.

I’m not saying Hudson is wrong. I’m still thinking about her advice. It’s something that is occupying my mind at the moment, and I’m certain it will continue to be in my thoughts in the coming days. I think increasing civility in our political discourse is worth considering.

Earlier this week, I shared some thoughts on how we in the United States approach immigration. My overarching point in that post was that we rely far too heavily on enforcement and punishment, when we would be better served by having an immigration policy that is organized, streamlined, and well thought out, and which emphasizes  respect, and compassion toward those seeking to enter the country. The post generated a few comments both on- and off-line, which prompted me to write this post clarifying some of the myths and misunderstandings regarding immigration.

Alex Nowrasteh is the Vice-President for Economic and Policy Study at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. He is an expert on immigration and has studied United States immigration policy for years. He offers 15 myths about immigration that I think a lot of people will find surprising.

MYTH #1: “Immigrants will take American jobs, lower wages, and especially hurt the poor.”

FACT: Immigrants don’t take American jobs, lower wages, or push the poor out of the labor market.

MYTH #2: “It is easy to immigrate here legally. Why don’t illegal immigrants just get in line?”

FACT: It’s very difficult to immigrate legally to the United States. Immigration law is second only to the income tax code in legal complexity.

MYTH #3: “Immigrants abuse the welfare state.”

FACT: Immigrants use significantly less welfare than native-born Americans.

MYTH #4: “Immigrants increase the budget deficit and government debt.”

FACT: Immigrants in the United States have about a net zero effect on government budgets — they pay about as much in taxes as they consume in benefits.

MYTH #5: “Immigrants increase economic inequality.”

FACT: Maybe. The evidence on how immigration affects economic inequality in the United States is mixed — some research finds relatively small effects, and some finds substantial ones. The standard of living is much more important than is the income distribution.

MYTH #6: “Today’s immigrants don’t assimilate as immigrants from previous eras did.”

FACT: Immigrants to the United States — including Mexicans — are assimilating as well as or better than immigrant groups from Europe over a hundred years ago.

MYTH #7: “Immigrants are a major source of crime.”

FACT: Immigrants, including illegal immigrants, are less likely to be incarcerated in prisons, convicted of crimes, or arrested than native-born Americans.

MYTH #8: “Immigrants pose a unique risk today because of terrorism.”

FACT: The annual chance of being murdered in a terrorist attack committed by a foreign-born person on U.S. soil from 1975 through the end of 2017 was about 1 in 3.8 million per year.

MYTH #9: “The United States has the most open immigration policy in the world.”

FACT: The annual inflow of immigrants to the United States, as a percentage of our population, is below that of most other rich countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

MYTH #10: “Amnesty or a failure to enforce our immigration laws will destroy the Rule of Law in the United States.”

FACT: America’s current immigration laws violate every principal component of the Rule of Law. Enforcing laws that are inherently capricious and that are contrary to our traditions is inconsistent with a stable Rule of Law.

MYTH #11: “Illegal immigration or expanding legal immigration will destroy American national sovereignty.”

FACT:  Different immigration policies do not reduce the U.S. government’s ability to defend American sovereignty.

MYTH #12: “Immigrants won’t vote for the Republican Party — look at what happened to California.”

FACT: Republican immigration policies pushed immigrants away, not the other way around.

MYTH #13: “Immigrants bring with them bad cultures, ideas, or other factors that will undermine and destroy our economic and political institutions. The resultant weakening in economic growth means that immigrants will destroy more wealth than they will create over the long run.”

FACT: There is no evidence that immigrants weaken or undermine American economic, political, or cultural institutions.

MYTH #14: “The brain drain of smart immigrants to the United States impoverishes other countries.”

FACT: The flow of skilled workers to rich nations increases the incomes of people in the destination country, enriches the immigrants, and helps (or at least does not hurt) those left behind.

MYTH #15: “Immigrants will increase crowding, harm the environment, and [insert misanthropic statement here].”

FACT: People, including immigrants, are an economic and environmental blessing and not a curse.

These 15 myths were taken from Nowrasteh’s report, The Most Common Arguments Against Immigration and Why They’re Wrong. There’s a lot of other interesting information in the report that contradicts most of what you hear from Republicans in Congress, despite the fact that the Cato Institute and Republicans often agree on legislation.

Nowresteh offers a three-prong approach to immigration reform:

1. Expand guest worker visas beyond agriculture
2. Welcome all highly skilled immigrants
3. “Enforcement First” is a cop-out and will never solve the immigration problem

The following video lays out Nowresteh’s recommendations. I not only found his recommendation to make sense, but I was surprised by who agreed with him once upon a time, only to now advocate against those same common sense immigration reforms.

My grandfather was just 16 years old when he came to the United States in 1904. He left his home in Romania, boarded a ship in Hungary, and sailed to New York, disembarking on Ellis Island. He didn’t have any money, didn’t speak English, didn’t have a job, and didn’t have family waiting for him in America. After spending a short time in New York, he left for Dearborn, Michigan, and eventually settled in Aurora, Illinois.

In those days, there were no immigration laws, at least not in the way we think of immigration laws today. Until a few years before my grandfather immigrated, each state had its own immigration policy. In the late 1800s, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had authority over immigration, striking down state immigration laws.

Beginning in the 1890s, our border was open, the only laws related to immigration were quotas that were set for each nationality entering the country. The quotas had a preference for northwestern Europeans but didn’t exclude any nationality from entering the country.

Today, its common for people who oppose immigration to claim that immigrants of the early 20^th century entered the country legally, unlike today’s immigrants. It’s hard to say that early 20^th century immigrants followed the law when they came to the United States since there really weren’t any immigration laws at the time. It’s literally impossible to break a law when no law exists.

Another argument against present day immigration is that immigrants of the past had to show identification to prove their identity, and they had to have a job set up before they could enter the country. Both arguments are incorrect.

First, most immigrants in the early 20^th century did not have to provide identification because most countries at that time did not provide any type of identification documents to their citizens. Early 20^th century immigrants entered the country and provided their name and country of origin to immigration officials on Ellis Island. Many immigrants had their name changed at Ellis Island, leaving their birth name behind. Even if they had documentation establishing their identity, it would have been meaningless because they left Ellis Island with a different name than they had when they entered the country. For instance, my grandfather entered the country as Vacile Mindgyar and left Ellis Island named Louis Mindar.

Second, very, very few immigrants had jobs set up before they came into the country. One of the reasons my grandfather moved first to Michigan, then to Illinois, was because he was chasing work. In those days, factories and mines needed workers and they welcomed immigrants to become employees. Unlike today, there were no laws requiring employers to prove that their employees were U.S. citizens, and there was no fear that a foreigner was going to steal the job of a citizen.

It wasn’t until the 1960s that Congress implemented comprehensive immigration laws. But even then, the law was quite different than what we think of as immigration law today. For instance, the law implemented in the 1960s emphasized the reunification of families and worked to attract skilled workers. It wasn’t designed to close the border or keep immigrants out of the country.

It wasn’t until 1980 and the Reagan Administration that the United States began to govern the admission of refugees. In 1986, Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), the first legislation in the country’s history to address the number of undocumented immigrants in the country. But rather than being punitive, the IRCA was designed to grant amnesty to the millions of undocumented immigrants that had been living for years in the United States.

Ronald Reagan is often given credit for (or blame for, depending on your perspective) bringing the issue of illegal immigration to the fore. But even Reagan would likely feel uncomfortable with the stance of Republicans today concerning immigration. Reagan saw immigrants as an asset to the United States, deserving of respect. He was opposed to undocumented immigrants living in the United States, but he wanted to find a way to grant them amnesty, leading to them becoming citizens.

Ever since Reagan put it in the spotlight, Republicans have become increasingly hostile on the issue of immigration, and have demanded harsher and harsher punishment of immigrants, even when they enter the country seeking asylum. So much so that it has become acceptable behavior for some Republican governors to ship illegal immigrants and asylum seekers to far off locations where they have no support, often sending them in the cold of winter without coats or shelter.

More recently, the State of Texas has installed razor wire buoys in the Rio Grande River, resulting in injury and death to several immigrants crossing the river. The governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, has defied an order from the Supreme Court to allow immigration officials access to the razor wire buoys so they can remove them from the river. In other words, the governor is breaking the law—even causing death and injury—to prevent immigrants from breaking the law. Yet, while immigrants looking for a better life in America are being injured and dying, Abbott has so far gone unpunished, even as he continues to defy court orders.

It would be easy for opponents of immigration to claim—as they often do—that the immigrants wouldn’t be injured if they just didn’t break the law, but it is our immigration laws themselves that force asylum seekers to enter the country illegally. Let me explain.

In order to apply for asylum, an asylum seeker must be physically present in the United States in order to make application. There is no way to go online to fill out an asylum application. There is no app to complete the process from anywhere in the world. It can only be done at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office within the United States.

Did you follow that? If you want to apply for asylum, you are forced to enter the United States illegally. Then, once an asylum seeker applies, it can take years—often three to five—before their case is ever heard and a decision is reached on whether or not they will be granted asylum and allowed to stay in the United States.

At this point, you’re probably wondering why it takes so long. There are a couple of reasons. First, ICE has to do their due diligence, looking into the circumstances the asylum seeker is running from, and determining the asylum seekers background. ICE does the best job they can to determine whether or not the asylum seeker is the type of person we want in the United States. But that takes time, ICE is understaffed and there are far too few immigration judges deciding the asylum cases.

The most hardline immigration legislation in history recently passed the Senate on a bi-partisan basis, but the bill is said to be DOA in the House, where Republican Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has refused to bring the legislation to a vote. This, despite the fact that there appears to be more than enough votes to pass the historic legislation. As crafted, the legislation would provide much more money to ICE to implement a quicker, more restrictive non-custodial asylum process; changes and alternatives to detention; funds for more ICE agents and immigration judges and court; as well as other changes that have been demanded by Republicans in recent years.

The politics of immigration are maddening, but rather than focus on the particulars, I’d like to offer a completely different approach to immigration. Currently, the approach to immigration is punitive. The main purpose is to punish those foreigners who enter the United States, regardless of the reason they enter. It’s a disrespectful approach that emphasizes pain and inconvenience. It’s an approach that presupposes that immigrants are a blight on our country and we have to do everything in our power to keep them out. As for those that make it in, we try to make it as unpleasant as possible for them in hopes that their pain and suffering will dissuade others from following in their footsteps.

I would submit that our approach is all wrong, and that it guarantees we get the very outcomes we claim we want to avoid. To start with, I think we need to recognize that immigrants, far from being a drain on our society, are a net benefit. Financially, according to the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, immigrants pay about the same in taxes as they receive from state and federal governments in benefits. On top of “money in-money out” considerations, immigrants tend to take jobs that Americans don’t want to do, such as agricultural work like picking fruit and vegetables, and milking cows, which helps keep food prices low for all of us.

Immigrants also tend to open small businesses at a higher rate than native born Americans, creating jobs and sparking local economies. According to a study conducted by economists at the MIT Sloan School of Management, immigrants are a whopping 80% more likely to found a business that native born Americans, and the businesses they found employ 1% more employees than comparable businesses founded by native born Americans.

In a nutshell, we need to begin from the perspective of immigration being good for the United States. It’s something we should encourage, recognizing that we can’t and shouldn’t just open our borders and let anyone in. But rather than fight immigration, we should design an organized process that gets the results we want. And that process should be respectful and fair, not punitive.

Unites States immigration law is incredibly complicated. In fact, it is the second most complicated federal code, surpassed only by the Internal Revenue Code (i.e. tax laws). What if we were to simplify and streamline immigration law in the United States, making it easier to understand and apply? And what if that new immigration code attracted the types of people we need to fuel our economy, not just those running from corrupt, violent situations in their home country. Right now, we are attracting the world’s most desperate people. We can and should help them. But what if we also designed our immigration policy to attract skilled, educated people who could slide right into our economy and help build it?

I don’t mean to say that reform of our immigration policy is easy. It’s not. But neither is it impossible.

My overarching point is that immigration can be a boon to the United States. We should embrace it and design an immigration policy that is respectful, fair, modernized, and which encourages immigrants—particularly asylum seekers—to follow the law without having to break the law. The only thing we’re currently lacking is the political will to get it done.