The story of James Meredith (b. 1933) took place long ago, but the principles of equality under the law and that no one is above the law make his story as relevant today as it was when it played itself out 60 years-ago in Mississippi.

Meredith was a former serviceman in the United States Air Force. In the wake of the US Supreme Court’s 1954 decision Brown v. Board of Education, he tried to integrate the University of Mississippi (“Ole Miss”) by applying for admission in 1961. He was accepted, but his admission was revoked when the registrar learned that he was a Black man. Meredith sued and a federal court ordered the university to admit him, but when Meredith tried to register for classes on September 20, 1962, he found the entrance to the office blocked by Mississippi Governor Ross Barnett (1898-1987).

On September 28, 1962, the Mississippi governor was found guilty of civil contempt and was ordered to cease his interference with desegregation at the university or face arrest and a fine of $10,000 a day. Two days later, Meredith was escorted onto the ‘Ole Miss’ campus by U.S. Marshals setting off riots that resulted in the deaths of two students. He returned the next day and began his classes. In 1963, Meredith, who was a transfer student from the all-Black Jackson State College, graduated with a political science degree.

For those of us who remember the intensity of racism (especially in southern states) in those years, as well as the non-violent principles of the civil rights movement led by Dr. King and the violent reaction against all integration in the southern states, Meredith’s story was huge. It grabbed the national headlines and was a prominent account highlighted on the evening television network news for many days.

Finally, on September 30, 1962, President Kennedy addressed the nation on radio and television. He described the legal steps that led to Meredith’s admission to the University of Mississippi and his own role as President who had sworn at his inauguration “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Kennedy said:

“In this case in which the United States Government was not until recently involved, Mr. Meredith brought a private suit in Federal court against those who were excluding him from the University. A series of Federal courts all the way to the Supreme Court repeatedly ordered Mr. Meredith’s admission to the University. When those orders were defied, and those who sought to implement them were threatened with arrest and violence, the United States Court of Appeals consisting of Chief Judge Tuttle of Georgia, Judge Hutcheson of Texas, Judge Rives of Alabama, Judge Jones of Florida, Judge Brown of Texas, Judge Wisdom of Louisiana, Judge Gewin of Alabama, and Judge Bell of Georgia, made clear the fact that the enforcement of its order had become an obligation of the United States Government. Even though this Government had not originally been a party to the case, my responsibility as President was therefore inescapable. I accept it. My obligation under the Constitution and the statutes of the United States was and is to implement the orders of the court with whatever means are necessary, and with as little force and civil disorder as the circumstances permit.“

President Kennedy also addressed the greater issues at stake; namely, the importance of the rule of law and the final authority of the law courts to affirm and to dispense justice in a democracy.

Kennedy told the nation:

“The orders of the court in the case of Meredith versus Fair are beginning to be carried out. Mr. James Meredith is now in residence on the campus of the University of Mississippi.

This has been accomplished thus far without the use of National Guard or other troops. And it is to be hoped that the law enforcement officers of the State of Mississippi and the Federal marshals will continue to be sufficient in the future.

… our Nation is founded on the principle that observance of the law is the eternal safeguard of liberty and defiance of the law is the surest road to tyranny. The law which we obey includes the final rulings of the courts, as well as the enactments of our legislative bodies. Even among law-abiding men few laws are universally loved, but they are uniformly respected and not resisted.

Americans are free, in short, to disagree with the law but not to disobey it. For in a government of laws and not of men, no man however prominent or powerful, and no mob however unruly or boisterous, is entitled to defy a court of law. If this country should ever reach the point where any man or group of men by force or threat of force could long defy the commands of our court and our Constitution, then no law would stand free from doubt, no judge would be sure of his writ, and no citizen would be safe from his neighbors.”

JFK articulated not only what was at stake in 1962 in Mississippi, but what is at stake today for the Department of Justice, the Georgia and New York courts with respect to the Trump-led insurrection leading up to and taking place on January 6, 2021, as well as Trump’s theft of and illegal transfer of government property including many top-secret classified documents to Mar-a-Lago after he left office.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has shown that those principles of American democracy articulated by President Kennedy that have guided the United States for 230+ years since the ratification of the Constitution are guiding him and the DOJ. Though 70 percent (according to polls) of Republican Party voters (approximately 50 million Americans) continue to believe in and advance the Big Lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, I have faith that AG Garland, the DOJ and relevant courts will act according to the law “without fear or favor” including a potential indictment and prosecution of Trump in the days, weeks, or months ahead.

As I listened to the American presidential historian Jon Meacham read a definition of a “Gentleman” last week on his daily 6-minute podcast called “Reflections of History,” I couldn’t help but measure myself against this lofty standard and think about how our nation would be different and better-off if more of our leaders behaved according to its prescriptions.

The definition was penned by the 19^th century English theologian, scholar, and poet, Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-1890):

“A gentleman has his eyes on all his company. He is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd. He can recollect to whom he is speaking. He guards against unseasonable illusions or topics which may irritate. He is seldom prominent in conversation and never wearisome. He makes light of favors when he does them, and seems to be receiving when he is conferring. He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort. He has no ears for slander or gossip. He is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him and interprets everything for the best. He is never mean or little in his disputes, never takes unfair advantage, never mistakes personalities or sharp sayings for arguments, or insinuates evil which he dare not say out loud. From the long sight of prudence he observes the maxim of the ancient sage that we should ever conduct ourselves towards our enemy as if he were one day to be our friend. He has too much good sense to be affronted at insults. He is too well employed to remember injuries and too indolent to bear malice. He is patient, forbearing, and resigned on philosophical principles. He submits to pain because it is inevitable, to bereavement because it is irreparable, and to death because it is his destiny. He may be right or wrong in his opinion, but he is too clear-headed to be unjust. He is as simple as he is forcible, and as brief as he is decisive. Nowhere shall we find greater candor, consideration, and indulgence. He throws himself into the minds of his opponents. He accounts for their mistakes. He is a friend of religious toleration, and that because not only has his philosophy taught him to look on all forms of faith with an impartial eye, but also from the gentleness of feeling which is the attendant on civilization, not that he may not hold a religion too in his own way even when he is not a Christian. In that case, his religion is one of imagination and sentiment. It is the embodiment of those ideas of the sublime, majestic, and beautiful without which there can be no large philosophy.”

I once again feel shocked, dismayed, angry, and frightened by Trump’s ongoing lawlessness, hubris, pathological lying, malignant narcissism, and the sycophantic response of the Republican Party leadership and extreme right-wing anti-democratic media in the wake of the FBI seizure of classified documents from Mar-a-Logo.

I keep wondering – When will this end? Is there no bottom to Trump’s depravity? Will top Republican House and Senate leadership and well-known Fox Cable leaders ever stand up and say ‘Enough!?’

I posted the following writings on the theme of tyranny by Stephen Jay Greenblatt a few years ago, but thought it timely to do so again. Professor Greenblatt is an American Shakespearean, literary historian, and author at Harvard University who wrote a superb volume called Tyrant – Shakespeare on Politics (New York: W.W. Norton & Co. 2018) in which he describes Shakespeare’s Richard III.

What follows are a few quotes from his book that describe as well as anything I have seen the nature of the tyrant as embodied by Richard III and Donald J. Trump (pages 53-54):

“Shakespeare’s Richard III brilliantly develops the personality features of the aspiring tyrant already sketched in the Henry VI trilogy: the limitless self-regard, the law-breaking, the pleasure in inflicting pain, the compulsive desire to dominate. He is pathologically narcissistic and supremely arrogant. He has a grotesque sense of entitlement, never doubting that he can do whatever he chooses. He loves to bark orders and to watch underlings scurry to carry them out. He expects absolute loyalty, but he is incapable of gratitude. The feelings of others mean nothing to him. He has no natural grace, no sense of shared humanity, no decency.

He is not merely indifferent to the law; he hates it and takes pleasure in breaking it. He hates it because it gets in his way and because it stands for a notion of the public good that he holds in contempt. He divides the world into winners and losers. The winners arouse his regard insofar as he can use them for his own ends; the losers arouse only his scorn. The public good is something only losers like to talk about. What he likes to talk about is winning.

He has always had wealth; he was born into it and makes ample use of it. But though he enjoys having what money can get him, it is not what most excites him. What excites him is the joy of domination. He is a bully. Easily enraged, he strikes out at anyone who stands in his way. He enjoys seeing others cringe, tremble, or wince with pain. He is gifted at detecting weakness and deft at mockery and insult. These skills attract followers who are drawn to the same cruel delight, even if they cannot have it to his unmatched degree. Though they know that he is dangerous, the followers help him advance to his goal, which is the possession of supreme power.

His possession of power includes the domination of women, but he despises them far more than desires them. Sexual conquest excites him, but only for the endlessly reiterated proof that he can have anything he likes. He knows that those he grabs hate him. For that matter, once he has succeeded in seizing the control that so attracts him, in politics as in sex, he knows that virtually everyone hates him. At first that knowledge energizes him, making him feverishly alert to rivals and conspiracies. But it soon begins to eat away at him and exhaust him.

Sooner or later, he is brought down. He dies unloved and un-lamented. He leaves behind only wreckage. It would have been better had Richard III never been born.”

To those Democratic commentators, politicians, office-holders, and every-day pundits (i.e. many of us) who believe that indicting Trump for his numerous crimes will inflame his base and result in the Democrat’s loss of both Houses of Congress in 2022 and the Presidency in 2024, I don’t buy it. To the contrary, if recent trends continue that began following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade and a string of legislative victories by Congress and the Biden Administration, the Democrats could not only hold both the House and Senate come January but increase its margins. Though conventional wisdom in off-year elections does not favor the party in power, it could be very different this year.

Consider all the positive things that have happened since Biden became President. He restored dignity to the Oval Office. He successfully got passed two very large bi-partisan funding bills through Congress on Covid relief and Infrastructure. After the Court’s reversal of Roe v Wade, millions of American supporters of abortion rights and women’s reproductive health were provoked by their rage into action, similar to the reaction of much of the country after the Trump inauguration and the police murder of George Floyd. In the deeply red state of Kansas last month, a ballot bill protecting women’s reproductive health and freedom passed by 18 percentage points. In the past two months, Congressional Democrats passed a series of laws concerning guns, climate, health care, prescription drug prices, taxation, semiconductors, science, and technology – perhaps the greatest legislative effort since LBJ’s Great Society.

Add all these accomplishments and phenomena to the powerful impact on public awareness of the January 6 hearings (gratitude to the House Committee is due), the fact that nearly 1000 indictments have been brought by the DOJ against insurrectionists, and the current multiple court cases facing Trump in NY, Georgia, and the DOJ, and the November mid-terms look much brighter than they did only a few months ago. Though anything can happen between now and the mid-terms, the Democrats have a solid record of progress and hope to run on as opposed to Republicans who are dominated by Trump’s grievance and negativity and are fixated on the Big Lie of election fraud.  

Many Democrats, however, have a bad habit of refusing to accept good news when it comes, and instead equivocate and complain about what was not accomplished. All the above is, in fact, good news in an imperfect world and a democracy in which compromise is necessary.

Should the Democrats hold both houses of Congress and expand their numbers, imagine what else can be passed on behalf of women’s health and abortion rights, childcare, universal pre-K education, judges and criminal justice reform, electoral reform, college debt relief, climate, and more. Yes, Trump and Trumpism will remain a dangerous threat to American democracy and the moral health of the nation, but we cannot allow ourselves to become depressed or paralyzed by anxiety and despair.

Gandhi’s reflection is worth remembering: “When I despair, I remember that all through history, the way of truth and love has always won. There have been murderers and tyrants, and for a time they can seem invincible. But in the end they always fall. Think of it, always.”

What can we do as individuals to support Democrats in the mid-terms? First, of course, is to vote and get everyone we know to vote when the time comes. Second, we can contribute dollars especially to Democratic candidates in purple states for those seats currently held by Republicans. And third, we can join campaigns in helping to get out the vote everywhere in the country where it will matter to elect Democrats up and down the ballot.

If you wish to help, go to “Vote Save America,” a project of Pod Save America Podcast – https://www.votesaveamerica.com/ – and volunteer on line. There is a lot each of us can do from our computer terminals and homes to support candidates throughout the country.

Consider sending this blog to your Democratic voting friends including Democrats, Independents, and anti-Trump Republicans.

It seems to me that President Biden has been wildly successful as President in his first 18-months in office despite a 50-50 Senate, a bare Democratic House majority, and a recalcitrant obstructionist insurrectionist Trump-Republican Party that shows no allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, the rule of law, or Biden’s legitimacy as the duly-elected President of the United States.  

To paraphrase the late 17^th century playwright William Congreve: “Hell hath no fury like a President scorned.” Biden gets far too little love as his tanking approval rating suggests. At the time of this writing, he stands at 39.3 percent approval and 55.6 percent disapproval.

I took time this week to compile – as best I could – a list of Biden’s accomplishments thus far. But first, a disclaimer. I am a Joe Biden fan not only because I respect his long governmental and political experience as a Senator, Vice-President, and foreign policy expert, but because as a religious man he exudes a measure of humility, honors all faith traditions, and respects American democracy enough to not try and legislate his religious views on the country as a whole. He is also what we might call our “Chief Empath and Mensch.”  Though Joe has made his share of mistakes over his long career, for the most part, he has amassed a large treasure-trove of accomplishments especially during his presidency.

Yes, Joe is now getting older; and yes, most of us lose a measure of mental and physical acuity as we age. But it seems to me, according to everything I have seen and read about him, that Joe is still mentally sharp and in command of his policy objectives. He is certainly physically fit, though he appears stiff, likely due to suffering from lower back pain. Relative to most everyone, Biden is politically wise after a lifetime serving the public interest, savvy about how the American political system ought to work, and emotionally and morally guided to do the best he can do as President for the vast majority of Americans.

Biden’s stutter and his way of dealing with that disability are often misinterpreted as signs of confusion and a lack of focus. His advisors and those close to him affirm that he has what it takes to do his job, arguably the most difficult of any in the world.

Many of us seniors, naturally, may be inclined to project our own situation onto Biden, for better and worse. Whatever we conclude about him, however, does not necessarily mean he cannot handle the demands of the presidency. He certainly seems to be doing just fine based on his record to date and the quality of people he has appointed in his administration. Only Joe Biden knows what he can actually handle and what he can’t. If he thinks he can effectively serve as President in a second term, God bless him, and I’ll support him fully.

Here is my list of Biden’s accomplishments in his first 18-months in office:

• The restoration of dignity to the Oval Office after four punishing years of the most corrupt President and lawless self-serving administration in the history of the country.

• $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package which drastically increased investment in the national network of bridges, roads, airports, public transport, national broadband internet, waterways, and energy systems.

• $1.9 trillion COVID relief deal that provided direct payments of up to $1,400 to many struggling U.S. citizens and temporarily extended unemployment support by $300 per week, channeled $20 billion into the COVID vaccination program, provided $25 billion in rental support and a further $350 billion into state, tribal, and local relief efforts, raised the maximum Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program support by 15 percent, invested $120 billion into K-12 schools across the nation, gave 209 million Americans the full dose of the COVID vaccination and 249 million (74 percent of the U.S. population) at least one dose of the vaccine.

• Federal judge appointments – Biden has so far has nominated 130 individuals to federal judgeships of which 76 have been confirmed. 80 percent are women and 53 percent are people of color.

• Supreme Court – Biden nominated the first Black woman ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court when he nominated Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

• Federal Executions – Biden restored the pre-Trump status-quo and imposed a suspension on federal executions while the Department of Justice assesses the existing procedures and policies.

• Climate change – Biden re-joined the international Paris Climate Accord immediately upon assuming office thereby reversing Trump’s unilateral withdrawal in 2017, and he allowed the United States to continue to work with global players in the worldwide drive to deter the climate’s deterioration. He joined an additional agreement aimed at reversing deforestation as well as presenting a 100-country strong pledge to reduce greenhouse emissions by at least 30 percent by 2030. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will invest billions of dollars to protect Americans from droughts, fires, and floods while moving America closer to our climate goals. (See specifics of the soon-to-be-passed Inflation Reduction Act below).

• Roe V. Wade – Biden has called for a national law codifying Roe V. Wade.

• Health Care – Biden strengthened the Affordable Care Act by expanding eligibility and extending the open enrollment period. Thanks to tax credits in the American Rescue Plan, a record 14.5 million Americans signed up for coverage in 2021 through the ACA, including 5.8 million new customers. At the same time, President Biden’s American Rescue Plan made quality coverage more affordable, with millions of families on ACA plans saving an average of $2,400 yearly on their premiums.

• Transgender Service Members – Within his first week at the White House, Biden issued an executive order overturning the Trump-era ban on openly transgender members of the U.S. military.

• Unemployment – When Biden took office, the unemployment rate stood at 6.3 percent. Upwards of 10,000,000 jobs have been created since January, 2021, including 642,000 American manufacturing jobs. Jobless claims are the lowest since 1969. Unemployment stands today at 3.5 percent.

• Afghanistan – Though it was a chaotic withdrawal and disastrous mistakes were obviously made, Biden ended the American military presence in Afghanistan after 20 years of war and the loss of thousands of American lives and far more injured, as he promised in his campaign.

• NATO and the Western Alliances – Biden restored NATO after years of undermining by Trump. In the last month, NATO admitted Finland and Sweden thereby expanding its reach.

• Ukraine – Biden has led the Western alliance and NATO in support of Ukraine against Russian aggression and led the U.S. to be the largest contributor of sophisticated arms and weapons to aid Ukraine in its self-defense.  

• Introduction of the Inflation Reduction Act (pending with a probable vote next week) that will address the globe’s changing climate, give Medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices, extend health care subsidies under the ACA for three years, and raise money by requiring corporations to pay a minimum tax to lower the federal budget deficit.
• Gun legislation – Biden signed into law the first major gun safety legislation passed in decades. Though the measure failed to ban military-style weapons, it does include funding for school safety and state crisis intervention programs. It includes granting $750 million to help states implement gun crisis intervention programs which can be used to manage red flag programs as well as for other crisis intervention programs such as mental health, drug and veteran courts. It also includes affirming Red flag laws, allows courts to temporarily seize firearms from anyone believed to be a danger to themselves or others. The law includes juvenile records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System which provides a more comprehensive background check for people between 18 and 21 who want to buy guns. It bars guns from anyone convicted of a domestic violence crime.

• The United States Chips and Science Act (CHIPS) – Invests $280 billion in areas like semiconductor manufacturing and scientific research to bolster competition with China.

• Comprehensive Toxics Act (PACT) – Improves health care and benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances (e.g. 9/11 first responders and victims of military burn pits) – passed largely by Democrats and Jon Stuart’s advocacy in shaming Republicans who cynically threatened to vote against the bill to deny Democrats a victory and then, when the public’s criticism was too intense, shifted course and voted for it.

• Killing al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri – with a huge Biden shout-out to America’s intelligence services that had been undermined by Trump.

• Gas prices – Hit a 50-day low. Gas prices had peaked above $5 a gallon but have fallen every day for more than six weeks. Today the average national cost is closer to $4 a gallon, though in Los Angeles, gas remains above $5 a gallon.

Biden’s Approval Rating – It seems incredibly odd that Biden’s approval numbers remains so low given the above list of accomplishments. Perhaps, these legislative wins will result in a ratings bump. A New York Times/Siena College poll conducted in early July found that 64 percent of Democrats wanted someone other than Biden to be the party’s nominee in 2024. A CNN poll later in the month put that figure at 75 percent among Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters. Those numbers, however, can change. Remember that Biden had a 55% approval rating during his first six months in office.

Why are Biden’s approval numbers so low? Here are a few possible answers:

• Baked-in attitudes among Republican election deniers and the lingering suspicion among too many Americans that, despite all facts to the contrary, Biden’s 2020 election victory was illegitimate.

• Biased news coverage among cable commentators, right-wing and local media, and among some in the mainstream media that never seem to miss an opportunity to cast Biden’s successes in a negative light.

• Biden’s advancing age.

• High expectations that Biden raised in his campaign to pass legislation assuring more affordable child care, help for the elderly and those who care for them, less expensive preschool, efforts to confront the cost of housing, student debt relief, tuition-free community college, money to cover health care for the poor in states that have refused to expand Medicaid.

Mario Cuomo once said that “politicians campaign in poetry, but they govern in prose.” Biden certainly is not the most eloquent of presidents, but his record thus far suggests that his prose is strong. In the end, that is what is important.

What might be the future of the Biden Presidency? It is hard to tell, but if past is prologue it could be very good indeed.

I have always appreciated Dan Rather, from the time he got beat-up as a reporter on the floor of the 1968 Democratic National Convention, to when he was embedded on behalf of CBS News on the ground in Afghanistan during the Russian invasion there, to when he became CBS’s Evening News Anchor after Walter Cronkite retired, and after he left CBS News to report and write on other platforms.

I have listened to him over many years. I love his down-home speaking style, his recall of Texas aphorisms and folksy imagery, the accented sound of his voice, and his wisdom.

I read religiously now his email postings in his series called “Steady,” and the one that came today (August 2) is to-the-point of what we all face in these times. I offer it below.

I’m not the only one who regards Dan Rather as a national treasure. He has earned it.

“Sometimes I remind myself that I haven’t talked to an old friend in a while. There are a lot of excuses, of course. Days pass by. Everyone is busy in some way. But when I do decide to pick up the phone or write a note, I am almost never disappointed. 

“How are you?” I ask. It can be a throwaway line, a perfunctory conversation starter meant to elicit an “I’m okay,” and then move on. But I mean it, and I want to know. 

These are difficult times. We all know that. There is a lot that is dispiriting. There is a lot that is demoralizing. There is a lot (more than we might want to admit) that can be outright terrifying. 

We all try to soldier on as best we can. We carry burdens that are personal, professional, communal, and familial. Fate strikes us all in unique and unpredictable ways. 

And then there is all that hangs over us at the national and global level. We talk about it often here — the threat to democracy, our climate crisis, a pandemic, attacks on our constitutional rights, and on, and on. 

But where we can find hope, support, empathy, and resilience, is in our human connections, our communities, our networks of friends and family. Age, distance, the pandemic, financial burdens, and many other hurdles can make that closeness more difficult to maintain.” 

There are currently nearly 2.2 million podcasts out there, according to ListenNotes. According to Amplifi and Podnews, 44% of the podcasts have less than 3 episodes. Only 720,000 podcasts have more than 10 episodes. Of those 720,000 podcasts, only 156,000 are releasing a weekly episode.

There are more than 1 billion podcast listeners every week (really!). Most listeners are in Asia, India, and China and are responsible for 45% of all podcast listener-ship in the world. In the United States, 80 million people, or 28% of the population (over the age of 12) are weekly listeners.

Most of the podcasts are coming from the United States (1.4 million to be precise). While India and China have the most listeners, they only account for 42,000 podcasts. 1.3 million Podcasts are in English. The second most popular language, Spanish, is far behind with only 220,000 podcasts.

[Source for all the above stats: https://podcastpage.io/podcast-statistics/]

So, 80 million of us Americans are devotees of podcasts. I listen every morning on my 60-90 minutes-walk in my neighborhood, whenever I’m driving alone on a long distance journey in my car (in LA, that is a fairly frequent occurrence), and occasionally when I’m doing the laundry, washing dishes, or doing other household tasks that bore me silly. I’m sure, given the numbers above, I’m not the only one.

My preferred Podcasts are those in which I can learn something new about our times in politics, current affairs, thought, and history in the United States, Israel, the Jewish world, and beyond. I listen to Podcasts that express ideas from the political left, right, and center of the political spectrum. I do not listen to Podcasts whose hosts rile me up emotionally – life is just too short. I look to be both stimulated and entertained.

Here is my preferred current list:

American News, Politics, and Commentary

Post Reports – Daily from The Washington Post with Martine Powers.

The Daily – Daily from The New York Times with Michael Barbaro and Sabrina Tavernise.

Hell and High Water – Twice-weekly with John Heilemann.

Pod Save America – Twice-weekly with Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, Dan Pfeiffer, and Tommy Vietor.

The Bulwark – Twice-weekly with Charlie Sykes.

The Ezra Klein Show – Twice-weekly.

Sway – Twice-weekly with Kara Swisher from the New York Times.

The Lincoln Project – Twice-weekly founded by former and incumbent anti-Trump Republicans.

Politics War Room – Weekly with James Carville and Al Hunt.

The New Yorker: Politics and More – Weekly with different hosts.

Hacks on Tap – Weekly with David Axelrod, Mike Murphy, and Robert Gibbs.

The Axe Files – Weekly with David Axelrod.

History

HistoryExtra – Daily from the BBC History Magazine.

Reflections of History – Daily with Jon Meacham (5 minutes each episode).

History this Week – Weekly with Sally Helm.

Jewish and Israeli News and Commentary

The Daily Briefing – From The Times of Israel with Jessica Steinberg and Amanda Bush Eldan.

The Promised – Weekly from Tel Aviv (TLV1) with Noah Ephron, Allison Kaplan Sommer, and Don Futterman.

Tel Aviv Review – Weekly from the Jerusalem Leer Institute on TLV1 with Gideon Halpern.

Haaretz Weekly – With Allison Kaplan Sommer.

For Heaven’s Sake – Every other week from the Shalom Hartman Institute with Rabbi Donniel Hartman, Yossi Klein Halevi, and Elana Stein-Hain.

In These Times – Every other week with Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch, Stephen S. Wise Free Synagogue, NY.

No – I don’t listen to every podcast every week.

When I become weary of the news and commentary, I shift to music (usually classical), or I take off my head-phones, listen to the birds in the early morning hours in Sherman Oaks and Studio City as the sun rises, and let my mind wander.

In the past week I watched two moving and important films now streaming on Netflix that offer insight into the origins of the modern State of Israel and the development of Israel through the experience of one of the most important of Israel’s founding generation, the late Prime Minister and President of the State Shimon Peres.

I highly recommend both to your viewing this summer and especially hope that young liberal and progressive American Jews (from junior high school age through their millennial years) who may be unsure of or question their relationship with Israel to watch both of them.

“Image of Victory – תמונת הניצחון,” a 128-minute 2021 film based on true events that took place during the 1948 Israeli Independence War and was set in a kibbutz called “Nitzavim” on the Mediterranean coast between the Gaza Strip and Tel Aviv. In a ferocious battle between the Egyptian forces and about 200 young Israelis between the ages of 16 and 25, one cannot help but be moved and impressed by the courage of those young Israelis who gave their lives for the infant Jewish state or were taken as POWs by the Egyptian army. The battle that completely destroyed the kibbutz under Egyptian missiles and tanks is viewed from both the Egyptian and Israeli perspectives. The film, directed by Avi Nesher, was nominated for 15 Israeli Ophir awards and is the most expensive film ($5 million) ever shot in Israel. The film crew recreated in its entirety the former Nitzavim settlement only to destroy it with guns and tanks as the Egyptians did so long ago. The film is streaming on Netflix in Hebrew and Arabic with English sub-titles.

“Never Stop Dreaming: The Life and Legacy of Shimon Peres” is a moving two-hour documentary including portions of more than 50 hours of interviews with the former Israeli Prime Minister and President of the State of Israel, Shimon Peres including discussion of his origins in Belarus, his relationship with his learned and revered grandfather, his teen-age years during the British Mandate helping to build up agriculture, and his close relationship with Israel’s founding Prime Minister and Minister of Defense David Ben Gurion. The film reveals Peres’ key roles in building up Israel’s Defense capability, in launching the famed 1976 Entebbe Rescue, developing a Jordanian peace deal with King Hussein in 1987, his advocacy of the Oslo Peace Process, his complex relationship with Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and his role in inspiring Israel to become a hi-tech society. The film is streaming on Netflix and is in English.

Taken together, these two films amply show the courage, vision, ingenuity, and dreams for peace of the respective subjects.

I have lived with the death of a dear one since I was a child when my father died suddenly at the young age of 53. I was 9 years old. That loss was especially painful in my young life as it is for any child who loses a parent.

I have often wondered where my Dad was after he died. I knew exactly where his remains are buried in the cemetery, but where was the essence of him after he took his last breath? What happened to his spirit and soul, his mind, memory, and consciousness? As the years passed, did he know what became of his sons, my brother and me, his family and friends? Or, upon death did he simply cease to be, his memory gone, his consciousness inert, and his being nullified. In the Hebrew Bible, death is sometimes described as a state of non-being in “Sheol,” the “place” of non-existence, darkness, lifelessness – neither heaven nor hell.

I have had to help congregants over decades cope with our powerlessness before and following the death of loved ones, of our inability to answer the ultimate question about what happens to us, if anything, when we die. I read everything I could find in Kabbalah, Christian mysticism, Islamic Sufism, Buddhism, Native American and other faith traditions about the nature of the soul and that which animates a human being. At times, I allowed myself to believe in the idea that the soul is indestructible and eternal, that it retains its memories as it journeys into the metaphysical realm, and that it is aware of the lives of its surviving loved ones. I allowed myself to believe the evidence of past-life memory and the eventual return of the soul to effect tikun (repair) as a consequence of the former life’s bad behavior and moral failings. I found that this was often a comforting response to those who needed or wanted to believe that there is a reality to the soul separate from the body that transcends the material world.

The French Catholic Jesuit Priest and theologian Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) once said: “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” I quoted him high and low for years, and part of me believes he was right, that there is far more to our lives than our earthly material experience, that soul-consciousness exists in the metaphysical realm, that it is a remarkable truth that one soul comes into one body to create a human life, and if it does so once, why not twice and many times.

In 1995, after two years of reading, polling my congregants about their experiences of past-life memory and intuitive knowledge, I delivered a Kol Nidre sermon that I called “The Journey of the Soul” in which I made the case for reincarnation – in Hebrew, gilgul hanefesh (“wheel of the soul”) – and justified it based on the work of many originally skeptical scientists and physicians such as Elizabeth Kubler Ross, Dr. Raymond Moody, Dr. Melvin Morse, Dr. Brian Weiss, and others into near-death experiences and past-life memory. I read The Tibetan Book of the Dead and the scientific work of the University of Virginia researcher Dr. Ian Stevenson on evidence of past-life memory in a number of subjects whose knowledge of former lives could not have been known through any normal means.

In Reform Judaism, the 19^th and 20^th century liberal Jewish religious stream that grew out of the European Enlightenment, I knew that when I delivered that sermon I was taking a risk of alienating rationalists in my community on the holiest evening of the Jewish year. I was surprised, in spite of the history of my movement, that many resonated with what I said and were inspired and comforted by the possibility that one’s soul-life survives death and is very long. I shared the stories of people in my community who told me that they had experienced visitations by dead relatives through dreams and in their waking moments. One told me she knew that her father died in exactly the way he did as a result of a catastrophic auto accident before being informed of the death because he came to her (they lived hundreds of miles apart) to tell her that he was at peace and that she should not worry about him. One well-known and highly respected non-Orthodox Jewish scholar in the Los Angeles Jewish community told me confidentially of a visit by his dead father soon after his funeral to him in his waking hours. I asked, “What do you make of this?” He said, “I don’t know because if I gave it any more thought I would have to change everything I believe to be true.”

In his series of books beginning with Many Lives, Many Masters, Dr. Brian Weiss presented compelling evidence that human beings can access the souls of the dead through hypnosis, and that there is a thin line between this world and the metaphysical realm. Part of me believes it’s true. Of course, no one can prove by empirical means the reality of soul-consciousness beyond death. Belief in it involves intuitive thinking and accepting the truths provided to us through non-rational (as opposed to irrational) thinking.

If gilgul hanefesh is a true thing, Jewish mysticism affirms that our souls undergo a process of tikun in the first eleven months after death, and then the soul ascends to the Otzar Ha-Nefashot (Treasury of Souls) before ascending higher into either lower Gan Eden or higher Gan Eden before returning to a new life.

There are many take-away lessons to be learned in reincarnation theory, that our lives are far more complex than we realize, that we are here to learn and evolve morally and ethically, that human life is short in the greater expanse of time, that a soul’s life is long, that the virtues of humility, appreciation, gratitude, and generosity are key elements to fulfillment, magnanimity, wisdom, and happiness, and that we are here to love and, hopefully, be loved.

Regardless of whether we believe in reincarnation theory or not, those truths are worthy in and of themselves.

By Ami Ayalon, Gilead Sher, and Orni Petruschka

July 20, 2022 – Opinion – Haaretz

[Note: Despite the expansion of the settlement enterprise in Israel’s occupied West Bank, these three leading Israelis continue to affirm the position that the United States must lead the way in bringing Israel and the Palestinians to the negotiating table to lay plans for an eventual two-states for two peoples resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. See their biographies at the conclusion of this op-ed.]

During a press conference in Ramallah on July 16, U.S. President Joe Biden reiterated that “as president of the United States, my commitment to [the] goal of a two-state solution has not changed in all these years.”

He then added that “even if the ground is not ripe at this moment to restart negotiations, the United States and my administration will not give up on trying to bring the Palestinians and Israelis and both sides closer together.”

Biden then flew to Saudi Arabia, where Saudi Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Adel al-Jubeir clarified Riyadh’s position on CNN: “Once we have committed to a two-state settlement with a Palestinian state in the occupied territories with East Jerusalem as its capital, that’s our requirement for peace.”

Biden’s visit presented a multi-focal opportunity for the Israeli government: first, to restore a non-partisan, intimate strategic relationship with the United States; second, to fine-tune a coordinated policy to counter a nuclear-threshold Iran; third, to further reinforce the regional normalization spring-boarded by the 2020 Abraham Accords; and fourth, and most importantly, to clarify that Israel does not support either the three-state solution (which would return the West Bank to Jordan and the Gaza Strip to Egypt) or the slide toward a disastrous one-state reality.

Unfortunately, it failed to do the last of these.

The visit was potentially a golden opportunity for Israel to convey that it seeks to promote a process of gradual, responsible, continuous, and purposeful separation from the Palestinians, thereby ensuring its future as a Jewish and democratic, secure, and egalitarian state, all while respecting the Palestinian right to self-determination. All this requires courage, leadership, and national responsibility.

And the Biden administration should be hands-on in terms of both the process and the ultimate vision of a two-state reality, which is indispensable. It is attainable through a series of transitional phases, interim agreements, and independent steps, all compliant with a continuous regional, multilateral, and bilateral negotiation process.

It is clearer now that there are no shortcuts to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, contrary to what Trump and Netanyahu would have liked us to believe with the festivities over the Abraham Accords.

For us and those like us, Israelis who do not shy away from both love of our country and concern about its future as the democratic and secure nation-state of the Jewish people, the spirit of the Declaration of Independence is a lodestar.

Whenever liberal Zionist patriots like us, who served the country without batting an eye, do not deal with the occupation and its consequences, we abandon the arena and allow the continuation of the creeping annexation process. And every day that passes without advancing toward disengaging from the Palestinians and ending the occupation, the creeping annexation distances us from the possibility of changing reality.

The terminology of “shrinking the conflict” that the outgoing government has championed is linguistic whitewashing aimed at continuing the tacit annexation.

While turning a blind eye to the settlement outposts in Evyatar and Homesh and showing laxity in the face of the despicable phenomena of seriously, unruly settler violence, and most importantly categorically dismissing any dialogue with the Palestinians, Israel is blindly walking down the road of a one-state reality.

Its indifference to the ramifications of the so-called status quo is a mirror image of the Arab world’s “three nos” at the Khartoum Conference of 1967: this time, it’s no to peace, no to recognition of a Palestinian state, and no to negotiations with representatives of the Palestinian people.

There is currently no political feasibility for a two-state solution. Nevertheless, the moderate camp, with its political, civil, and public branches led by Prime Minister Yair Lapid and his colleagues, should rally around a plan and message that will promote the creation of a two-state reality and preserve the chances and conditions for future Israeli-Palestinian disengagement and creation two distinct nation-states with a border between them; call for a freeze on settlement outside the major blocs; and promote mechanisms that will enable the evacuation of settlements located east of the separation barrier.

Any other course means that the center-left is joining a policy of annexation that will lead to the loss of Israel’s identity as a Jewish and democratic state, which would bury the Zionist enterprise and be a disaster for both us and the Palestinians.

The right-wing parties in Israel boastfully say are part of “the national camp.” In practice, they are no more than the binational camp, willfully leading us to a disastrous binational state instead of the necessary partition.

Prime Minister Lapid and the moderate camp around him should express a willingness to promote a plan aimed more ambitiously at providing a better future to generations of the some 15 million Israelis and Palestinians living in this battered land. Let us hope a second “government of change” is established after the November election, one that will adopt a step-by-step policy of advancement toward a better regional reality.

Ami Ayalon is a former commander of the Israeli Navy and head of the Israeli domestic security agency.

Gilead Sher is an Israeli attorney who served as Chief of Staff and Policy Coordinator to Israel’s former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak.

Orni Petruschka is a high-tech entrepreneur in Israel and co-founder of the Israeli independent, non-partisan organization, Blue White Future.

Note: I am printing the combined statement of American Reform Judaism (the Union for Reform Judaism, Central Conference of American Rabbis, American Conference of Cantors) concerning the American Presbyterian Church’s defamatory statement about Israel. As the statement notes towards the end, the American Reform Jewish movement has called over many years for a negotiated two states for two people’s resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This designation by the PCUSA of Israel as an “Apartheid state” is not only inaccurate (as the statement below explains) but is inflammatory and will be used by anti-Israel and antisemitic left-wing elements in the United States to delegitimize Israel as the state of the Jewish people.

July 13, 2022 

The Reform Jewish Movement strongly condemns Presbyterian Church (USA)’s declaration falsely charging that Israel is an apartheid state, with the passage of Amendment INT-02 at its recent General Assembly. The Reform Movement is equally appalled that the Church entertained a recommendation to remove the term “antisemitism” from its official lexicon, preferring the term “anti-Jewish,” as it is universally accepted that “antisemitism” refers specifically to the hatred of the Jewish people. This is not the first time that an egregious statement on Israel has been made by PCUSA leadership, and we can clearly see that this is part of a pattern. Earlier this year in his reflection for Martin Luther King, Jr. weekend, the Church’s highest official, Stated Clerk Rev. Dr. J. Herbert Nelson II, described Israel’s treatment of Palestinians as, “21st-century slavery.”

The Reform Movement condemns these libelous mischaracterizations of the Jewish State, which carry with them a significant risk of increased antisemitism in the United States and worldwide.

The accusation of ‘apartheid’ is flawed, as the distinguishing factor determining the legal system in the West Bank is based on nationality and citizenship, not racial hierarchy, skin color, religious, or ethnic measures. Positioning the conflict in racial terms is simply wrong and is unhelpful in bringing this conflict to resolution. PCUSA and other international organizations continuously fail to recognize the context of Israel/Palestine, as they do not address Israel’s security concerns or the call by many of Israel’s neighbors – including the Palestinians – to bring an end to the Jewish State.

While the North American Reform Movement has a long-standing policy of opposition to Israeli settlements, we deeply regret that the PCUSA has taken an entirely unhelpful, even counterproductive, approach toward achieving a two-state solution. We acknowledge that the occupation regularly causes hardship to Palestinians, and to that end, we have repeatedly called for negotiations to establish two states for two peoples.

Reform Jews across North America enjoy warm relationships with local Presbyterian clergy and laity, many of whom have chosen to disassociate themselves from the national body. We will continue to nurture those relationships, engaging our friends and partners honestly and candidly to share our hurt, anger, and disappointment. Reform rabbis, cantors, and lay leaders will work with our Presbyterian partners to build a greater understanding of the Jewish people’s commitment to Israel, as well as a more accurate and nuanced understanding of its ongoing conflicts, its vulnerability to antisemitism, and our shared concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people. We call on PCUSA to retract their resolution.

Central Conference of American Rabbis
Rabbi Lewis Kamrass (he/him), President
Rabbi Hara E. Person (she/her), Chief Executive

American Conference of Cantors
Cantor Seth Warner (he/him), President
Rachel Roth (she/her), Chief Operating Officer

Union for Reform Judaism
Jennifer Brodkey Kaufman (she/her), Chair
Rabbi Rick Jacobs (he/him), President