It has only been a week since President Trump gave his State of the Union address, which had little to do with the State of the Union. Now we have missiles destroying buildings in the Middle East in …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in, using the login form, below, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account and connect your subscription to it by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
It has only been a week since President Trump gave his State of the Union address, which had little to do with the State of the Union. Now we have missiles destroying buildings in the Middle East in an enlarging war that began when the U.S. dropped bombs on Iran, taking out a good portion of the leaders in that country. The justification for doing it when they did is that there was going to be a meeting where a lot of important people were going to be present. It makes sense to strike them all at once. But I am not sure in an already unstable part of the world that this was the best action. The Secretary of War is still being a little bit close-mouthed about what the U.S. has planned and how long it is going to take and how many Americans might die. Hopefully, it will not turn into a major war with everyone having to pick a side.
But to go back to the State of the Union, I want to talk about two things in particular that bothered me. Trump invited the men’s hockey team to the address. But he had to add, “I must tell you; we’re going to have to bring the women’s team, you do know that.” Twenty of the 25 members of the men’s hockey team attended, the other five missed out because they had games the next day. The women’s team declined the invitation, citing prior commitments.
The problem I have with this is that it is another put down of women by our misogynist president. It took the men’s hockey team 46 years to achieve a gold medal since they got the last one. Maybe that makes it more monumental. In addition, they won gold in 1960. They have also won eight silver medals, the last in 2010.The women have also won gold three times, in 2026, 2018, 1998. They have four silver medals and one bronze. So why does it seem like their achievement means less to our president? Was his remark really necessary? Maybe he needs to follow the engage brain before speaking rule.
The other thing that really bothered me is when he said, “The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.” I won’t deny that it is a duty of government to protect our citizens, but I don’t see that happening when we don’t take care of our children, our senior citizens, or much of anyone else for that matter. It is not protecting our citizens when gun violence is rampant, but nothing is done. It is not protecting our citizens when we are engaging in another war with people who don’t necessarily value human lives, particularly American ones. It is not protecting our citizens when people are losing healthcare, when they can’t afford food or medicine, when they can’t afford housing. I could go on.
What our president doesn’t seem to understand is that he is in the White House at the will of the people and the purpose of government to serve the people, all the people. That is why the Constitution starts with the words “We the People.” It sets out a blueprint for forming a more perfect Union, establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare and securing the blessings of liberty not just for our founders but for us too.
I could be wrong but it seems like we have lost sight of what government was meant to do. In this 250th year since the founding of the U.S. as we look back to our roots, maybe we can gain back some of what we appear to have lost.