​It shouldn’t come as a shock that the Republican Party is having a difficult time this week with slavery.  After all, when your party leader is a racist who enables White Supremacist groups and has said that there are “many fine people” among the neo-Nazia, and begins echoing Adolf Hitler, and the base of your party is filled with White Supremacists, neo-Nazis and your standard, garden variety racists, and several Republican-led states have blocked the teaching of “Critical Race Theory” in their high schools and grade schools (a college-level subject, not taught in any high school or grade school), and even blocked teaching Black history classes, and with the Republican Party morphing into fascism – of which one of the core tenets is xenophobia and hatred of all minorities -- then not knowing how to deal with slavery in order not to offend your base just isn’t something that comes amazingly out of the blue.
 
So, that brought us Nikki Haley being asked about what she believed caused the Civil War and telling her Town Hall meeting that it was really all about “Freedom.”
 
Now, clearly Nikki Haley knows that the Civil War is not about “Freeeeeedom!”, but rather about slavery. She had the Confederate flag removed from the South Carolina capitol building, after all, when she was governor.  But when talking to your party’s voters, you just can’t afford to offend the base.  Even when it comes to saying that slavery is very bad.

(My favorite moment was not her woeful explanation, but after her questioner expresses surprise that in 2023 she didn't even mention slavery, to which she asks, "What do you want me to say about slavery??"  And he answers, "I'm not running for president.")
 
And she made it worse the next day when, after having a lot of time to think about how to stop the ridicule, she pretty much doubled-down and said that, while it’s a given that the Civil War was about slavery, it’s about so much more today, like “Freeeeedom!” and government and individual rights, saying that that’s what she was supposedly referring to, about what it means today.  Except…
 
Well, except that that wasn’t what she was asked.  She was asked very simply what was the cause of the Civil War.  And the thing is, even if you’re going to address what it means today, it’s certainly not about “Freeeeeedom!” (unless you mean the freedom of slaves), and it is still about slavery at its foundation.  And of course, slavery isn't about "individual rights," but the collective subjugation of a people.
 
She also made it worse later still, insisting that the question had been asked by a “Democratic plant.”  My immediate thought was that it’s pretty embarrassing if you can get tripped up by a Ficus.  Though in fairness, a Democratic Ficus was known to be especially wily.  That aside, even if this had been a sneaky Democrat who somehow got into the event and asked a “gotcha” question, if you want to be President of the United States, you had better be able a question – most especially if it’s as easy as “What caused the Civil War?”  A question most six-graders can answer.
 
By the way, “Gotcha” questions have become a big bugaboo the Republican officials ever since Sarah Palin was running for vice-president and asked what newspapers and magazines she read that informed her views.  And she got stumped, answering “All of them” and then later complaining about how unfair the question was.

(It should also be noted that as much as Nikki Haley  wants to blame this on Democratic vegetation, this isn't even a case of "gotcha" at all, since it's not the first time Nikki Haley has addressed this.  Video has since surface from 2010 when she's talking about the Civil War, and explaining that it was about a conflict between "tradition" and "change."  No mention of slavery.)
 
The Civil War is a complex issue.  And there’s certainly more involved with it than just slavery.  But slavery is the foundation of all the issues.  Which is why it’s, as Nikki Haley herself said, “a given.”

But still she’s gone on and on, defending her words to even more TV cameras.  Here’s the problem with that – every day that goes by with Nikki Haley doubling down explaining why she was right saying the Civil War was about "FREEEEDOM," rather than slavery is a disaster for her. After all, if it's a "given" the cause of the Civil War was slavery (which it is, as she herself has "of course" noted)...then say that.  And stop.
 
The only remaining question for her about this is if it will affect the possibility of her being selected to be Trump's VP running mate.  On the one hand, it’s become such an awful issue for her (that she keeps making worse) that it’s become an almost disqualifying distraction.  On the other hand, not saying that that the Civil War was caused by slavery but is about “Freeeedom!” might be a positive in today’s Republican Party.
 
And given the problems that Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) caused for himself when he brought up slavery on Sunday – perhaps in defense of Nikki Haley, perhaps because (being a Republican) he thought this was a good thing.
 
Cotton left a series of tweets trying to make the cool point that it was Democrats who actually supported slavery and caused the United States to split, when it was a Republican president who had to keep the country together.  And Democrats who still want to tear the country apart.
 
Apparently Cotton felt that when you write on social media, only your racist base can see it, not realizing that everyone can read what you’ve written, including those who understand actual history and reality.  And he was scathingly excoriated.
 
Actually, I thought there was at least one positive to come from Cotton’s effort – it showed that learning history of 160 years ago was A Good Thing.  And especially learning Black History.
 
After all, Cotton was correct about the Civil War.  The Southern states that defended slavery and seceded 160 years ago were, indeed, Democrats.  What Cotton left out was that the Democratic Party learned from his horrible mistakes and became aggressive defenders of civil rights for Black people, and that those conservative Democrats who refused to support this quit the party and became Republicans!  And this happened as long ago as 1948 when the “Dixiecrats” were outraged by Democrats putting a civil rights plank in their party platform, and many walked out of the convention.  And has become the base of the Republican Party since.  In 1964, Mississippi Democrats walked out of the Democratic convention when a Black slate was going to be admitted.  And in 1968, the switchover became pretty much completed when Richard Nixon had his “Southern Strategy,” going full racist, and the South became pretty much Republican.  And has been so since.  For the math-challenged, that’s 75 years since the Dixiecrats walked away.
 
And this week doesn’t even include earlier when Ron DeSantis explained the Florida education standard that there were “benefits” to slaves, thanks to the skills they learned while under inhumane captivity.
 
So, no, Republicans today don’t seem to have come to grips with how to deal with slavery as A Bad Thing so that they don’t offend their base.
 
Oh, and as for Cotton’s other whimsical suggestion, it was Republicans who were the Insurrectionists that stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and tried to overthrow the government.  Perhaps Cotton missed the story, but it was in all the papers.  And it’s been Republicans who have continued to defend the fascist Trump’s insistence to perpetuate this divisive lie that the election was rigged and stolen.
 
In the end, if we’ve learned anything from all this, it’s just really, really hard to defend the indefensible.  The only hope is that, among the “we” referenced here who have learned this incredibly easy and basic lesson of life, it includes Republicans.

Don’t hold your breath on that.  But miracles are possible.

Returning to our World o’ Squirrels, we have yet one more example of what appears to be great loyalty that squirrels seem to show when they get rescued.  From the fine folks at the Dodo, a guy tried to release a squirrel that he rescued, but it was to no avail because she always kept coming back.  Interestingly, this is almost the same experience I’ve had with my longtime friend Rob Hedden who himself dearly loves squirrels and has apparently picked up this characteristic, because I can’t get rid of him.

We're going to turn these pages to someone who I don't know who he is or his area of expertise.  But in just one minute, he does a brilliant job explaining -- in a clear, cogent way I haven't heard anyone else do so -- the massive benefits of the United States giving aid to Ukraine.  Not even so much from the perspective of critically helping a foreign nation defend democracy, but for how it actually helps the United States, improving our our military, which provides for our defense, and providing jobs to Americans.

Carry on --

I was sorry to read about the passing of Tom Smothers at the age of 86.  He'd been ill for a while, so this didn't come as a big surprise, but it's still a loss.  I loved the Smothers Brothers.  I think their debut album, The Smothers Brothers at the Purple Onion, was the second album I ever owned, and the first I bought.

I have three videos of Tom and Dick.  This first is a very early one, an appearance on Judy Garland's TV show where they perform a couple of songs, including "Dance, Boatman, Dance" which was on  that first album.

Next, here's a song from their TV variety show -- it looks like it's from the return series they did, not the famous one on CBS from which they got fired -- with a song that's particularly touching today, "Side by Side."

And finally, here's 51 minutes of songs they performed, also (it appears), from that later variety series.

Someone posted this family Christmas card photo on Twitter.

Now, I generally don't care what is going on with Trump and his wife, that's between them at any given moment, or whatever prenup or subsequent agreement they may have made, and I still don't care.  But for a Christmas card photo, peace on earth, joy to the world, from our family to yours -- having the entire family together but not your wife -- that certainly is weird.  I'm not saying there isn't a great reason for her absence, who knows, maybe so. Or not. Nor am I saying I care why she's not there, I don't. Just that...it's really weird.

​Though I must admit, if I was Trump, more than getting anyone else to pose for the family card of those closest and most dear to him, I'd have made absolutely sure to include Walt Nauta in the picture...

I was reminded (yet again) of one of my more prescient observations which I remain pleased to have made. 
 
It came about this time by the latest of Lindsey Graham’s head-spinning, soul-sucking pronouncements on behalf of Trump.
 
“I tell you what,” he said on CNN this past Sunday, “if Trump were President, Putin wouldn’t have invaded Ukraine because he’s afraid of him.”
 
Now, yes, of course, I know all the obvious and correct responses to this.  Like how “if Trump was president, Putin would be waltzing through Ukraine since not only would Trump support him, but Ukraine wouldn’t have gotten any aid from the United States without it being pushed by Trump.”  And “It’s well-accepted from evidence in the Mueller Report and elsewhere that Putin tried aggressively to get Trump elected president, which is the opposite of someone being afraid of him.”  And “It seems far more likely that Putin has something (or a lot of things) on Trump from his years as a businessman in Russia, and so there’s a much better chance that Trump is terrified of Putin.”  And “What does Putin or Trump have on Lindsey Graham that has made him lose his spine and total self-respect and become a quivering blob of Trump errand boy???”  That and “How utterly stupid do you think the American public is – or are you only talking to the Republican base that believes this garbage?”
 
And yes, all of these thoughts rumbled around in my head as I heard Lindsey Graham (R-SC) blather like Dickensian urchin begging for even just the tiniest scrap of Trump love.  It’s a sad, pathetic performance that has been going on for almost seven years now, ever since Graham said about Trump in February, 2016 I think he’s a kook, I think he’s crazy, I think he’s nuts.  I think he’s unfit for office” and even after Trump actually humiliated Graham by actually giving out his personal phone number to embarrass him.  The long list of things that Lindsey Graham has since said and done and reversed himself on in order to, it seems, solely please his Great Daddy Figure Trump in the most awkward, infantile and, at times, weepy, red-faced, handkerchief-rending ways that you almost expect him to pause a moment while he shakes in a fever and has to sip his mint julep to steady himself has become so unending that there’s pretty much no need to repeat them.  Sort of like noting that when it rained today, it was wet.
 
But what most rumbled in my head – and does almost every time he’s spoken for the past seven years – is a conversation I had about 20 years ago, give or take a few years.
 
This was the time when elected Republican officials were beginning their early stages away from just political disagreement and becoming uncompromising idealogues.  The era of impeaching Bill Clinton for the crime of being “Slick Willy,” slamming Hillary Clinton for being a smart woman, insisting Barack Obama was a Muslim Kenyan and more.  And through it all, Lindsey Graham would occasionally stand out from the Republican Party with a few thoughtful comments contrary to his party.
 
And it was during this period that I was having a conversation with a friend who said, “Y’know, I sort of like Lindsey Graham.  He’s about the only sane Republican.  I don’t agree with him on many things, but he’s fair-minded and I sort of see supporting him as a rational voice in the party.”
 
To which I said – “I don’t.  I find him smarmy.  He does say occasional things that are fair-minded, but you don’t get bonus points for being fair.  We’ll all supposed to be fair.  I’m glad he is, but it only stands out because the rest of the Republican Party is so reprehensible it makes him seem reasonable.  But I don’t think he’s reasonable.  I get the sense that most of the time he’s only saying things that any person should say, but it’s only on the surface because at heart I find him deceitful and nasty and obnoxious.”
 
I’ve always been pleased of that observation.  And the only thing I’m sorry about is that for the past two decades he hasn’t proven me wrong.