The Republican Party must stop its deranged leader now
By Michael M. Barrick
United States President Donald Trump must be removed from office. On New Year’s Day, North Korean President Kim Jong Un declared that a “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Trump took the bait, or just threw a temper tantrum for all we know, and replied via a tweet, “Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”
I must defer to people better trained in psychiatry to address the “bigger button” metaphor.
This I do know; we are living under the tyranny of a toddler.
Unfortunately, we’re not the only people stuck with a child in an adult’s chair. The whole world is because of our nuclear arsenal. Throw in another child in an adult’s chair – Kim Jong Un – and we have the perfect cocktail for all those nuclear explosions I practiced for during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
So, Vice President Pence – or somebody in the Cabinet with courage and clout – must lead the effort to remove President Donald Trump from office under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. What they have to do is prove that Trump is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”
Check. His tweeted, taunting rantings clearly reveal a man incapable of handling the grave responsibilities of the office. Such behavior is not suitable from a leader in any workplace. I can see it from North Carolina. Certainly Pence and the Cabinet members can see it from where they genuflect.
The argument that Section 4 has never been used is a straw man. Let the lawyers figure out whether a 71-year-old man should be conducting foreign policy using a teenager’s platform that could start a war that would cause the deaths of millions of people.
The president has done enough. He has revealed – repeatedly – his cruelty and wickedness. His presidency threatens the life of every human on the planet. The GOP must mitigate the existential threat posed by Donald Trump.
So, we need to ask a couple of question of the Republican Party. Do you not care about even your own families, let alone all of civilization? And, as Boston attorney Joseph Welch asked of Senator Joe McCarthy regarding his Red Scare witch hunt of the early 1950s, “Have you no sense of decency?”
That is not all that Welch said though. According to the U.S. Senate website, McCarthy accused a lawyer on Welch’s staff of having ties to Communists. Welch responded, “Until this moment, senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.” He continued, “Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?”
The president has done enough. He has revealed – repeatedly – his cruelty and wickedness. His presidency threatens the life of every human on the planet. The GOP must mitigate the existential threat posed by Donald Trump. Is there a person of courage left in the GOP? Or shall we all die under the tyranny of a toddler tyrant?
© Michael M. Barrick, 2018
Mattis suggests that troops read sobering Korean War history
By Michael M. Barrick
FORT BRAGG, N.C. – When U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis recently advised soldiers to read, “This Kind of War: A Study in Unpreparedness” by T. H. Fehrenbach, I immediately walked over to a book shelf and grabbed my copy of it. It is just one of many books I own and have read about the Korean War, but I knew instantly why Mattis recommended it to the troops. Fehrenbach’s book is the ultimate After Action Review (AAR) of the Korean War.
The diplomatic, political and military failures are mercilessly explored. So are the successes. However, based on other remarks that Mattis made at Ft. Bragg, I believe he was warning the troops to study about the dangers of unpreparedness.
I am particularly interested in the Korean War because my uncle died there on 12 July 1950, six years before I was born. However, to people who knew him, such as my dad and grandmother, he remained very much alive in their memories. So, his life narrative was an integral part of our family history.
His name was George M. Barrick Jr. I have written about him before, here. He was among “ … the majority (that) had fought and died” (Fehrenbach, p. 87) in the early days of July, 1950. His death, recorded in detail by a surviving companion, was horrid. Fehrenbach’s version is sanitized; “And on the retaken ground Jensen found six American soldiers with their hands tied behind their backs, shot in the head” (p. 87). In short, it was routine for POWs, especially officers, to be executed by the North Koreans.
In Korea, Americans had to fight, not a popular, righteous war, but to send men to die on a bloody checkerboard, with hard heads and without exalted motivations, in the hope of preserving the kind of world order Americans desired.” – T. R. Fehrenbach
With Mattis doing his duty – preparing soldiers for war with North Korea as diplomatic options dwindle – his advice is good for all Americans: pick up a copy of Fehrenbach’s book. Be prepared though. He pulls no punches. On p. 84, in summarizing the slaughter of American troops after their arrival in South Korea around 1 July, he writes, “What happened to them might have happened to any American in the summer of 1950. For they represented exactly the kind of pampered, undisciplined, egalitarian army their society had long desired and at last achieved.”
Ouch. Yet, he continues, “They had been raised to believe the world was without tigers, then sent to face those tigers with a stick. On their society must fall the blame.”
This last assertion by Fehrenbach is severe. Yet, he wrote this book just 10 years after the cease-fire was signed at Panmunjom on 27 July 1953. In that three years, more than 50,000 U.S. troops and millions of Koreans died. Since then, millions more have died in North Korea at the hands of its Communist leaders, people just as ruthless as the ones that shot my uncle in the back of the head after he had surrendered.
Fehrenbach and others also point out that the Truman administration had sent signals to North Korea, as well as Russia and China, that the United States would not go to war over Korea. In short, everyone miscalculated.
So, let’s just consider one more section from Fehrenbach’s book about those miscalculations. “In the first terrible, shattering days of July 1950, casualties among officers of high rank in the United States Army were greater in proportion to those of any fighting since the Civil War. They had to be. There were few operable radios with the regiments in Korea, and almost no communication from command posts down to the front positions.” He continues, “If commanders wanted to know what was happening, or make their orders known, they had to be on the ground” (p. 85).
He added, “The high-priced help was expendable, true. They too were paid to die. But it was no way to run a war” (p. 85).
No, it was not. And despite many heroic actions, including the delaying action in which my uncle was killed, we accomplished no diplomatic objectives through the military action. The 38th parallel was the demarcation line between North Korea and South Korea the day the war started and was roughly so three years later, when the cease-fire was signed.
Writing in July, 1962 in the book’s Preface, Fehrenbach asserted, “In Korea, Americans had to fight, not a popular, righteous war, but to send men to die on a bloody checkerboard, with hard heads and without exalted motivations, in the hope of preserving the kind of world order Americans desired.”
He added, “Tragically, they were not ready, either in body or spirit.”
It is no wonder Mattis wants his troops to read Fehrenbach’s history. It is full of sobering words for our nation and our leaders. Are we, as a people, committed to sending more troops to fight and die on distant hills in Asia? For too long, we have asked too few to sacrifice too much. That is symptomatic of a nation “not ready, either in body or spirit.”
Mattis has issued a wake-up call about the existential threat caused by unpreparedness – of mind, body and spirit. How shall we respond?
© Michael M. Barrick, 2017
Obsession with stuff that will become dust – like us – reveals our true priorities
By Michael M. Barrick
LENOIR, N.C. – Before this day is out, we will almost certainly see images of people stampeding over one another in order to be the first to get the newest trinket, cell phone, computer or toy. Then, of course, there are the unending advertisements in print, on TV and the web.
It is indeed, Black Friday in the U.S.A. Not, however, for the stated reason. A person recently asked me why the day after Thanksgiving is called Black Friday. I explained that it is the busiest retail day of the year, the day that helps ensure that the red ink on the balance sheet turns black for the year. However, I didn’t stop there. I also used the question as a teachable moment. I added that Black Friday is an apt description of our nation’s heart. In short, I said, it proves we care more about stuff than people.
You will hear from certain preachers and politicians that this is – or should be – a Christian nation. Black (Heart) Friday proves this is simply not the case. But in case anyone wonders what a true Christian nation would look like, consider first teachings from Jesus about money and possessions, and then what we are taught are God’s priorities. This much is clear: the “Christian” nation that many envision is totally opposite of what you read below.
Let’s begin with the Sermon on the Mount. “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. … No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? … So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well” (Matthew 6: 19-21, 24-25, 31-33 NIV).
Is there really any doubt that serving money is our nation’s top priority?
God’s priorities, conversely, are quite different, as we read in the Old Testament: “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8 NIV).
Our obsession with today’s best deals for what amount to nothing more than meaningless trinkets reveals a nation that is anything but “Christian.” So, think for yourself. Do not let the carnival barkers lead you astray. If we will change our priorities and care for people instead of possessions, we will find our land a much more livable and welcoming place. We don’t need to call ourselves Christians to do that. We simply need to behave as humans, not desperate animals.
‘The Resistance’ can count me out if all it seeks is destruction
By Michael M. Barrick
I am an old hippie who has no use for the ways of the established order. Ask the CEO of any corporation or the principal of any school for which I’ve worked. Or the pastor of any church I’ve attended. Most “order” is based on outdated, controlling systems designed to destroy creativity, and hence freedom. That leads to injustice.
I was raised to recognize and oppose injustice. I was also taught to do it peacefully. I was also taught there were great costs to standing against “The Establishment.” I learned that mostly the hard way.
I still oppose “The Establishment” even though my generation is the establishment. I am with the disaffected and dissatisfied. I am not satisfied with the direction of our nation. I believe “Citizens United” has led us down the path of crony capitalism even worse than the Robber Barron era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In short, the inordinate control that corporations exert over our personal lives and political systems as a result of that Supreme Court decision have so polluted our national discourse that this outcome – violent resistance – was inevitable.
It is still unacceptable though. “The Resistance” must reject anarchy. Too many protesters are leaderless with no clear purpose short of destruction. If they wish to improve how our nation cares for the poor, vulnerable and the environment (I think that’s what they want other than Donald Trump’s head), they need leadership. Now.
That would – should – come from progressive clergy and politicians. The anarchists have legitimate complaints. There is truth to the saying, “If you want peace, work for justice.” There is plenty of injustice today. No ordinary American would ever enjoy the bailout received by Wall Street. Police departments do not need to be militarized. Energy companies such as Dominion and Duke should not be allowed to destroy the environment and seize private property through eminent domain to build fracking infrastructure. The War on Drugs is a complete failure, leading to the unjust imprisonment of tens of thousands of people, mostly minorities. We are spending more on the military than ever before even though we can’t muster the will to provide health coverage for all Americans.
So, one can understand the anger.
Violence, however, is not the answer.
To appreciate that, one needs a sense of history. There is talk on street corners no matter where I go that people say they’ve never seen our country in such a mess. I have. It was 1968.
The Vietnam War was at its peak, with thousands of young Americans subjected to an unjust draft. It was called the Selective Service System and it was very selective. If you were in college or could get a deferment because daddy had connections, you weren’t selected. So, eventually, the working class youth had enough of it and started burning draft cards, fleeing to Canada and even occupying buildings. Yes, there was some violence, especially at the Democratic National Convention, but that was largely precipitated by Chicago’s ruthless police.
Also in 1968, blacks, a century after the completion of the Civil War, were still having to fight for economic justice and attempts by white supremacists such as Alabama Governor George Wallace to deny them their constitutional rights.
The nightly news in 1968 was dominated by headlines about war, domestic unrest, racism, and political assassinations. We’ve been here before.
The most obvious attack upon the Civil Rights movement was the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. But he was not the only person killed that year. So was Bobby Kennedy, as he closed in on the Democratic nomination for president. So were activists and students. The nightly news in 1968 was dominated by headlines about war, domestic unrest, racism, and political assassinations. We’ve been here before.
As I did then, I turn to music for guidance. The folk and rock protest music of the 1960s and 70s helped stop the Vietnam War. And, the most popular group of the decade, the Beatles, spoke to the madness of 1968 through their song, “Revolution,” which was released in November of that year. Compared to many other groups, such as Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, the Beatles had been relatively silent on political issues – until John Lennon penned “Revolution.”
Here is the first verse: “You say you want a revolution / Well you know / We all want to change the world. / You tell me that it’s evolution / Well you know / We all want to change the world. / But when you talk about destruction / Don’t you know you can count me out.”
Well, 50 years later, nothing has changed. I want to change the world. There are literally as many ways to do that as there are people willing to do it. But when you are destructive, you lose me as an ally.
Being destructive is being lazy. It shows a lack of real thought about how to address our many disagreements. It sets a horrible example for our children, and converts nobody. It is unbecoming of a human being. So, if we wish to convince others to be more humane, we must set the example.
No violence. No destruction. Only love.
Try it. It is my experience that in the end, to be effective, you’ll only have time for love.
Appalachian Chronicle On Facebook
On Twitter: @appchronicle
Recognizing the distinction is essential to ensure access as a basic human right
By Dr. Arthur M. Sherwood and Michael M. Barrick
The United States Congress has no hope of resolving any of the many health care challenges facing Americans until it understands that in the United States, health care is an industry, not a “system.”
This distinction is critical – and one would think, obvious. Just ask anyone seeking quality time with their physician, looking for an insurance company that won’t demand that their doctor discharge them from a hospital earlier than medically appropriate, and playing the pharmacy lottery forced upon them by the pharmaceutical companies. The difficulty in accessing health care is apparent to anyone who has had need of it, from difficulty in funding care to identifying appropriate care.
So, with the costs and complications of the health care industry evidently beyond reform – considering we’ve been debating this issue since the Truman Administration – it is time to transform how Americans access health care.
We believe that health care is a fundamental human right, embedded in the “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” phrase of the United States Declaration of Independence. Hence, we support universal health insurance with a single-payer system. Incidentally, it is far more efficient than the current puzzle of industries competing for profits, when the focus of health care delivery should be clear – exceptional care for every person.
First, though, members of Congress need to understand and concur that the U.S. does not have a health care system. Only by correctly understanding the issue is an intelligent approach possible.
We believe that health care is a fundamental human right, embedded in the “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” phrase of the United States Declaration of Independence. Hence, we support universal health insurance with a single-payer system.
Some have argued that the United States has the best health care in the world. It may be true that outstanding providers of health care can be found in the U.S. But it is certainly not true that we have the best health care system in the world.
Health care in America is anything but systematic; according to “Webster’s Universal College Dictionary,” systematic means “having, showing, or involving a system, method, or plan.” There is no plan. There has been no plan. There is not even method to the madness.
The good news is, Congress has an example from which it can learn – the Department of Veterans Affairs. It was created after the Civil War to honor Abraham Lincoln’s idea expressed in his Second Inaugural Address: “to care for him who has borne the heat of battle, and his widow and his orphans.” Indeed, the VA adopted this sentiment as its motto in 1959. The Veterans Health Administration is the largest single provider of health care in the United States, and provides care for millions of veterans. It has seen creation of many of the advances of modern medicine, including the very concept of clinical trials. Creation of electronic health records was facilitated by the VHA, as was promotion of preventative medicine. Provision of care is done via a network of small and large facilities spread around the country, with additional funding possible to provide care in every corner of our great country.
The absence of any real system can be seen in the lack of any structured plan for systematic care of the population. For example, if an individual sustains a serious injury to their spinal cord, there is no mechanism in place to ensure that patient gets sent to the centers best equipped to manage such injuries.
It is even much more evident in the nation’s depressing health statistics, where, e.g., the life expectancy for adult males has actually declined in recent years, the only advanced country in which that happened, reversing what had been a steady advance in life expectancy over the past century. Or, perhaps more importantly, where the rate of childbirth mortality is so high that the U.S. ranks 45th in the world in that category. Mothers in the U.S. are twice as likely to die in childbirth as are mothers in Canada.
During the past decade in particular, this inability to distinguish between a nation with a health care industry and not a system has misdirected the debate regarding the health care needs of Americans. Many of the arguments about financing health care miss the point. The fragmented nature of such financing is further evidence of a lack of a system. Currently, far too much time, effort and money is expended on cost shifting – playing games with peoples’ lives in order to minimize expenditures from each competing source, whether that be the individual, one or more private, for-profit, insurance or pharmaceutical companies, or local, state or federal governments.
Cities and counties bear much of the expense of indigent care; state budgets are severely impacted by costs of health care, and the federal budget allocates a great deal of money to health care. With all that money spent, the lack of timely and appropriate health care sends many people to the emergency room, with a lowered likelihood of good outcomes (compared to early, preventative care), utilizing the most expensive entry point into health care. Additionally, the lack of universal prenatal care results in unconscionable and unnecessary outcomes such as a higher percentage of premature births and prolonged stays in astronomically expensive neonatal intensive care units.
Our current approach to health care delivery makes no sense fiscally, and is morally bankrupt. It is absurd for a country such as ours claiming to be an advanced civilization to exhibit so little care for our fellow citizens. And it is even more disturbing that those claiming religious affiliation and allegiance permit such a situation to persist in conflict with Matthew 25: 35-40.
It has been our experience, as professionals in health care and with spouses who have devoted their lives to providing loving, exceptional care, that almost all caregivers are motivated by a desire to help people. For the sake of the people needing such care, it is incumbent upon Congress and President Trump to quit the political posturing, acknowledge that our current industrial approach to health care delivery is inadequate, and replace it with universal, single-payer coverage. We already know how to do it. It’s called Medicare. And, it is what the majority of Americans want. As is customary, the people “get it” first. The question is: Who in Congress and at the White House will stand up for the American people? Who will put people before profit?
© Arthur M. Sherwood and Michael M. Barrick, 2017.
On Twitter: @appchronicle
About the Authors
Dr. Arthur M. Sherwood earned his Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Duke University in 1970. He has devoted his career to helping veterans and others with spinal cord injuries maximize their ability to function independently. He has also been very active in the Baptist faith, having served as a Trustee at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary for 10 years, and staying active in a local congregation wherever his vocation has taken him.
Michael Barrick has a post-graduate Certificate in Community Preparedness and Disaster Management from the UNC School of Public Health. He worked for several years as a paramedic and has served as Safety Office and Disaster Preparedness coordinator at two hospitals. He is also an experienced journalist, specializing in health care reporting. Catholic Social Teaching informs his writing.
Trump’s threat of ‘fire and fury’ against North Korea undermines Nikki Haley’s incredible diplomacy – and the Constitution
By Michael M. Barrick
Nikki Haley, the United States ambassador to the United Nations, did what none of her 28 predecessors were able to do – get a unanimous vote of the U.N. Security Council. The 15-0 vote, in short, is intended to deny North Korea of roughly $1 billion in revenue annually in hopes it will bankrupt the nation’s nuclear program. It also sends an unprecedented unanimous message to the North Korean leadership.
Ms. Haley hit a diplomatic grand slam. Naturally, President Trump immediately undermined her work, threatening “fire and fury” against North Korea. That’s war, not diplomacy. And, it’s amateurish, as noted by Senator John McCain (R- Ariz.). He told the Associated Press, “You got to be sure you can do what you say you’re going to do. That kind of rhetoric, I’m not sure it helps. The great leaders I’ve seen don’t threaten unless they’re ready to act and I’m not sure that President Trump is ready to act.”
So, we’ve just leap-frogged over a moment to achieve peace to almost certain war.
It is not unreasonable for there to be skeptics as to whether or not nations voting for the resolution will actually abide by it. Nevertheless, it is inconsistent with the values of the United States to initiate war. In fact, one would think that recent history would have taught us that.
I’ve got a stack of books about the Korean War sitting on my bookshelf. I offer them to the White House. Chief of Staff General John Kelly can sit the president’s butt in a chair and read to him just a few select passages of the madness that a war on that peninsula would unleash. It would be an apocalyptic example of man’s inhumanity to man.
I’ve even got the word-for-word account of my uncle’s death there on 12 July 1950. It makes for sobering reading. I’ll also be happy to provide a copy of my grandmother’s letter to President Truman, a letter saturated with anguish that only a mother can feel.
Speaking of reading, somebody needs to read the president a copy of the Constitution. The same thing is true in Congress. When President Harry Truman sent troops into Korea in 1950, he started our 67-year history of unconstitutional wars. A journalist called it a “police action” and the president claimed it as his own. Those books I mentioned have a lot of colorful quotes from soldiers that actually participated in that “police action.”
If reading just isn’t an option, then show the president episodes of “M*A*S*H.”
It’s time for that executive abuse of power to stop. Indeed, the lesson here is that while the U.N. resolution is impressive, it is not legal cover for war. Only Congress can authorize war. I can think of no more appropriate time in our nation’s history than now for Congress to re-assert its rightful authority. At least men like my uncle will not then have died in vain.
Today, the media is just as irresponsible, talking and writing about a “conflict.” No, it’s a war, and it is very, very ugly. So, it’s time for everyone to do their job, especially Congress. It seems only it can check the White House. It must send a clear signal to the president – if you do not come to the House chamber for a Joint Session of Congress with a Declaration of War that will be debated live for every American to see, there will be not one cent made available for war. There will be no such declaration. And, Articles of Impeachment will be introduced the second you should initiate an unconstitutional war.
We can hope.
© Michael M. Barrick, 2017
On Twitter: @appchronicle
No Nukes for anyone
By Michael M. Barrick
In the early 1980s, I had a t-shirt that exclaimed, “No Nukes!” It caused more than one confrontation, which of course was my intent. The reason I was so confrontational was because I considered escalation of nuclear weaponry insane. President Reagan, in particular, seemed to be a bit trigger-happy.
He was not the first though. I have known since I had to throw by butt under my desk or up against a wall at school in 1962 that nuclear weapons could make all of mankind extinct. As a first grader, I was not old enough to grasp the “All of mankind” concept; however, television and magazine images of exploding mushroom clouds I did understand – it meant I would be vaporized – extinguished!
My awareness of all of this began with the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was enlightening to a six-year-old. The president was serious, our parents more so with each passing day. The nuns at St. Mary’s in Clarksburg, W.Va. were the ones having us diving under the desks. We followed that by saying the rosary and going to confession quite regularly. At six, I was a handful, but I really didn’t have much to confess. In hindsight, I’d like to say, “Thanks for messing with my head.”
Speaking of which, during the time I was wearing my “No Nukes!” t-shirt, President Reagan mused about eliminating nuclear weapons from the planet. In a Time magazine interview in 1984, he revealed, “I just happen to believe that we cannot go into another generation with the world living under the threat of those weapons and knowing that some madman can push the button some place.” He added, “My hope has been, and my dream, that we can get the Soviet Union to join us in starting verifiable reductions of the weapons. Once you start down that road, they’ve got to see how much better off we would both be if we got rid of them entirely.”
That interview occurred the same year our second child was born. We are now grandparents of an eight-year-old. She is the second generation since that interview to live with the ongoing threat of nuclear annihilation. This lack of leadership simply won’t do. And, before we can lead, we have to get over our sense of moral superiority – which is clearly the reason we think we should have nuclear weapons and have the right to tell others they cannot. The United States would never submit to such dictates from a foreign power (OK, there is that Trump/Russia “thing,” but let’s just let it play out for now).
Additionally, from the perspective of those who don’t live between the shores of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the borders with Canada and Mexico, the United States is, at best, hypocritical to demand that other nations not develop nuclear weapons programs. That is true even when we are dealing with a nation that threatens us almost daily, as does North Korea. After all, we are the only nation to ever use them in war – twice.
Put frankly, the United States lacks the moral authority to demand that any nation adhere to our wishes – about nuclear weapons or anything.
So now, we find ourselves in a helpless diplomatic situation with North Korea. We can’t bend them to our will. If we choose war to do so, we will witness human, cultural and environmental destruction that few of us alive today have ever seen our nation engaged in.
So, what to do? Resurrect the vision of Ronald Reagan – and much of humanity since the end of World War II: A nuclear weapons-free world. Does such a vision seem impossible? Yes – until you consider the alternative. All weapons of war are always used. As I’ve written before, waging peace is much more difficult than waging war. It requires more patience, creative thinking, and a humble spirit. Humility is not exactly our nation’s strongest attribute. It is even less so under Donald Trump. So, the Anti-Nuke movement must re-originate from our neighborhoods and our towns.
As a child, in fact, I was taught that peace was to begin with me – a lesson I learned at home, my Catholic parish and Catholic school. Indeed, David Haas, a singer-songwriter that has written hundreds of songs that are used in Mass of Catholic parishes in the United States and beyond, challenges nations to wage peace in his song, “Enter God’s House.” The lyrics begin, “All you nations, all who seek peace: / leave your arms and weapons behind. / Come and climb the mountain of God. / Enter God’s house!”
The United States must heed this call for two reasons. First, as the only nation to use atomic / nuclear weapons, our nation is obligated to lead the effort to eliminate them. Secondly, this nation is run by a political party that claims to be the party of God. Of course, that’s cowpatties, but they certainly have a chance to prove it.
All they – and many hawkish Democrats, too – have to remember is: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God” (Matthew 5:19).
On Twitter: @appchronicle
Obsession with Russia is manipulative, voyeuristic, and distracting from vital issues
By Michael M. Barrick
OUTSIDE THE BELTWAY, U.S.A. – Here, where it is not Red Square or either end of Pennsylvania Avenue, the spectacle playing out on our TV screens, computer devices and in the newspapers regarding alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. presidential election is simply nauseating.
For God’s sake, enough already! You’ve lost me.
I’ve quit reading, listening and watching – that includes you John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Stephen Colbert, et al. That means I’ve abandoned my primary source of news – late night comedians who are really journalists; and, my secondary sources – the mainstream media and alternative media, who are clowns posing as journalists.
It is a topsy-turvy world, indeed.
Am I surprised that Russia probably meddled in our election? No. However, I think we’ve got that covered. Between the special prosecutor and congressional committees, plenty of investigating is occurring. That’s good. What we don’t need, however, is speculation. And, 99 percent of what I’ve seen, heard or read is exactly that.
… election-meddling is not exactly new to geo-politics; the United States is quite expert at regime change – we’re just not as subtle.
On the part of the media, it’s manipulative, voyeuristic, and ultimately rooted in a sick drive for profits. But it’s also distracting us from what is important. Let me pause here and say, yes, a foreign government interfering in our election is concerning. So, let the investigators investigate. And, yes, I would expect any editor or producer to assign a reporter or two to the story. However, we have far too many issues that are simply being ignored by The Fourth Estate. Additionally, election-meddling is not exactly new to geo-politics; the United States is quite expert at regime change – we’re just not as subtle.
Hence, the media needs to abandon the feigned outrage and get to work on covering what most of us living Outside the Beltway know are the vital topics of the day.
More about those in a moment; but first, a quick demand of Congress and the president – do your jobs! America and the world have multiple challenges – not the least of which is a scarcity of leadership.
Now, about those vital topics; following is just a quick, partial run down the list:
- Health Care: Polling shows that the majority of Americans support universal, single-payer health care. In short, Medicare for all. Only one in six support the current GOP proposal. Why? Because those of us living Outside the Beltway understand that the Medicare for all approach is the most humane; it provides for our most vulnerable citizens.
- North Korea, et al.: Even our own military strategists say that a war with North Korea would almost certainly kill millions, and perhaps tens or hundreds of thousands just on the first day. The Korean War, which is still technically exactly that since we have only a truce with North Korea, was caused by inept diplomacy – Harry Truman indicated to the Russians that the U.S. would not wage war over control of the Korean peninsula. Today, we have a president who is the opposite. All he does is issue threats. Every president in between has kicked this matter down the road. That simply won’t do anymore. What I believe we expect Outside the Beltway is that a peaceful solution be found. Yes, waging peace is harder than waging war. But hey, we sent men to the moon. We’ve sent enough of our youngest adults to die on foreign sands and distant hills. We can figure this out.
- Campaign Finance: Because of Citizens United, we are experiencing an age of crony capitalism like that of the Robber Barons of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This is evident in many places, but currently most obvious in the health care debates. Insurance and pharmaceutical companies are among the biggest obstacles to meaningful – and simple – reform (we’ve been doing Medicare a good while now). Gerrymandering has also altered the political landscape in a manner not consistent with voting patterns, accomplished through the buying of legislatures by the millionaire class. As a result, our most fundamental right – the right to choose our elected representatives – has been degraded or denied.
- Infrastructure – From aging school buildings to hospitals not equipped to handle modern telemetry, to collapsing bridges and pot hole-filled roads, we have simply been negligent. We have not maintained our infrastructure. We all know it. We all see it. We have allowed private companies to own and manage our water systems, diverting money that should be reinvested in those systems to far-away shareholders that care only about profit and nothing about the quality of the water you and I drink. Certainly, the country that intends to send people to Mars by 2040 can fix roads and sewer pipes.
- Failed War on Drugs: Billions of dollars have been spent, and tens of thousands of people sent to prison, simply to restrict the use of a naturally growing plant – marijuana. Our treatment of it – legal here, illegal there – is more schizophrenic than any alleged side effect of it. Three years ago, when interviewing John Buckley, the Libertarian candidate for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, this is what he had to say about the War on Drugs: “What makes drugs a threat to society is the drug gangs pushing them because there is a hefty profit in pushing it. We have not stopped the war on drugs. We have not accomplished the goal. We have spent money. We’ve jailed people, yet we still see an increase in crime. We haven’t made a dent. We have set horrible legal precedents in rigorous law enforcement. When you add them all up, and say we haven’t made a dent in drug abuse, it cries out, ‘Is there a new approach?’ If you eliminate the profit, you eliminate the gangs and the terrorists profiting from it. If we will take a new approach, then it allows us to address it as a medical issue, not a criminal issue.” He was right then, and has been proven to be right repeatedly since that interview.
- Education: We’ve known for years that educators reaching retirement age hit the door the first minute they can; what is more disturbing is that our best and brightest young teachers are leaving also. Why? They have lost control of their classrooms to everything from bureaucratic interference to children not ready for school because of poor living conditions. Virtually our entire society makes its way through our public schools. If we do not address society’s problems, every day in the classroom becomes more difficult. And, there are systemic problems as well. This is an example where a political party – in this case, the Democrats – must challenge a sacred cow. Yes, public education is essential; that, however, does not mean we refuse to take a critical look at its failures and alternatives. Additionally, the cost of college (and textbooks) must be addressed. Having to go into debt for years to earn a degree is counter-intuitive. Once educated, one cannot contribute to society unless unencumbered with unnecessary debt.
- Ecology: Last, but certainly not least, is how we approach the management of the ecology – that is, our interaction with the natural world. Presently, human health and the environment are in great distress for a number of reasons. Mountaintop removal, fracking, clear-cutting and other practices that support the fossil fuel industry are harming people and the land, air and water which give us life. Climate change is real. Responsible reporters, for example, should not be asking politicians if they believe in climate change; rather, they should be asking what they know about it and how they intend to address it.
This is by no means an exhaustive list. I’m sure you can certainly add to it. My prescriptions to the vital topics of the day may be different than yours. In fact, they likely are. That doesn’t matter nearly as much as this: that we agree that politicians of all stripes and the media need to be taking a critical look at these issues and working together to solve them rather than obsessing over Russia. In time, conclusions by the Authorities Having Jurisdiction regarding Russia will be reached. That will be news. For now, all the talk inside the beltway and TV studios is simply commentary that rivals the Tower of Babel.
We expect action, not talk. Sure, there are political purists (or opportunists) who will refuse to work with others, but they are in the minority. We know that because in our families and communities, we have to work together.
At least, that’s how it is Outside the Beltway.
© Michael M. Barrick, 2017
We honor those who gave ‘the last full measure of devotion’ by working for peace
By Michael M. Barrick
It was May 1950, about five years since Morgantown, W.Va. native Lt. George M. Barrick Jr. had returned from World War II, recipient of two Bronze Stars and a Purple Heart for meritorious action and wounds received during the Battle of the Bulge. During those five years of peacetime, Lt. Barrick – a direct descendant of Morgantown, W.Va. (then Virginia) founder Colonel Zackquill Morgan – had graduated from West Virginia University with a Bachelor of Arts, received his commission as an officer in the U.S. Army, had fallen in love and started a family.
On May 12 1950, a short paragraph in the social pages of The Morgantown Post noted a visit by Lt. Barrick. It read, “Lieut. and Mrs. George Barrick and their infant son George Barrick III, arrived last night from Ft. Benning, Ga., to visit in the home of Mr. and Mrs. Max Mathers and Mrs. Margaret Barrick on Park street. Lieut. Barrick has been assigned to Japan for 30 months duty and will leave for San Francisco, May 29. Mrs. Margaret Barrick and Mathers Barrick (his brother) motored to Fort Mead, Md. to meet the visitors.”
Though it spoke of a new deployment, it did so without alarm. As it turned out, this brief account of a family gathering is also an account of the last time the family was together, for in less than two months, Lt. Barrick was dead, killed in action in Korea.
The social announcement hinted at no such danger. Nearly five years since Japan’s unconditional surrender to Allied forces in August, 1945, the United States military continued to serve as an occupying force. So, the assignment seemed routine. That changed, however, on June 25 when North Korean forces crossed the 38th parallel in overwhelming force, quickly capturing the South Korean capital and driving the surprised and disorganized army further and further south. Soon afterward, the United Nations condemned the action and authorized the use of force to repel the invasion. Based on this resolution, President Harry Truman ordered U.S. troops into the war. The closest – those overseeing the transition in Japan – were among the first to be airlifted into areas still under South Korean control, soon to be positioned in defensive positions among unfamiliar hills and valleys, with rifles and bazookas to hold off tanks.
So, in just over two months, a much different story was being told in the local newspaper. The Morgantown Post of July 26, 1950 carried this headline: “Local Officer Reported Missing in Korea Action.” Beside his photo, the newspaper reported, “This area’s first casualty of the Korean War was reported here today with the receipt of word that 2nd Lieut. George M. Barrick Jr., 26, has been missing in action since July 12.” The article continued, “Lieut. Barrick, son of Mrs. Margaret Barrick, was serving with the 21st Infantry Regiment of the 24th Division, the first American unit to go into action against the North Koreans.”
It wasn’t until November, 1950 that his family learned for certain that he had been killed. It was even longer before he returned home. Indeed, it was more than a year since his last visit in May. Again, the local paper tells the story. In the June 20, 1951 edition of The Dominion-News, the headline read, “Body of Hero Brought Home: Barrick Rites Set for Saturday.” Again accompanied with a photo of Lt. Barrick in his uniform, the first full paragraph read simply, “The last full measure of devotion.”
The account continued, “Home yesterday from the faraway battlefield in Korea on which he died last July fighting under the country’s colors accompanied by a military escort, came the body of Lieutenant George Milton Barrick Jr., son of Mrs. Margaret Mathers Barrick and grandson of Mr. and Mrs. Max Mathers of this city.”
After detailing funeral arrangements, the story continues, “Lieutenant Barrick was one of the most popular young men to reside in this city. He was a direct descendent of Colonels Zackquill Morgan and John Evans, Revolutionary War heroes and pioneer settlers of what later became Morgantown and Monongalia County.” The account revealed, “He was killed while commanding an ammunition and pioneer weapons platoon of the Headquarters Company, Third Battalion, 21st Infantry Regiment, 24th Division.”
He was laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery on June 25, 1951, one year to the day that the Korean War began. Those present at his funeral Mass prayed, “O Jesus our Savior….Grant peace and eternal rest to the souls of all who were engaged in this whirlwind of war and were swept unto death.” Now, 67 years since these events unfolded, with peace still quite tenuous on the Korean Peninsula and around the world, there is no greater time to pray and work for peace – so that accounts of pleasant family gatherings such as those from May 1950 are not nullified by battlefield dispatches just two months later. Such prayers and efforts make the sacrifice of Lt. Barrick – and every person who has given “the last full measure of devotion” – worthy of honor.
© Michael M. Barrick, 2016-17. The author is the nephew of Lt. Barrick.
On Twitter: @appchronicle