Through horrendous experiences, history has conclusively proved that Democracy is for the common men (a generic term indicating both men and women). No other political system can claim that status.

Democracy is a political defensive mechanism to protect the common men and their rights. Strong men are by nature aggressive and therefore hate democracy. There are strong men in any society. If society is unable to check them, they will let go of their follies. It is clear by now that there is no check and balance in any regime other than Democracy, which IS the best political achievement ever by and for the common men, arrived at by the hard work, sweat, tear, blood, and deep-rooted goodness of men. As Professor Francis Fukuyama says in “The End of History and the Last Man”, liberal democracy is the most viable political system in which men are satisfied with society as no fundamental changes will happen.

Did any common man ever feel free and independent in an autocratic or dictatorial regime? No. He felt that he had no choice but to do as he was told by stronger men and step on weaker men to survive. Did he ever feel the outrage and dare to stand up to point a finger at a strong man and say, “Have you no sense of decency, sir… have you left no sense of decency?” in response to a strong man’s tyranny?

Henry VIII just chopped off the heads of his wives simply because he wanted to chop off their heads. Napoleon woke up one day and decided to conquer Russia, riding his horse and taking thousands of his Frenchmen, who WALKED, traveling thousands of miles to a hellish corner of the earth, and for what? For nothing if not death and destruction to satisfy his crazy urge to conquer. He could do it because in the France they lived in, the common men did not know anything about Democracy (although, many Frenchmen such as Jean Jacques Rousseau and Montesquieu indeed wrote essays on democratic ideas). They followed their strongmen like lemmings follow their leader over a cliff in a Disney movie. Not long ago, a German strongman, whom his fellow countrymen blindly worshipped as their prophet and savior, and willingly and ferociously did his biddings, led them on an insane murderous crusade to dominate other people causing the death of between 6,6 to 8.8 millions of their fellow countrymen – and over 38 millions of others around the world. It is safe to say all of them but a few were common men.

In the U.S.A., Democracy supported, solidified, and strengthened by the Constitution and an elaborate system of law, has turned the country into the most humane society, the most prosperous economy, and the strongest country on earth in terms of fighting ability. It is a place where the common men’s rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are recognized as unalienable.

The U.S. has become what it is today because Democracy allows the common men to effectively fight the strong men’s inclination to try to get their way and, in the process, oppress, exploit, and even enslave ordinary people.

To be clear, there have been objections to Democracy. Thomas Hobbes did not like Democracy. Edmund Burke was skeptical of Democracy or at least “radical” Democracy. They preferred small and limited government. They believed that an affluent middle class would present a danger to political and social stability and therefore should be limited in their ability to acquire wealth or possess political rights. American Republicans have bought into their theories and made them their policy for quite some time without any evidence showing that non-democratic regimes serve the common men’s security and interest.

The late President Ronald Reagan imposed tax on the meager social security benefits mostly received by the middle- and low-income classes and cut the tax rate of the ultra-rich from 70% to 28%. The Bush tax cuts benefited the top 1% most, which had received a tax cut of more than $570,000 between 2004 and 2012 according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The tax cuts increased their after-tax income by more than 5% each year. The Center pointed out that the cuts did not improve economic growth or pay for themselves but instead ballooned deficits and debt and contributed to a rise in income inequality.

The Reagan and Bush administrations, or at least the presidents, acted in accordance with their sincere belief that their policies protected the country and Democracy by maintaining political stability. Nevertheless, the policies underline the fact that they were in favor of strong men, nowadays mostly billionaires, who are allowed to grow to their full potential – even sometimes do crazy things without consequences – but the common men’s ability to accumulate enough wealth (getting their full social security benefits, for example), to do some small things close to their heart such as send their children to colleges and still have some money left for a good vacation in the Caribbean islands, was limited.

The new crop of MAGA Republicans want to go further. They don’t just want to limit Democracy. They want to get rid of it altogether. And they have done it gradually, methodically, and discreetly at first. Now they do it publicly.

Upon assuming his presidency, former President Donald Trump privately demanded FBI Director James Comey pledge his loyalty to him. Then he unceremoniously sacked Comey when he refused. Only a few days later, the public watched an incredible display of fawning cabinet members, one by one from Vice President Mike Pence (“The greatest privilege of my life is to serve as vice president to a president who is keeping his word to the American people”, he said) on down, lavishly praising him then pledging allegiance to him.

A first sign of MAGA’s plan to erode Democracy from within.

The next four years saw them try to bend the Department of Justice into a concierge for the president, attempting to involve the military to quelch demonstrators. They disregarded the foundational principle of Democracy by denying the result of the 2020 presidential election. They resorted to violence to subvert the election process by attacking the Capitol.

But why do the Republicans (or any American), want to support such a plan considering that most of them are common men? Without Democracy, who or what they would become?

In 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump declared “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I would not lose any voters, OK?” That was a low IQ boasting that turned out to be wrong in 2020 when without having shot anybody, he still lost the majority of the voters after four years of his meandering administration.

But he may be right because he still got more than 74 million votes after he had done a lot to erode Democracy during his four years in the White House. It was an amazing statement in hindsight.

How did he know about that absolute loyalty in a Democracy? He was not just right about MAGA’s loyalty in 2016 but has continued to be right since then.

He has denied his election loss since 2020 and MAGA supports him.

He exhorted extremist groups, the Proud Boys and the Oak Keepers, to go to the Capitol to protest President Biden’s win. They broke into the building and chanted “Hang Mike Pence”. They vandalized the building, chased the people’s representatives running like ducks, robbed them of all their dignity, and got a security officer killed. Mr. Trump called them “patriots” and, according to Politico, he expressed support for hanging his VP as testimony before the House’s January 6 Select Committee indicates. MAGA supports him.

He was found guilty on 34 felony counts by a jury of his peers chosen not just by the prosecution but also with vigorous participation and selection by his legal team, a revered constitutional institution of the democratic American legal system. MAGA denounces the verdict as rigged and that he is persecuted. His supporters, including lawmakers in both chambers and lawyers, loudly and shamelessly smear judges and juries.

The big questions are: who are MAGA Republicans and what are they seeking?

Are they the followers of the Seasteading Movement wanting to live in autonomous, mobile communities on seaborne platforms? Are they soon going to move to the Red Planet and form a Kingdom there, away from this earth that has disappointed them profoundly because they are unable to dictate to the other earthlings? Do they disdain the rest of the world and get annoyed because the common men have too humble aspirations? Or because the common men are sympathetic and supportive of others who are also weak and disadvantaged?

Could the former president’s behavior, characteristic of an autocrat, be the reason why MAGA Republicans stick to him because they disdain Democracy? In a talk with an audience of Christians in West Palm Beach, whether carelessly or in a moment of intimate conversation, he confided to them, “You gotta get out and vote. In four years, you don’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you are not going to have to vote.”

Did he perhaps speak cryptically and act like a pied piper to lead his followers toward a world that could be totally separate and different from the world we live in?

The former president did not seem confused or inarticulate. He meant it. There will not be any more voting after 2024 if Mr. Trump wins in November.

In any society, including a democratic society, citizens have grievances and complaints about the current state of national affairs. But we must not let ourselves be fooled by the dictatorship salesmen’s charismatic marketing skills with the illusion that billionaires are pursuing the same goals as ours, and a dictatorship would solve our grievances and be good for the common men.

Should we, out of blind anger, let MAGA destroy Democracy? The common men’s investment in Democracy is historic and huge. We fought hard and tenaciously and made horrendous sacrifices from the Magna Carta to the American Revolution, Civil War, the French 1789 Revolution, WWI, WWII, and then the Cold War to protect, build, and preserve Democracy. From every corner of the earth, people strain their necks, perk their ears to watch America, and get inspiration and wisdom to establish their own democratic society from Taiwan to South Africa. We have done extraordinarily well for ourselves and for the world. We should not and must not abandon it or expect something better just because MAGA says so.

We listen to the politicians exhort this and that, we must discern what they say and match it with what they will do to our wellbeing. All political rallies and conventions are sale events, and the candidates and speakers charismatic as they are, are just salesmen. We don’t buy their charisma. We buy the product, which is their plan. And we must choose before we buy (or vote).

To understand MAGA’s plan for the country if the Republicans win in November 2024, just read Project 2025. It is officially called “The 2025 Presidential Transition Project”. With more than 900 pages, it is a gigantic political guide that tries not to leave anything to chance. It is an Autocrat’s Handbook, which conveys the ideology and intention of the authors, The Heritage Foundation, and its collaborators.

The following is a short list of the changes, among many other changes that Project 2025 recommends to the next Trump Administration if he wins in 2024:

1. Putting the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Commerce, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission under the direct control of the president.
2. Dismantling the Departments of Homeland Security and Education. Doing away with or restricting public education.
3. Reclassifying tens of thousands of federal civil service workers as political appointees in order to replace them with loyalists more willing to enable Trump’s policies.
4. Sharply reducing environmental and climate change to favor fossil fuel production. Fund for climate research would be cut.
5. Cutting funding for Medicare and Medicaid.
6. Explicitly rejecting abortion as health care.
7. Eliminating coverage of emergency contraception under the Affordable Care Act and prosecuting those who send and receive contraceptives and abortion pills nationwide.
8. Removing legal protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
9. Terminating DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) programs and Affirmative Action by having the DOJ prosecute “anti-white racism”.
10. Deploying the military for domestic law enforcement.

The former president has denied that he is connected to Project 2025. The director of Project 2025, Paul Dans who used to work for Mr. Trump has just resigned. You may think that these are proposals by a conservative think tank, not by Trump and his team.

But keep in mind that in November 2016, the Heritage Foundation published the “Mandate for Leadership VII” and the first Trump administration adopted 64% of its recommendations. And Paul Dans was responsible for staffing the 2016-2020 Trump Administration with about 4000 presidential appointees and rooting out public servants deemed insufficiently loyal to Mr. Trump. Mr. Dans and people who worked for Mr. Trump during his previous administration and his close allies are the authors of Project 2025.

If implemented, these proposals, and more from Project 2025, would guarantee a Plutocracy, Oligarchy, Aristocracy, or any other form of dictatorship, to replace Democracy. Regardless of our political affiliation, we should not and cannot let that happen.

This American presidential election in November 2024 is pivotal because the country is at a fork and Democracy is at stake. With MAGA on the rise, Democracy is facing serious challenges. We may lose it. And once we lose it, it may be gone forever.

We all, Democrats and Republicans, must save and protect Democracy by voting against MAGA. Then, we can sit down, sort out our differences and grievances, and find the best solutions, if not this time, we try another time, if not this day, another day. But if our society were no longer democratic, we the common men would lose our freedom to think for ourselves. We will lose our power to provide security, safety, prosperity, and happiness for our families and ourselves. We will lose our society in which our dignity is preserved and respected.

JOHN P. LE PHONG

For months, the former president, Donald Trump, repeatedly exhibited his age issue with so many gibberish and incoherent speeches at rallies. The Democrats were lured into thinking that his cognitive ability was deteriorating and would be no match for the president’s debating skill and experience.

It is hard to think that the president’s people did not see his cognitive problem before the debate. But they were probably confident that he would look old and feeble at the debate but a “normal” 81 years old and feeble statesman. They forgot the former president was once a show host and had appeared on TV probably more than any politician in history. He had learned the skill of pretending. In fact, he was a great pretender. He even prepared for the contingency by leaking to the press that he had decided on a running mate, no doubt to be announced at the debate if things would not go smoothly for him.

Republicans set a trap for the self-confident Dems.

At the debate, a different Donald Trump appeared, focused, energetic, and controlled, to the surprise of the Dems. But it was too late for them. When the viewers of the debate saw the president at the podium, they would ask the obvious question why did his handlers allow him to appear? Could there be traitors or saboteurs lurking inside the Democratic campaign? An excuse for the president to back out of the debate such as a flu or sore throat would be bad but not as damaging as his performance at the debate. What is going on?

Well, the MAGA Republicans have done a fine job of setting their goal, devising a plan and implementing it perfectly even when they run into unexpected problems.

The Republicans are disciplined and well organized. They know their mathematics. And with the help of genius minds in mathematics, science, technology, and engineering such as Elon Musk, Peter Thiel who come out passionately and publicly to help the Republican Party, hands on.

A guy who has just arrived in America from South Africa, takes a look at the cars made by legacy companies for a century and SEES that he can make better cars and KNOWS what to do to build them and in no time, creates a company worth more than all the legacy car companies combined. That guy is now LOOKING at the Republican Party and if the Democrats still think that the ideas he gives to the Republicans as to how to re-organize and win political races are that of a political novice, then they must stop and think again. Everything of importance now is computerized, using algorithms, or AI, political battles being no exception.

The Republicans know how to fight and has fought effectively, from the Bush v. Gore victory to McConnel’s successful blocking of the appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court to the 2020 presidential victory even though they lost the popular votes, hugely.

The Democrats on the other hand seem to be confused and rudderless. They are not sufficiently politically nimble. The Republicans accepted the debates because they were not sure they could persuade the undecided to vote for them. But they had a contingency plan, the vice president nominee announcement, that would soften any blow the former president would have received during the debate. The Democrats suggested the debates. So, they seemed to think they were obligated to go forward, or a cancellation or delay would show weakness. They had known the pitfall of a Biden appearance at the debate (to suggest otherwise, that they did not know, is to suggest something more sinister than what is known) but seemed paralyzed, unable to make a proper decision.

After the Democrats’ debate debacle, the former president, Donald Trump, issued a statement denying that he was not connected to the Project 2025. Then, the Republican Party announced that it has dropped the federal abortion limits from its platform, strategic announcements to woo moderate voters. They have plans, precision plans.

The Democrats has visions where the country should go, decades from now. But tactically, they are underhanded. They need to focus on November 5, only a few more months away, as the Republicans have been. What the Democrats need now is for a few computer or AI geniuses to take a leave of absence from making money to engage themselves full time in helping the Democrats. They can’t just send money to them, then turn around and proudly talk about climate change as if American election politics is beneath them to take a public stance.

Then, the voters will get back to watching debates and political discourse because they will be more factual, reasonable, rational, and more sophisticated worth watching with their children. The voters, even hardcore rightists, want to be enlightened.

(You can read this article on X, “cothuxanh”, or on my Facebook).

John P. Le Phong (7/10/24).

Jake Tapper and Dana Bash of CNN will moderate the presidential debate today, Thursday 6/27/24 at 6PM Pacific time.

No less a figure than the MAGA Extraordinaire, Marjorie Taylor Greene who wrote on X, “Dana Bash’s husband is one of the 51 spies who in 2020 lied by signing his name to the intel community letter claiming Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation,” and “Jake Tapper hates Trump so much and has called him Hitler.”

So, why the Republicans agreed to the debate and the choice of Tapper and Bash of CNN, a bastion of “woke” according to MAGA, as the moderators?

A brand-new star of MAGA politics opined on Fox News that “Biden’s debate-prep artifice is as fake as his presidency: projecting an artificial projection of a leader who is nothing more than a puppet for the managerial class that controls him”. So true if you replace “Biden” with “Trump”.

The same also said that “Donald Trump has already won the debate” by just showing up.

Setting aside this wisdom for now, there could be a chance, despite being aided by AI, that the former president would repeat his erratic meandering speech as he did in recent rallies. And if that happened during the debate, the independent or undecided voters would realize that the former president’s antics, name calling, etc. were no longer amusing or entertaining but unserious, and would vote for the Democratic ticket.

So, why do the Republicans take the risk?

One of the possible answers is that they WANT him to lose.

JOHN P. LE PHONG, ESQ.

A lot of talk in the media and in the Biden campaign circle that the former president is incoherent in delivering his speeches. It sounds bizarre but it may be, albeit unusual, a possibly effective campaign strategy.

According to The Nation, the 45th president delivered a speech in a 105-degree outdoor in Las Vegas meandering from sharks to boats to batteries that his audience did not know what he was talking about. His detractors conclude that he was incoherent and thus incompetent to govern. They hope the voters can see that and not vote for him coming November 2024.

A case can be made that it has been the Republican strategy all along.

The former president has always conducted himself in a haughty manner. Whether it is his nature or acting, he has treated everybody with disdain as if he were a Kaiser or a Windsor (unlikely, as it would be unimaginable for Mr. Trump to walk with his hands behind his back). That is the image the MAGA Republicans want the public to see: a King moving along in his carriage, smiling and waving to the onlookers without uttering a word let alone meaningful sentences. That was enough to command respect and loyalty of his subjects.

MAGA wants Mr. Trump to do the same in a modern-day American version of royalty, appearing in public often so that his people can SEE him. They are not worried about his “incoherence” but seem to encourage him to talk about anything, even incoherent things. After all, true Kings and Emperors hardly made sense. Even the formidable King of France, Louis XIV, could be incoherent who famously said “L’etat c’est moi (the nation that’s me)”. That of course is nonsensical.

The strategy requires that he can say things like “Somebody didn’t pick up hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of cocaine (in the White House). I wonder who that could’ve been. I don’t know. Actually, I think it was Joe.”

Perfect. Just don’t try to make sense.

The former president has persistently denied against all evidence that he lost the 2020 election. The Republicans have openly and steadfastly sided with him.

Then, he was convicted in a court of law by a jury of his peers. He has defiantly accused the judge presiding over the trial of being biased against him, the jury rigged, and the trial a disgrace. With no evidence to support his accusations, the Republicans have fiercely defended him and emotionally and approvingly repeated his unfounded accusation.

We all were flummoxed, asking the question in bewilderment what was going on with the Republican Party?

After four years of witnessing Mr. Trump performing as president of the United States, it became obvious that the presidency was not in his natural portfolio. A president of one country, let alone the most powerful country in the world, does not fawn, even in private, over a leader of another country. Just doing so would have disqualified him for the job. But seventy-six million assumably Republicans voted for him in the 2020 presidential election.

What did that signify? -Mr. Trump was not the leader. He was not the commander in chief. But like the soldier in Iwo Jima, he was holding the MAGA flag rushing up the hill of American politics and planted the flag there for the glory of MAGA. He has done it well and deserves to be protected.

But why do they publicly and vehemently chorus his obviously unfounded and poisonous complaints? -The Republican Party has transformed.

It was a party, which elected a leader who thundered “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” and is now demanding a wall to be built on the border with a friendly neighboring country.

It was a party, which fiercely fought dictatorship of any form, is now courting Russia and North Korea, fawning over its leaders and wannabe dictators such as Viktor Orban of Bulgaria. It has taken a confused attitude on the Russia-Ukraine war even though politically and morally there is nothing confusing about it.

It was the Party, which voted to allow the Vietnamese to emigrate to the U.S. after the Viet Nam war despite strong voice opposing such legislation. Now it wants to ban immigrants.

It was the Party, which steadfastly advocated a strong NATO with deep commitment by the U.S. It is now hinting at withdrawing from NATO.

The transformation is now complete. By supporting his lies about rigged election that was allegedly engineered by the deep state, the Party is openly rejecting a fundamental principle of Democracy by refusing to accept the result of free election. By vocally and irrationally supporting Mr. Trump’s emotional denouncing of the jury verdict of his guilt, not just one, not just two, but 34 counts, the Party is openly rejecting our legal system, which is the nervous system of the American democratic society.

There is no longer a MAGA faction in the Republican Party. MAGA has infected the Party and is now in complete control of and is one with the Party. Mainstream Republicans from Mitch McConnell to Nikki Haley, have receded or surrendered to MAGA.

In 2020, MAGA was in a sense caught off guard. The chaos and violence were limited to the Capitol and a few raucous but sporadic denouncements in Congress. They have had four years to regroup and organize. If the election result has not been accepted to this day by MAGA, and only a few “patriots” marched up the Capitol steps, what would be the scale of the revolt after the 2024 election and Joe Biden won? MAGA has signaled what would happen: It would not respect the democratic institutions and it would not respect the legal system.

So, what is its intention? If it wins in 2024, with a stroke of the pen, it will revolutionize the political system. If it loses, it will create chaos to seize power. Clearly, Democracy and the current legal system don’t serve its purposes.

The question every Republican must ask is, what are the Republican Party’s purposes?

    Hamas has received massive international aid for years, billions of dollars. The majority of the money did not go into bettering Gaza or its citizens but into the building of almost a hundred tunnels along the border of Israel, stockpiling weapons, and filling up the coffers of its leaders. Their intention was clear: all their effort and money had gone into carrying out their promise to destroy Israel.

    Of course, the Israelis knew about this, for years.

    But they did not take any preemptive action, which any security expert must admit to be necessary to secure Israel against such an out-in-the-open threat to its national security. They were patient and calm about the situation, minding the weird mindset of the world that Israel was always in the wrong, too aggressive and too militant.

    Until October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched their surprise attack unprovoked, savagely killed, raped, and took Israelites hostage.

    From Israel’s point of view, and the view of ANY national security strategist, Hamas must be attacked. Even that was not enough, Hamas must be eradicated and the campaign to clean up Gaza must continue until that strategic goal is completed.

    Then, what will the world do in the aftermath? Clamoring for Israel to pay for reconstruction. And what will happen after reconstruction? If history tells us anything, that is that Hamas II led by leaders dead set on revenge and the termination of Israel will emerge, and the cycle of crossing the border to kill, rape, and kidnap will start again.

    You can clean up Gaza but you can’t uproot Hamas. Sooner or later, another Hamas-inspired, ruthless, and violent group of terrorists will form in Gaza after Israel “pacifies” and returns it to the Palestinians.

    So the solution is to take and separate Gaza from Hamas, annex and make it a province of Israel. In exchange, Israel will agree to a two-state political framework and cooperate with the Palestinians to make a Palestinian State a viable reality, with some concessions on the issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

    Of course, there will be loud swearing and cursing. The alternative is the Palestinians will be without a country for a long time, and the Israelites will not just be open to savage attacks by the likes of Hamas. They will be unable to develop their full and proven incredible potential to work for the benefit of mankind.  

History is full of cases when men used their physical power to relegate women to second-rate human beings, punished them to keep their control over them, and killed them whenever they felt like it, such as when they had a lover BEFORE marrying them or when they could not bear a child.

So, in the new country founded on the principles of equality, freedom, and democracy, enlightened American women struggled and valiantly fought the American chauvinism to assert their rights, rightly so, to be equal to men’s. In 1923, the Equal Rights Amendment was drafted. It needed the ratification of 38 states to become an amendment to the Constitution. That requirement was not met by the deadline. What happened?

The proposed Amendment was vehemently opposed by, of all people, WOMEN led by a very well catholic-educated, eloquent, obedient, and charming lady named Phyllis Schlafly and her 80,000 followers, who convinced women that equal rights would not serve their interests. Their mission in life, in their opinion, was to serve men, bear children, and do housework. Equal rights would subject them to the military draft and the burden of making money. Many women bought their argument.

It was quite believable that it was a political legerdemain performed by the Republican men who had pulled the trick beautifully. Eh, we have nothing to do with it. That’s what they want. Every Republican, female and male, is happy. Men’s rights are, and power is, intact. They continue to dominate their households which unavoidably leads to women being abused because there is no counterforce as women have no equal rights; they don’t want them. Right?

Women have been put back to their mission position.

In the last few decades, many maverick women have tried to prove otherwise that men’s strength is relative. Technology and science have changed the dynamics that have given men advantages. Women are competent in doing whatever men can do. They can till the fields, fly a fighter jet to defend the country, and run mega-conglomerates. They can even wrestle convincingly and more seductively.

But politics is the last bastion for Republican men to cede to those darn democrat women pretending to run Congress or even for president. Something needed to be done. So, Republican men hatched a scheme to prove to the nation that women are not for politics but in the house, doing what they have been doing best since religions were conceived: bearing children, cooking dinner, and pleasing their male partners.

The scheme has been implemented and successful beyond the men’s dream: they have elected so many female Republican politicians to political powerful positions in state houses and in Congress, waiting for them to prove themselves, and as an extension other women, to be unfit to hold political posts. They have behaved as if they find themselves in a Louis Vuitton shop with thousands of handbags and don’t know what to choose, or act blindly.

A Republican governor shot her dog. When she was criticized, she defiantly told the public she had shot her horses too. In a congressional committee’s session solemnly discussing if the U.S. Attorney General should be held in contempt, one Republican congresswoman loudly smeared a colleague for wearing “false” eyelashes, probably thinking that the chambers of Congress were no different than a cosmetic parlor at an L-shaped shopping mall. Another one took every opportunity to make known her desire to be picked by the former president to be his running mate, publicly shopping herself for the job.

A Republican former governor harshly criticized former president Donald Trump, calling him UNFIT to be president. She even questioned if he was mentally fit. Now she says she will vote for him – she will vote for a person she believes to be unfit to be president, or probably worse, mentally unfit. Such about-face is stunning, a naked self-interest chasing disregarding principles that for some time I thought she alone among the Republican presidential candidates possessed.

The men have proved their point: their counterparts are confused, lost, puzzled, and cases in point bearing out the chauvinistic conviction that Republican men and women are not equal, and where the women should belong.

The Republican men would smirk and quietly spread the words: you see that and still think women are equal to us?

The Liz Cheney Republicans, male or female, seem to be a very rare breed nowadays. But the Party does need them, desperately.