Tag Archives: Freedom

We Are Being Tested

Leave a reply

Welcome to this week’s Bill Harvey Blog.
July 17, 2026

We are being tested the way Job was tested.

It was a setup. Starting way back in the 1960s. As early as the 1960s, as documented by Yoni Applebaum in this month’s issue of The Atlantic, the way that American history was taught in schools bifurcated into two warring narratives. One emphasized the American ideals of what we have always aspired to be, and have generally been, to our own people and in our dealings around the world. The other narrative told it like it was, warts and all, not pulling punches about our imperfections, even as we were getting better year after year.

By 2001, when George W. Bush and Congress created No Child Left Behind, they dodged the bullet on setting a single standard for the teaching of history. The unintended net effect was to virtually mute the teaching of American idealism in schools for the past quarter of a Century. Although the trend toward subordinating American history as a school subject started back in the 1960s.

Can we see any effects that might be traceable to this change in the way schools have taught about what America means and is?

An AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about two-thirds (67%) of U.S. adults say a democratically elected government is highly important to the nation’s identity. Conversely, this means roughly 33% of Americans do not see it as extremely or very important—a significant jump from 2021, when 80% viewed it as highly vital.*

The Generational Divide: Apathy or detachment is heavily concentrated among younger generations. Only 50% of Americans under 30 believe democracy is a key element of the U.S.’s identity, compared to 81% of those ages 60 and older.

Rather than outright hostility toward democracy, experts note that this detachment often stems from a growing belief among everyday citizens—especially younger generations—that the political system is fundamentally broken, corrupt, or simply failing to address their day-to-day problems.

If they had been taught the way the Old Guard had been taught, some of our current problems might never have been possible.

I’m not preaching in favor of whitewashing, but in favor of telling not only all the good and bad details, but also the philosophical drivers for why there is a USA designed the way it is. The ideals, the values, the logic, and reasoning based on deep studies of pre-American history and the types of governing systems there had been and how they fared. The Founders didn’t just make it up. They never claimed that they had received the Light from Above. They had assimilated Enlightenment philosophies and had studied history going as far back as it goes. They debated for 17 years from 1774 to 1791. 17 years to get it right.

And get it right they did. No republic has ever lasted as long as we have.

But loopholes existed. And things that The Founders had warned us against, like the two-party system happened despite their warnings. And the things that Washington said would happen if we went to a two-party system, have now happened big time. The people who felt that their Party was shrinking away found a leader who found those loopholes and has leveraged them. At a time when the schools had pressed the pause button for too long on reminding us of our ideals.

Even when idealism was being taught in schools, we have always, as citizens, not been 100% engaged. Other interests occupied our attention, for most of us, and only a fraction of us (usually around 40%) voted in elections. Socrates, who was all for having a republic, felt that it was a citizen’s duty to serve that republic, might have been shocked to see how lackadaisical the majority of Americans have always been about chipping in some time to serve in the role of engaged citizens.

In the 2024 US presidential election, approximately 85.9 million eligible voters did not cast a ballot. While 2024 tied the highest voter turnout rate in over a century (tied with 1960), the 85.9 million people who sat it out actually outnumbered the total votes cast for either major candidate.

This goes back to the feeling that none of us can do anything to change the inept, corrupt, and distracted from the needs of The People system as it now is. People who don’t vote feel that if they did vote, it would make no difference. As Simon & Garfunkel wrote and sang, “Going to the candidates’ debate, Laugh about it, shout about it, When you’ve got to choose, Every way you look at it, you lose.”

So, we’ve been set up to be tested, prepared by a quarter century of not teaching our own brand of American pragmatic idealism in schools, supported by the most successful governance system in world history and spoiled by it so as to take its benefits and our rights for granted without needing to lift a finger or even vote. And now, if we fail to stand up and be counted, and to vote against the removal of our rights to freedom of speech and assembly, cynicism and low meanness and corruption more blatant than ever before by an order of magnitude, the test will result in a longer period of learning to pass it.

That’s the way that the Universe works. It teaches us things. It first tries teaching it to us in ways that are fun. If we don’t get it, it teaches us with a few hard knocks. If we still don’t get it, the knocks get harder and harder the longer we cling to obstinacy and refusal to open our minds and eyes and see what the Universe is trying to tell us.

As the Father of Our Nation warned us, we might be obstinate because of the two-party system and what it has done to make us feel that the political party we cling to is vital to our personal identity. It is not. Our personal identity is unique in the Universe; it has nothing to do with which teams we root for.

Pass the test. Help us all pass the test. Plan to vote no matter what. Show what you’re made of.

And then when we have retaken our country and are again recognized as the seat of all governing power, “We, The People,” we have some loopholes to fix. In a moment of forgiveness, sometime in the future, we will thank the folks who called those loopholes to our attention so we could fix them before some more talented, more professional, more intelligent baddies come along and find them.

*However, according to a PBS News/NPR/Marist poll released in July 2026, the overwhelming majority of Americans are deeply concerned:

  • 82% of Americans believe that the future of American democracy faces a serious threat.
  • This worry spans across the political spectrum: 74% of Republicans, 83% of independents, and 91% of Democrats share this view.

In that same poll, it was found that 84% of us feel that we know too little about history.

My best wishes to all,
Bill

Starting Over

Leave a reply

Welcome to this week’s Bill Harvey Blog
Created June 26, 2026

It’s a gloriously beautiful day in the future. The dark days of endless hate and hopelessness have finally ended. The United States has voted in a competent, pragmatic President who is inspired by the spirit of America and its dream for the world. The American dream of the preciousness of each human life and the dignity of every individual.

There is a lot of rebuilding and repair to do. Augean stables abound.

Rather than being overwhelmed by the scope of the task, Americans who begin this resurrection will feel grateful to be the lucky generations whose timing has granted them this historic honor. “We are the new Washingtons, Franklins, Jeffersons, Hamiltons, Lincolns,” they dare to realize with awe. “Completing their work.”

Starting over. A feeling of enormous creative license, freedom to paint on a grand scale canvas. And yet an imperative to start from and hew to originalism, the original Constitution, its exact words and meanings.

Even though that Constitution did not protect us from falling away from The American Dream into an American Nightmare.

That is where the creativity comes in. How do we Amend the Constitution so that it can never happen again?

Finally, a social media conversation worth having. A collaboration, a wikimedia, crowdsourcing at the highest level. With guard rails and guidelines contributed by experts in Constitutional Law.

Something better to do with the amazing media we have created.

A sense of common purpose.

Starting over is a lovely feeling.

What sorts of things will be up for discussion? What are some of the different ways things can turn out?

In one scenario, there may be a ban on the two-party system.

The idea of political parties is never mentioned in the Declaration of Independence nor in the Constitution.

In fact, many of the Founding Fathers were deeply suspicious of them. They referred to political parties as “factions” and viewed them as a threat to national unity.

For instance, George Washington famously used his 1796 Farewell Address to warn Americans against the dangers of political parties, arguing that they would lead to “alternate domination” and distract the government from its duties. Similarly, James Madison wrote extensively in Federalist No. 10 about how to control the negative effects of factions.

George Washington

Thomas Jefferson

The landmark political science book Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters by Green, Palmquist, and Schickler argues against the common political science theory that political party affiliation is a rational, calculated choice based on policy. Instead, it’s a deep-seated social identity, much like religious or ethnic alignments. People adopt a partisan identity early in adulthood. This identity acts as a perceptual lens that filters all future political information. Major events like recessions or scandals rarely shatter a voter’s core party identity.

A social identity does not have the same psychological status as motivational drives; it is more like a mask that is worn, not the inner urgings which cause all of our behavior. We stick to our early self-classification as Democrats or Republicans because otherwise we feel a loss of identity and as if we no longer live within the safety and support of a large group. All of this goes on below the level of our conscious minds. This is why we can be rabble-roused and manipulated to hate each other. If our conscious minds were in control, we would not let that happen.

When the reconstruction comes, there may no longer be political parties. The first new President may be an Independent. This was never thought possible, but today we see great erosion in the images of both parties. Americans want a real change and this might not be possible with the current two parties.

How do we stop money from controlling politics?

This is really a media question.

If there were a foolproof mechanism for identifying candidates willing to serve and who have proven by their actions to be the kinds of people that could possibly serve us well, the media exposure of those candidates could be provided for free, mandated by law. True, this would reduce advertising revenues by about 3%, but perhaps that would be worth the cost.

One way or another, in the reconstruction, we have to stop the buying of elections by the amount of money raised for advertising.

Neither gerrymandering nor filibuster appears in the Constitution. The Electoral College causes gerrymandering, so it is time to switch to popular vote. The two-party system causes filibuster, so in the Second Life of America, we can sweep those out together.

The FCC may have been a bit prissy in regulating American media before there was digital, but on balance, we were better off then than now in terms of what we allow in media.

With AI, it is well within technical capabilities to automatically fact-check everything and to filter out lies and false statements made innocently – or to allow them with the fact check alongside – something for all of us to decide together. Then we get the best of Free Speech without the current Orwellian, Skinnerian conditioning of our whole population’s acceptance of blatant lying as the new way of being we are all supposed to adopt because somehow it is manly?

We who are suffering through the new Dark Ages are entitled to let our hearts and minds have respite by living in the future when we emerge again in the Light.

Starting Over.

Love to all,
Bill

 

Misrepresentation of God May Be the Greatest Sin

Leave a reply

Welcome to this week’s Bill Harvey Blog
Created May 29, 2026

My interpretation of heaven and hell is more of a gradient than a black-and-white situation.

I’m pretty sure that none of my readers fit in the category of needing to read this column. What I’m hoping for is that you all realize what I’m trying to do and agree with the notion that if everyone who sees this column posts a link to it on social media, we could make a positive difference. It will, through going viral on social media, penetrate all the news bubbles and some of the minds that DO need to see this and to correct the error of their ways.

Today, there are most noticeably tens (perhaps hundreds) of millions of people who call themselves Christians and yet propagate hate, who call themselves Muslims and do the same thing, and who call themselves Jews or Hindus or many other denominations and yet mirror these unkind behaviors.

This misrepresents what their own religions preach.

In my Theory of Everything, this is going to result in their being “left back” when the rest of their class graduates. What I mean by that is that when they reincarnate, it will be into a remedial classroom situation, as compared to the relatively balanced classroom situation we have here on Earth. Others of us who practice kindness and behaviorally (not just verbally and performatively) seek the good will graduate into a higher classroom, even more like “heaven” than this one.

This is my interpretation of heaven and hell. It is more of a gradient than a black-and-white situation.

Those who refuse to learn will need to be more strictly guided for their own good, and for the good of the Universe.

“Sin” means “missing the mark” – essentially, it means error.

However, stubbornly proceeding with sinful behavior earns the word “evil” if it goes too far. Extreme error. Requiring extreme remedial lessons. What the individual consciousness might consider to be a hellish situation.

Those are my interpretations of reality and meaning.

What does the Bible say in support of the idea that misrepresentation of God may be the most grievous sin?

While the Bible doesn’t explicitly rank a single action as the “number one worst sin” (outside of the theological discussions surrounding the “unforgivable sin” or blasphemy against the Holy Spirit), a powerful scriptural case can be made that misrepresenting God is treated with a unique level of gravity, wrath, and consequence.

When humans distort who God is, they create a false idol, twist His truth, and actively drive people away from salvation. Here is how the Bible supports the idea that misrepresenting God is uniquely grievous:

Taking the Lord’s Name in Vain (The Third Commandment)

In the modern day, people often think the Third Commandment (“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain” — Exodus 20:7) just means using God’s name as a curse word. However, in the ancient Near East, to “take” a name meant to carry it or represent it—much like a wife taking a husband’s last name or an ambassador carrying the name of their king.

To take His name “in vain” means to claim to belong to Him or speak for Him, but to do so in a way that is false, empty, or malicious. God explicitly adds a terrifying caveat to this commandment: “for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.”

God’s Wrath Against Misrepresentation (The Story of Job)

Throughout the Book of Job, Job’s friends spin complex theological arguments to explain Job’s suffering. They confidently claim that God is punishing Job for some secret sin, framing God as a cosmic vending machine of strict, mechanical retribution. They thought they were defending God, but they were actually misrepresenting His justice and counsel.

When God finally speaks at the end of the book, He doesn’t vent His anger at Job’s messy, raw venting. Instead, He turns on the religious friends:

“My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.” (Job 42:7)

God required a blood sacrifice and the prayers of Job just to turn His burning anger away from them.

The Severe Penalty for False Prophets

In the Old Testament, sins like theft or property damage required restitution. But misrepresenting God by claiming to speak for Him when He hadn’t spoken carried the ultimate penalty:

“But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name that I have not commanded him to speak… that prophet must be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 18:20)

God viewed spiritual forgery—signing His name to human opinions or lies—as a capital offense because it poisons the spiritual well-being of an entire community.

Millstones and Severe Judgment for Teachers

In the New Testament, Jesus and the apostles reserve their harshest words not for broken sinners, prostitutes, or tax collectors, but for religious leaders who misrepresent God’s heart.

  • Jesus on Stumbling Blocks: In Matthew 18:6, Jesus warns that if someone misrepresents God and causes a “little one” who believes in Him to stumble, “it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
  • The Condemnation of the Pharisees: In Matthew 23, Jesus hurls a series of “woes” at the teachers of the law because their legalistic misrepresentation of God’s character shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces.
  • Strict Judgment for Teachers: James explicitly warns, “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.” (James 3:1)

Paul’s Curse on Distorting the Gospel

When the Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians, he discovered that false teachers were distorting the true nature of God’s grace, making salvation about human works instead of Christ. Paul’s response is incredibly severe:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be under a curse!” (Galatians 1:8)

Paul uses the Greek word anathema (devoted to destruction). To warp the message of who God is and how He saves people is to invite an apostolic curse.

Summary

Why is this sin treated so grievously? Because we cannot love a God we do not accurately know. When people misrepresent God—portraying Him as a cruel tyrant, a weak and passive bystander, or a transactional judge—they paint a monstrous caricature of the Creator. This drives hurting people away from the only source of true life, which is why Scripture guards the truth of God’s character with such fierce jealousy.

What about people who properly quote the bible but nevertheless do not act in the ways that the bible advises?

When people perfectly quote Scripture but fail to live by it, the Bible doesn’t just call it a minor lapse in consistency—it addresses it as a dangerous spiritual delusion and a severe misrepresentation of God’s character.

Scripture has a lot to say about this exact gap between theological literacy and moral obedience. Here is how the Bible frames it:

Deceiving Oneself (The “Mirror” Metaphor)

The Apostle James addresses this head-on, arguing that knowing the Word without doing it is a form of self-delusion.

“Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like.” (James 1:22–24)

In this view, using the Bible merely as information to repeat—rather than a truth that transforms your behavior—makes your faith completely useless.

Causing Others to Blaspheme God

When someone claims to speak for God or know His law, but acts wickedly, the outside world doesn’t just blame the individual; they blame the God that individual claims to serve. The Apostle Paul fiercely confronted the religious elite of his day for this exact hypocrisy:

“You who preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?… As it is written: ‘God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.'” (Romans 2:21–24)

By quoting the law but breaking it, they became walking anti-advertisements for the Kingdom of God, driving people away from the truth.

The Danger of “Demonic” Faith

James takes the critique a step further by pointing out that even the forces of evil possess flawless theology. Merely intellectualizing or reciting biblical truths doesn’t make someone holy.

“You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.” (James 2:19)

The implication is stark: if someone’s “faith” consists entirely of correct information and zero obedience, their spiritual state is no better than that of a demon.

Christ’s Most Terrifying Warning

Perhaps the most sobering passage in the entire New Testament deals with people who perform religious acts and speak the right spiritual language, but do not actually submit to God’s will. Jesus warns:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'” (Matthew 7:21–23)

Notice that Jesus doesn’t dispute their credentials or their correct vocabulary. They called Him “Lord.” But because their hearts were far from Him and their actions were lawless, He rejects them entirely.

The Biblical Verdict

In the biblical narrative, Satan himself perfectly quoted Scripture to Jesus during the temptations in the wilderness (Matthew 4). Therefore, accurately quoting the Bible is never treated as a badge of righteousness.

Without love, humility, and obedience, quoting the Bible is viewed as a form of religious weaponization—using God’s own words to hide a heart that refuses to submit to Him.

What does the Koran say about this subject? And what do the scriptures of India say about it? The full white paper containing all this is available free here.

The Ultimate Point of Agreement

If you distill all of these scriptures down to a single behavioral thesis, it is this: True spirituality cannot be separated from morality. All of these traditions agree that God is not impressed by empty rituals, loud prayers, or flawless scriptural recitation if the person performing them is cruel, dishonest, or unjust. In the eyes of the Divine, the ultimate validation of your faith is how you treat your fellow human beings.

Love to all,
Bill

 

Live chat with my avatar

How Do We Protect Our Elections and Voting Rights At The Same Time?

1 Reply

Welcome to this week’s Bill Harvey Blog
Created May 21, 2026

The question of non-citizen voting in U.S. elections is a major point of public discussion. Extensive data, recent state-level audits, and nonpartisan research show that verified cases of non-citizen voting are vanishingly rare, representing a minute fraction of a percent of overall votes cast.

When state election officials conduct extensive audits using federal immigration databases (like SAVE) and Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records, the initial lists of “suspected” non-citizens routinely shrink drastically upon investigation. This is usually because the data relies on outdated status reports (e.g., individuals who were green card holders when they got their driver’s license but have since become naturalized U.S. citizens).

The Center for Election Innovation & Research (CEIR) and recent state reports provide the following official figures:

Note: “Potential” or “Suspected” means the individuals were flagged for review; subsequent checks usually reveal many are actually naturalized citizens who simply haven’t updated their DMV profile.

The conservative Heritage Foundation maintains a national database tracking verified instances of voter fraud. Going back to the year 2000, their database documents fewer than 100 cases of non-citizen voting across the entire country. Given that hundreds of millions of ballots have been cast in that timeframe, the percentage is statistically close to 0%.

A landmark study by the Brennan Center analyzed 42 jurisdictions during the 2016 presidential election (tabulating 23.5 million votes). Election officials referred only 30 cases of suspected non-citizen voting for investigation—amounting to 0.0001% of the votes.

Why It Happens (When It Does)

Data shows that the microscopic number of non-citizens who do successfully register or vote are almost exclusively Lawful Permanent Residents (green card holders) rather than undocumented immigrants. These cases are usually driven by administrative errors (such as being automatically prompted to register while getting a driver’s license) or honest confusion about eligibility rules, rather than intentional fraud.

Recent data from major polling operations, including the comprehensive PBS News/NPR/Marist Poll and federal tracking data, outlines where the public stands:

High Bipartisan Support for Specific Stricter Laws

When polled on specific legislative proposals—such as photo voter ID mandates or proof-of-citizenship requirements—supermajorities of Americans consistently voice support.

  • Voter ID Requirements: Between 81% and 84% of Americans support requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote. This includes roughly 95%–98% of Republicans, 79%–84% of independents, and 67%–70% of Democrats.
  • Proof of Citizenship: Approximately 75% to 83% of Americans favor requiring proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote for the first time.
  • The SAVE America Act: A White House data release tracking public sentiment on federal election security legislation shows 71% overall support for tighter federal restrictions on voter registration eligibility, including half of rank-and-file Democrats.

Fraud vs. Access: The Public Divide

Despite broad consensus on IDs, the public splits significantly when asked about the core philosophy governing election laws. The Marist Poll reveals a sharp divide over whether the priority should be stopping fraud or maximizing turnout:

  • The Primary Concern: 59% of Americans believe it is more important to ensure that everyone who wants to vote is able to do so. Conversely, 41% say the bigger concern should be ensuring no one votes who is ineligible.
  • Partisan Splits: This question is highly polarized. 70% of Republicans prioritize stopping ineligible voters, while 86% of Democrats and 53% of Independents prioritize maximizing voter access.

Perceived Threats to Elections

When Americans are asked to name the single biggest threat to safe and secure elections, voter fraud ranks high, but it shares the spotlight with other anxieties:

  • 33% cite voter fraud as the top threat.
  • 26% cite misleading information (including concerns about AI-generated misinformation).
  • 24% cite voter suppression (worrying that strict laws will turn away eligible voters).

Notably, 57% of Republicans view voter fraud as the top threat, whereas 41% of Democrats view voter suppression as the primary threat, and a plurality of independents worry most about misinformation.

In summary, the percentage of Americans who want stricter laws depends heavily on how the question is asked. If asked about voter ID and citizenship verification, support sits overwhelmingly at 75% to 84%. However, if asked whether tightening laws to prevent fraud is more important than protecting voter access, only about 41% of the country prioritizes fraud prevention above all else.

When forced to weigh election security against voter access, a clear majority of Americans prioritize ensuring that eligible voters are not locked out of the system.

According to the comprehensive PBS News/NPR/Marist Poll on Election Security:

  • 59% of Americans state that their primary concern is making sure that everyone who wants to vote is able to do so.
  • This concern is heavily driven by partisan lines: 86% of Democrats and 53% of Independents prioritize maximizing voter access over stopping potential fraud.

Fear of Voters Being Turned Away

Anxieties regarding specific voting rights being taken away or restricted at the ballot box have hit a multi-year high:

  • 58% of Americans believe it is likely that people will show up to the polls only to be told they are not eligible to vote.
  • This represents a striking 16-percentage-point jump from when the same question was asked in 2020. Among Democrats, this fear rises to 74%.

Concern Over Gerrymandering and Vote Dilution

While broad polling generally measures “gerrymandering” through the lens of overall trust in the political process, the sentiment that the system is being rigged to minimize the effect of certain votes is incredibly widespread.

  • Threats to Democracy: In the February 2026 Marist Poll, 78% of Americans stated that they believe U.S. democracy is “in jeopardy” or “under serious threat.”
  • The “Voter Suppression” Threat: When asked to isolate the single largest threat to a safe and fair election, 24% of Americans specifically point to voter suppression (the intentional restriction of voting access).
  • Lack of Confidence in Fair Elections: Driven heavily by the ongoing “arms race” of mid-decade redistricting across states like California, Texas, North Carolina, and Virginia, public confidence that state/local governments will run fair and accurate elections dropped to two-thirds (66%)—a 10-percentage-point decrease from late 2024.

Data tracking from organizations like the Pew Research Center confirms that large majorities of Americans intuitively favor electoral fairness and believe that extreme partisan gerrymandering actively undermines confidence in whether their individual vote actually matters.

What do these facts tell us? Despite the incidence of voter fraud being close to zero, 41% of us want stricter laws preventing it, outweighing in their minds the risk of citizen voting being made so much more difficult or diluted that “one person, one vote” no longer applies, and minority rule can take over America.

How can we explain this?

Possibility #1: 41% of us are racists.

Possibility #2: 41% of us are unaware of the near-zero factual threat of voter fraud to date.

Possibility #3: 41% of us simply want the Republicans to win, regardless of the issues or consequences.

Possibility #4: 41% of us fear the perceived weakness of the Democrats more than they fear anything else.

Possibility #5: 41% of us fear that the elections are going to be rigged from now on, because of the actions now being taken by the government, and they want stricter anti-fraud laws to protect us against that. (However, the laws that we need to prevent that are not being strengthened, in fact the weakening of voter rights strengthens that.)

Possibility #6: all of the above to varying degrees. This is the likely real answer.

What should we all do?

  1. Take action to make sure the facts about voter fraud statistics are known by as many people as possible. We can all do this in social media. Let’s make social media socially a positive force for a change.
  2. If you do not see yourself as weak, run for office, or help someone you see as strong and wise run for office. Socrates and George Washington agreed that wise and morally strong people must be willing to accept the role of governing, even if they would prefer to do something else with their lives. Unfortunately, the public votes for strong over wise, so if you are in any way involved in politics or are willing to become involved now that our country needs all of us to become more involved, and you are a combat veteran or simply a strong person, hear and take the call now.

Happy Memorial Day Remember and Honor May 25, 2026

Love to all,
Bill

 

Live chat with my avatar