By Bob Gaydos

‘Tis a word that I see that simply can’t be with letters like N,M,J and B, yet the puzzle insists and the poets say, you can make a word with letters like MBN and J.

Ok?

‘Tis a gimmick, a tool, a conceit if you will, that poets employ when they’ve more to say still and a flow to maintain so punctuation must go and critics refrain.

Enjambment.

Spelling Bee, I hate thee for hours of head-scratching misery, seeking to unravel the ultimate word with the likes of NMJ and B is absurd. Beyond belief, nothing but grief to go with my tea. N,M,J and B.

Woe is me.

But Google hath confirmed there is such a word, even though it’s one that I’ve never heard.

To stay healthy, ’tis said, live and learn is the rule, but let’s see if my friend the poet knows this unspeakably unspellable tool.

He does, alas, and impressed that, when asked, he says, “Oh, yes.” Of course, should expect no less since he went to school to learn to do it and does so very well.

What can I say to a poet who not only knows Enjambment but can spell … MBN and J?

Do tell?

Chastened and humbled, I must bow to the pros, to those who know to separate poetry from prose, to Kevin and Mary and others I can’t immediately recall, for knowing ‘bout Enjambment.

Spelling and all.

                                    ****

Footnote: On the very good chance I didn’t make myself clear above, I do the New York Times Spelling Bee word game every morning with a cup of tea. A ritual. Usually do fairly well. I got stuck one recent morning when the source word was enjambment. Tell me you ever heard of it. Oxford: “(In verse) the continuation of a sentence without a pause beyond the end of a line, couplet, or stanza.”

It never came up when I majored in English at Adelphi some 60-plus years ago, but then poetry, as well as the times, are a changin’. Sorry, Bob.

Consider this your English lesson for the week.

(This is a slightly edited version of a column I wrote June 21, 2019.  Six years later, it still feels appropriate)

By Bob Gaydos

There have been times, like now, when I saw little point in writing about what the pretend president is saying or doing because millions of Americans don’t seem to care. At those times, I often wondered how the scribes who get paid to inform the world of the latest news — and even moreso, those who get paid to have opinions about it — find the energy to cover Trump day after day. It has to be depressing, I thought to myself. I’m depressed and I don’t have to write about it. Does a paycheck work as an antidepressant?

Maureen Dowd finally answered my question. I admit to not being a religious, or even semi-religious, reader of Dowd’s column in The New York Times up to now. That’s changed since I read her May 25 column that carried the headline, “Crazy Is As Crazy Does.” Yes, it was about Trump.

She begins by describing her waking thoughts as another morning arrives. About the talents of an actress and an actor she admires and their TV shows. About a book she has apparently just read or is reading. And then, abruptly, reality sets in: “Once I’m completely awake, a gravitational pull takes hold and I am once more bedeviled by our preposterous president.

“I flip on the TV and gird for the endless stream of vitriol coming from the White House, bracing for another day of overflowing, overlapping, overwrought news stories about Trump. I’m sapped before I arise. …

“My head hurts , puzzling over whether Trump is just a big blowhard … or a sinister genius …”

Me too, I sighed. Glad to know I’m not alone.

I’m also not alone in my belief in synchronicity. Serendipity, if you prefer.

Coincidence? I’m with Carl Jung on that. The Swiss psychologist who gave us the word defined synchronicity as “a meaningful coincidence of two or more events where something other than the probability of chance is involved.”

As in, what are the chances that, being shamed into participating in a decluttering exercise at home, I would “stumble upon” a slim book I’d never heard of that instantly uncluttered my mind on how to explain what in the world was going on in Donald Trump’s mind.

It’s “Bullshit.”

Literally.

Some explanation is necessary.

The house decluttering was precipitated by a prevailing notion that I had collected too much stuff (an occupational hazard, I believe) and some of it had to go, but we would find a safe resting place for the stuff that was worth keeping. One of the safe places was a lovely, old cabinet in which other stuff was resting. Old tapes, photos and books. Among the books was the aforementioned slim volume.

I read the title: “On Bullshit.”

The decluttering came to a momentary halt. Was this a joke? As it turns out, no. Oh, there is humor in this 67-page essay, but the author, Harry G. Frankfurt, it also turns out, is a distinguished philosopher, professor emeritus at Princeton University, which published the book. This was serious. In fact, the book was a New York Times best-seller in 2005 and Frankfurt discusses it on YouTube, which tells you something about my attention to literary news.

But the point, and I’m finally getting to it, is that after months of trying to out-pundit everyone else writing about Trump and continuing to muse on why he does what he does, Frankfurt lays it out in a way that anyone, except maybe Trump, can understand — the man is a bullshit artist.

It dawned on me as I read Frankfurt’s explanation of the difference between liars — which Trump has been crowned champion of all time by those who keep score — and bullshitters. (If the language offends you, I apologize, but Frankfurt says “humbug” is not the same. Also, the times have changed and I’ve already been labeled an enemy of the people for treating the truth with respect.)

As Frankfurt explains, the difference between liars and bullshitters is that liars are acquainted with the truth. They have to be to maintain their lies. There is a discipline involved. Bullshitters don’t care. They make stuff up as they go along, saying whatever seems necessary to them at the time to appear to know what’s going on. It isn’t a matter so much of bullshit being false, Frankfurt says, as of it being phony. It’s meant to convey an impression. It’s like bluffing. And too much of it can carry over into a general laxity about how things really are.

As Frankfurt writes, “The bullshitter is faking things.” It’s not a matter of concealing the truth, because sometimes the bullshitter will speak the truth. It is a matter of concealing “what he is up to.”

Indeed. And those who are good at it seem to have no trouble attracting gullible believers. But that’s a mystery for another day.

Frankfurt mentions patriotic politicians who, on the Fourth of July, give grand speeches extolling all the wonderful things this country represents, not that those things are false or lies or B.S., but because the speaker wants others to believe he believes in them and is a true patriot. There’s a chance we’ll hear some of that next Independence Day, with Trump taking center stage at the Lincoln Memorial.

I know in advance that I don’t necessarily have to write about it because it’s more of the same B.S. Instead, I can read what Dowd writes about it and focus instead on what synchronicity offers as a topic. Like the fact that Frankfurt and I share the same birthdate, May 29. Some stuff you just can’t make up.

********

Update: Professor Frankfurt  died  July 16, 2023 at the age of 94. The decluttering was a relative success. I claimed Frankfurt’s book as mine on the basis of synchronicity and it now resides in the top drawer of a small bed-side cabinet.  I have given up the conceit and occasional depression of trying to out-pundit everyone else on the daily utterings of Donald Trump.  I still occasionally read Maureen Dowd‘s column. 

By Bob Gaydos

Something to consider as you stock the cooler, clean the grill and get the burgers, hot dogs and buns ready for Friday’s Fourth of July celebration: On the eve of Independence Day, Paramount Global, parent company of CBS, agreed to give Donald Trump $16 million because he didn’t like the way the staff at 60 Minutes, the premiere news show at CBS, edited an interview with Kamala Harris last October.

That’s pretty much the gist. Paramount, an entertainment company which has no business owning a news media operation, figured it was cheaper to buy off the president of the United States, than go to court and defend its journalists’ rights under the First Amendment  to the Constitution. A free press, to be specific.

Trump, who was running for president against Harris at the time, sued 60 Minutes, claiming the edited interview was defamatory to him. Editors at 60 Minutes, which has continued to tell the truth about Trump, said it wasn’t. The board at Paramount said we have a bottom line to worry about, new projects to worry about and we don’t want Trump siccing his legal goons on us. They didn’t say that, but that’s the gist.

Trump, who threatens lawsuits almost as much as he lies, just recently threatened to sue both CNN and The New York Times for their reporting on leaked information regarding U.S. bomb strikes on nuclear power sites in Iran.

Trump immediately bragged that the attacks had “decimated” Iran’s nuclear weapon capability. But U.S. intelligence reports a couple of days after the attack cast serious doubt on that assessment. Trump demanded a retraction of the reports by both news agencies.

CNN and The Times stuck to their guns and their reporting. CNN said it will issue no retraction. The Times issued a statement saying, “No retraction is needed. No apology will be forthcoming. We told the truth to the best of our ability. We will continue to do so.”

I sincerely hope so. The Times appears to have gotten over its infatuation with tiptoeing around Trump. Couldn’t have come at a more important time.

The truth is the truth and a free press is a free press. Both have been under constant attack since Trump entered national politics and, unfortunately, a lot of Americans in my opinion have forgotten what it means to have a free and independent press.

You hear a lot of complaints about the so-called “mainstream media,” whoever that may be, but I think the slow death of so many local newspapers, bought up by corporate interests with no journalistic background and concerned only with their bottom lines, has caused many Americans to forget what it means to have a free and independent press delivered every day on their doorstep.

After a while, you don’t know what you don’t know because nobody’s telling you. Except for Trump and his henchmen on social media. And Trump siccing his lawyers on anyone who dares even suggest that he might not be telling the truth.

You can say this is a bit personal for me since I spent more than 40 years working for daily newspapers, 23 of them writing editorials on an almost daily basis. I loved it. From my observation, so did most of the people I worked with. Also, from my observation, the people running the show recognized that, with the freedom guaranteed under the Constitution came a responsibility to be honest and truthful and factual. That’s our job. Tell the truth. Let him sue. We’re not called the Fourth Estate for nothing.

Anyway, something to think about. Have a hotdog on me, forget about the fireworks and maybe let the people at 60 Minutes know you appreciate their efforts.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

The Washington Post’s ironic motto.

    The oligarchs are flexing their muscles. On the heels of stories that the owner of the Los Angeles Times killed an editorial supporting Kamala Harris for president, the Washington Post announced it would not be endorsing any candidate for president this year, or in the future.

      So much for the Fourth Estate. So much for a Free Press.

     These “non-endorsements“ are bought and paid for by the greed of super rich people, afraid of losing some money and influence if they say something that might, heaven forbid, offend someone.

      Something like maybe, “Don’t vote for the incompetent, felonious, lying fascist, but rather vote for the competent, sensible, intelligent candidate. The country’s future wel-being may hang in the balance.”

      In the most important presidential election of our lifetimes, the newspaper that drove Richard Nixon out of office is taking a pass because its owner, Jeff Bezos, is more afraid of what will happen to him if Donald Trump wins knowing that the Post endorsed Kamala Harris, than what will happen to everyone else in the country if Harris doesn’t win.

      You’re on your own folks. We don’t have an opinion. Except, the Post editorial board actually did have an opinion. Like the editorial board at the LA times, it was preparing to endorse Harris for president.

  Instead, Will Lewis, the Post’s chief executive, wrote, “The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election. We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates.” Balderdash.

    The Post has been endorsing presidential candidates since 1976.

     This is where the politics of fear leads — newspapers, protected by the Constitution, become fearful of performing their duty. Of course, if the fascist wins, that fear will exist every day. That’s when greed and the desire to maintain power kick in. More silence. Look at today’s Republican Party.

     Editorial writers at the Post and the LA Times have resigned in protest, pointing out that this is not the time to remain silent. Indeed, maintaining a position of neutrality in this election falsely suggests that there’s no clear difference between the candidates, that they are pretty much alike, take your pick. We have an opinion on everything else, but this one’s up to you. No biggie.

   Patriotism apparently is not present in the Post’s roots.

                                    ***

    Full disclosure: In my 23-plus years writing editorials for The Times Herald-Record in Middletown, N.Y., we took a pass on one presidential election. It was the 2000 race between Al Gore and George W. Bush. There was no concern about fascism, criminal convictions, sexual assaults, fraud, lies, ignorance of government procedures, secret foreign alliances, threats of reprisal and obviously declining mental competence with either candidate. Just which one might be better for the country, Gore, the current vice president, or Bush, the son of a former president and a governor of Texas.

    I preferred Gore, the  Democrat. So did Mike Levine, the paper’s editor. Gore was in keeping with the newspaper’s liberal tradition editorially. However, Jim Moss, the publisher, preferred Bush, the Republican. Not entirely surprising since publishers tend to be more conservative.

      Levine told Moss that I was going to write an editorial endorsing Gore for president. Moss said he wanted Bush. We asked why. His reasons didn’t sway us. Our arguments for Gore had the same result on Moss.

      Moss insisted that the newspaper run an editorial endorsing Bush for president. I said I wouldn’t write it. Levine said he wouldn’t write it. That left it up to Moss. He decided to punt. Levine and I considered it a victory of sorts in that we avoided endorsing Bush and I wrote an editorial which, to this day, remains remarkably unimprinted on my brain. We had an opinion on the election, but no endorsement and I have no idea what I wrote.

      That was the hanging chads election in Florida which the Supreme Court gave to Bush. It was also the only time that Moss made any such demands on me editorially and even he compromised his position.

    Unfortunately, both Levine and Moss are no longer with us so I have no way to check my recollection of events, but I’m pretty sure I got it right. If any librarian reading this can find a copy, I’d love to see it.

        In any event, I’m glad The New York Times whose reporting on the campaign, has left much to be desired, still had the courage of its convictions this year to write a strong endorsement of Harris for president. I’m sure other newspapers around the country will do likewise. But the continuing growing control of newspapers in this country by a few rich, powerful entities is a threat to democracy that, I feel, too few Americans appreciate.

      Our founding fathers gave newspapers the protection of a free voice for a reason. If you don’t use it, you lose it.

rjgaydos@gmail.com  

By Bob Gaydos

Vice President Kamala Harris.

Why do we  elect vice presidents?

     That’s not a rhetorical question. In fact, it’s the answer to a question many Democrats have been asking themselves for more than a week.

      In a virtual meltdown since Joe Biden’s shutdown performance in his first debate with Donald Trump, and under a constant New York Times-led media barrage about Biden‘s age and his capability to handle the job of president, many wealthy Democratic Party supporters and plenty of everyday Democrats have been asking, “What is Plan B?”

     As in, “If we don’t think Joe can win, who should the party’s candidate be? Quick!”

     Funny thing is, all the names quickly mentioned as possible presidential candidates quickly said they’re still backing Biden. Now, that may be because it would be unseemly to challenge the leader of the party or simply because none of them wants to face Trump now when they might have an easier race four years from now.

    The other funny thing is, even though presidents run with vice presidential candidates, who, theoretically at least, can step in immediately and take over the duties of president if necessary, whether because of incapacitation or resignation, hardly anyone mentioned Vice President Kamala Harris as a potential substitute for Biden.

       But isn’t that her job?

       This is in no way an argument for Biden to decline to run again “for the good of the party and the country” or for him to dramatically resign the office of president. I have no way of knowing, any more than do any of those big media pundits, whether Biden is capable of fulfilling the duties of president while also conducting an aggressive reelection campaign against Trump and his Republican cult followers. If Biden’s running, he’s got my vote.

       All I am saying is that if he feels he is not up to it, his vice president would seem to be the person most qualified and capable of doing so. Harris has been with Biden through all the successes of nearly four years in office, been part of the planning and prodding and preaching necessary to get things done. She has dealt with leaders on the world stage. If people like what the Biden White House has done, well, then Harris has been part and parcel of all that.

    Plus, she is Donald Trump‘s greatest nemesis: An educated, articulate, outspoken, politically astute black woman. She has been district attorney of San Francisco, Attorney General of the state of California and served as a United States senator from California. She knows how government works. She can take on the issue of abortion head-on. She can talk frankly about voter suppression tactics. In fact, she can talk about any issue Trump or Republicans throw out there with more clarity and knowledge than can Trump.

       In fact, so can Biden. But if by Plan B Democrats want someone to more aggressively get up in Trump’s face, call out his constant lies, which much of the media now seems to accept as, well, acceptable, then Kamala Harris is their woman.

     Plus, you’d have the whole first woman president angle going again, the one stolen from Hillary. And if Biden did take the dramatic step of resigning (which he has given no indication of doing, nor am I suggesting), she would have access to the Biden campaign’s considerable funds.

        All of this, of course, would be dependent on Democrats doing something they always have trouble doing — getting behind one candidate and sticking to the script.

       Republicans have mastered the art of uniting behind even the most despicable of candidates imaginable, with Trump the felon exhibit A. They are a political party without a soul. Democrats, however, usually spend an inordinate amount of time challenging each other over who is the most noble of candidates. It often produces confusion, not votes.

       Joe Biden has been a good president. He has served this country well his entire adult life and grown old in the process. Few are granted the opportunity. In an election which is in sum a contest between democracy and despotism, he is the symbol of what our forefathers had in mind when they said farewell to the king.

       When the script hit the fan, their Plan B was to have a vice president.      

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

The Post staff rebelled against a proposed new editor with a questionable ethics past.

    Score one for the good guys.

   In a time when (1.) “fake news” is thrown around routinely as a way to delegitimize real reporting by real journalists while (2.) social media is awash in actually fake news produced by fake journalists and (3.) the airwaves are polluted by well-funded “media” outlets pushing outright lies, all to support the propaganda machine of the Trump Republican Party, The Washington Post recently provided a lesson in what has historically been considered basic journalism ethics in America.

  Actually, The Post staff with major help from The New York Times gave Post management a lesson in basic American journalism.

    In brief, they forced the ordained new editor of  The Post to change his mind about taking the job because, well, it’s always more pleasant to work with people who like you and who share your principles and ethics. Or, in this case, lack thereof.

     Robert Winnett, the Post editor-to-be, announced that he’s decided to stay in England, where his brand of “journalism” is accepted and (by some) even admired, rather than come to The Post, whose staff was in revolt over his selection.

     That’s because Winnett was involved in a scandal that engulfed British newspapers years ago in which stories based on hacked or stolen phone and business records or records purchased from a data information company were published to embarrass prominent politicians and celebrities. Lawsuits followed.

      Those practices are frowned upon by legitimate American news organizations and have been for a long time. Winnett denied taking part in those activities, but both The Post and The Times published articles quoting individuals involved in those sensationalized stories saying Winnett was in it.

      Indeed. So was his almost new boss, Post CEO and publisher Will Lewis, who was, in fact, Winnett’s actual boss at The Sunday Times, a Rupert Murdoch newspaper across the pond. Lewis was reported to have assigned Winnett to do one of those hit jobs.

    Still, Lewis did manage to get hired as the top dog in Washington. Apparently, The Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, didn’t notice or didn’t care that the British style of “journalism,” as practiced most outrageously in America by Murdoch-owned Fox News on TV and to a lesser extent The New York Post, wasn’t acceptable for major American media, especially those with a reputation for fairness and ethical practices, like The Washington Post.

     Bezos, who turned Amazon into a mega profit machine, is understandably concerned that The Post is losing money. Maybe he never considered all the advertisers that newspapers lost when businesses flocked to the Internet to companies like Amazon to promote their products.

   In any event, Bezos wants The Post to establish a third news-gathering wing, presumably centered on the Internet. Lewis wanted Sally Buzbee, the Post’s former top editor, to take over that new job, but she properly took it as a demotion and resigned. The Times and Post stories story on Winnett followed. Hence, the search for a new editor. (A new publisher wouldn’t be bad either.)

     Back in London, Chris Evans, top editor at The Daily Telegraph, Winnett’s current newspaper, sent a message to his staff saying, “I am pleased to report that Rob Winnett has decided to stay with us. As you all know, he’s a talented chap, and their loss is our gain.” 

     Well, chaps of a feather do stick together.

     In any case, the hope here is that Lewis and Bezos and others at The Post who maybe were thinking of taking part in some form of UK “hit job“ journalism get the message: The First Amendment protection afforded the press in this country in the Constitution is not a license to lie, cheat, steal or in any other unethical way ruin people’s lives for the sake of selling more newspapers or getting more clicks on social media.

    Not yet at least.

(Editor’s note: The author worked for more than 40 years at three daily newspapers, all of which followed the basic ethical principles of American journalism. Two of them — The Sun-Bulletin in Binghamton and The Times Herald-Record in Middletown — were tabloids in size, but not in the practice of journalistic sensationalism. The Evening Capital in Annapolis, a standard broadsheet, was no less rigorous about ethical practices.)

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

    A quick snapshot of a recent day in America:

    A former president of the United States was on trial in a New York City courtroom in a story that could’ve been written by the National Enquirer. Well, actually, it was supposed to be, but then the Enquirer killed the story and that’s all part of what the trial is about.

    Donald Trump, the defendant, brooded, slept, glared, argued with his lawyers and pretty much showed he didn’t want to be where he was, sitting at the accused’s table in court. The judge kept warning him not to misbehave, but somehow still resisted locking Trump’s butt up for being a constant threat to the community with his comments on social media and elsewhere, an action that would prove to the rest of us that the law is truly applied equally to everyone. No matter. That day has to come.

   And despite Trump’s call to arms that “all hell will break loose” on Monday when his trial started, the only menacing site outside the courthouse was a group of college Young Republicans trying to figure out what the heck they were doing there. Not very menacing.

    Anyway, the trial is all about hush money paid to porn stars to keep them from going public with their stories, and hurting Trump’s chances of being elected president in 2016. Mostly, a lot of lying about what money was used for what purpose and one of the key witnesses against Trump is his old lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, who served a term in the federal prison just down the road from me for lying about all that money a few years ago.

   Anyway, it’s sleazy and salacious and I’m embarrassed as an American that this man once sat in the Oval Office and apparently a lot of Americans still think he should be given another shot at the job he totally botched. They keep showing up in these polls that are supposedly fair and scientific, but for which I have never been contacted in my entire life.

    Oh yeah, he’s the first American president ever to face criminal charges after leaving office. Well, that’s something he can lay claim to without having to lie about it.

     On the same day, NBA commissioner Adam Silver banned some player I never heard of from ever playing in the league for committing “a cardinal sin” of betting on the league’s games and sharing information on his own play, removing himself from games pretending to be injured, and controlling betting on his own play. The player actually played in Toronto, which is not in America, but the rest of the league is.

    Sports betting may yet be the downfall of the major sports leagues, but there seems to be no limit to it. The Los Angeles Dodgers only recently escaped major disaster as star Shohei Ohtani‘s former translator took the fall for stealing money from the ball player to cover millions of dollars in gambling losses. No baseball. The FBI says Ohtani didn’t know about it. Well, OK. Perhaps he’s taking English lessons now.

    On this particular day, I looked to see what the great grey lady, the New York Times, had to say about the Trump trial. Its editorial went into great detail, carefully explaining all the nuances of the justice system and why everything was being done the way it was being done, etc. It was not until the end of what the paper itself described as “a seven -minute read,” that the editorial referred to Trump’s “disregard for the rule of law and his willingness to demean American justice when it suits his interests.”

   It continued, “Those actions render him manifestly unfit for office and would pose unique dangers to the United States during a second term. The greatest of those dangers, and the one that Americans should be most attuned to, is the damage that a second Trump presidency would inflict on the rule of law.”

      Well, no you-know-what Sherlock. Did no one at the Times ever explain to the editorial writer that “don’t bury the lead“ applies to editorials as well as news stories. Seven minutes to tell people don’t ever put this lunatic in office again? He’s too dangerous?! “Manifestly unfit!”

    Give me a break! Tell them at the top, tell them why and tell them again at the bottom. Tell them every damn day while you’ve still got a press! Geez, people, this is no time to be gentle.

      A friend of mine recently asked how I felt about the direction this country was heading. Well, the first four presidents of my lifetime were Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy.

    Maybe it was a trick question.

rjgaydos@gmal.com

By BOB GAYDOS

The big news of the day.
RJ Photography

   It’s definitely time to connect the dots. When (1.) your Sunday New York Times, which you still get delivered to home, comes with a touching note from the delivery person thanking his customers for 12 years of “kindness and generosity” and announcing that, as of March 17, home delivery of the local morning paper, The Times Herald-Record, will cease and that the delivery person learned of the contract termination in the much slimmed-down version of the paper itself {which you no longer get delivered}, well, you kind of pause and wonder what those 29 years of your life were all about, (2.) decide to write more about that in a future column and (3) go looking in still-functioning news sources for some positive news, such as (4) Mitch McConnell, the two-faced weasel from Kentucky announcing that he will step down as Republican leader in the Senate in November after 18 years in which his primary motivation was to use his power to thwart any Democratic president or program and pack the Supreme Court with rightwing stooges to do the bidding of wealthy Republican backers, McConnell’s relinquishing of power also being (5) likely to result in a Donald Trump boot-licker ascending to the Republican leadership in the Senate and, one hopes, further hastening the death of the party as a vehicle for responsible governing, something which (6) the aforementioned Great Gray Lady of New York refuses to use its reputation and power to accomplish, preferring instead (7.) to feature stories on polls declaring that American voters are worried that Joe Biden, who has more hands-on experience in how to properly govern than any previous president and has rescued the country from the ethical and economic morass that Donald Trump left behind, is too old for the job, at 81, because he confused a couple of names while running the country, handling delicate foreign policy and dealing with a Republican Party that refuses to do its job, (8.) because it’s being led by a 77-year-old man who repeatedly confuses who the actual president is, confuses Nikki Haley for Nancy Pelosi, warns about a possible World War II, encourages Vladimir Putin to attack our NATO allies, insists he is immune from prosecution for (not innocent of) any crime he committed as president, claims to be a billionaire but can’t post $500,000 bond in New York to appeal a court ruling that his business there was a massive fraud, faces 91 felony counts, incited an insurrection, raped a woman in a New York City department store, hasn’t the foggiest idea or interest in learning how government is supposed to serve the people, says he will get rid of his enemies on Day One of a new Trump term and whose former staffers say is not only unfit for the office of president, but is also deteriorating mentally, which (9.) many Americans seem to have no problem with and, The Times tells us, can’t seem to even remember what the Trump four years were really like, possibly because the newspaper is too busy trying to be all things to all readers (“The best way to clear ear wax” arrived in today’s issue) to (10.) remind us daily, like a newspaper fighting to protect its First Amendment protection from forces out to abolish it, of Trump’s lying and vindictiveness and ignorance or to explain that sitting presidents typically have low favorability ratings in polls early in a reelection year because they are actually doing the job and the poll, assuming first of all that it’s accurate, may reflect the current situation, but does not predict the future, (11.) which, the way things are going, may not include home delivery of The New York Times. 

rjgaydos@gmail.com

Bob Gaydos is writer-in-residence at zestoforange.com.

By Bob Gaydos

Ghee.

  Stick with me here. I’m not sure where I’m going, but I hope it’ll be worth the trip when we get there.

    I typically start my day (assuming the stars are aligned and the usual very considerate dog-feeder has fed the dogs) by tackling a New York Times word game called Spelling Bee. You get points based on how many words you can make from seven letters. It’s one of several word games I play each day so that, among other things, I can continue to write columns that I hope readers find (a) informative, (b) provocative, (c ) entertaining or (d) all of the above. The people who know about keeping brains vital recommend such games. And I enjoy them.

   So, this particular morning I advance to the point in the game where I am “amazing,” but one point short of “Genius.” I hate when that happens because it means all the obvious and most of the non-obvious words have been found, leaving words no one ever heard of and the odds of picking up a single point is slim.

    Finally, after going away and coming back several times, I see it. The word that will give me one point: Ghee.

   Yes! Genius once again and, gee, isn’t it interesting that I got there on a word I didn’t even know a few years ago. 

   For those who aren’t familiar with the word, ghee is a form of highly-clarified butter that is traditionally used in Indian cooking. Like butter, ghee is typically made from cow’s milk. It is made by melting regular butter, which separates into liquid fats and milk solids. The solids are removed, leaving a liquid with less lactose. Ghee is thus considered to be vegetarian because there is no animal product in it, but not vegan, because it is derived from animal product. (See, we’re already learning something.)

   Since I am neither vegan nor vegetarian, the technicalities don’t bother me. I became acquainted with ghee several years ago by adopting a diet with less meat and more plants. A quick scan of the internet on its health benefits or risks quickly pointed out the problem of our unfettered information glut, with ghee being declared either good or bad for weight loss, digestion, cholesterol or the heart. There was even a report the FDA had banned it, which should be a surprise to the thousands of Indian restaurants in this country, as well as the USDA, which regulates ghee and other products derived from cows. Consult your doctor on this, please.

     For me, ghee has been no issue and we only have it when we treat ourselves to a meal at a wonderful nearby vegetarian restaurant, The Red Dot, in Wurtsboro, N.Y, which is the entrance to the Catskills region if you’re planning a trip.

   If instead you’re planning a trip to Paris this year, be aware that the Summer Olympics will be in town and by “in town” the Parisians mean it literally, with urban games at Le Place de la Concorde, beach volleyball at the Eiffel Tower and Equestrians at the Palace of Versailles.

   I know all this only because when I got my genius score on Queen Bee, I put up water for tea, doled out a truckload of vitamins and then checked my Facebook feed, which promptly informed me that Snoop Dogg was going to be a special commentator for NBC on this year‘s Olympics in Paris.

    Oh. I thought. Why? I further thought.

     It seems Mr. Dogg, or Snoop to his friends, was such a hit four years ago with his colorful, occasionally profane, comments on the dressage competition at the Tokyo Olympics, NBC figured the rapper/business mogul would be a good bet to raise ratings for this year’s event.  

Snoop Dogg

   For the record, the 2020 Olympics recorded the lowest average primetime viewership for the network since it began presenting the Olympics in 1988. In fact, viewership fell by 42 percent from the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro.

   But we’re now in the world of streaming and watching anything, anywhere, anytime. If he was so popular on NBC’s streaming coverage on Peacock in 2020, NBC figured, why not bring on the Dogg and his irreverence, if not expertise, to the whole network? It’s entertainment, isn’t it?

    Yes, and the size and, now, diversity of the audience also sets the price of the advertising, doesn’t it? 

    Snoop will apparently be free to roam around Paris and all the Olympic venues and “add his unique perspective to our re-imagined Olympic primetime show,” according to Molly Solomon, executive producer and president of NBC Olympics Production.

    Gee.

    Before I turned to tea and breakfast on this particular morning, one last look at Facebook informed me that the National Football League had fined Carolina Panthers owner David Tepper $300,000 for throwing a drink toward Jacksonville Jaguars fans from his luxury box. Classy.

 The Panthers were in the midst of losing to the hometown Jaguars, 26-0, leaving Tepper’s team with the worst record in the NFL. In fact, the team hasn’t had a winning record since Tepper bought it five years ago after a sex scandal under the previous owner.

   Tepper accepted the fine and expressed “regret” for the incident, but didn’t apologize. Apparently, he’s still feeling a bit agitated. Panthers fans can identify.

    Well, thanks to Queen Bee, the Internet and Red Dot, I have a suggestion for Mr. Tepper: Clarified butter. Ghee. More of it.

    Ghee is a staple of Ayurvedic medicine, the traditional medicine of India, which is rooted in Hinduism. The philosophy of Ayurvedic medicine contends that the body, mind and soul are connected to the outer world and when the relationship among these elements is out of balance, health problems arise. 

    Ghee is often suggested to improve gut health and they say a healthy gut is a healthy body. It helps in cleansing the body of harmful stuff. In fact, it is regarded by some as one of the most sattvic foods. In Hinduism, sattva (a Sanskrit word) is having a serene, harmonious state of mind.  

    Some believers say that regular consumption of ghee leads to a reduction in stress and anxiety levels.

    It can’t play quarterback, Mr. Tepper, but ghee whiz, at least it’s more sattvic than listening to Snoop Dogg commenting on Olympic equestrian events in Paris.

       I told you we’d get there.

(PS: I have attained Queen Bee status just one time in more than a year of playing the game.)

rjgaydos@gmail.com

Buffalo quarterback Josh Allen, never got a shot in OT.

By Bob Gaydos

      I don’t care about the polls. I think Joe Biden is a decent man doing a better than decent job having inherited a decidedly indecent situation. Joe Manchin is another story. Meanwhile, the world turns …

• Maybe it’s just me, but: I agree with every football fan in America that the NFL overtime rules have to be changed. The fact that the Buffalo Bills lost their divisional playoff game to the Kansas City Chiefs because their quarterback, Josh Allen, said “Tails” instead of “Heads,” is beyond unfair. It is ridiculous. At a minimum, each team should get a chance with the ball in overtime. After the incredibly exciting finish to the game, with each team scoring at will in the final minutes, the final result was a letdown. The quarterbacks, Allen and Patrick Mahomes, were great, the defensive backs exhausted, but if Allen had said “Heads,” I’m certain Buffalo would have won. Forget sudden death, play a full overtime period.
• Maybe it’s just me, but: McDonald’s messed up big time in naming its new, still-on-trial plant-based burger. The fast-food company has been slow to adapt to the plant-based food movement, which is not surprising given its failure to properly prepare and promote other more healthful choices in the past, including salads and yogurt. The new burger, made with patties from Beyond Meat, will be tried out in 600 McDonald’s locations. It’s called, ta-da, the McPlant. Can you say, “McNo?” Burger King got it right with its plant-based burger launched a couple of years ago. It named the Impossible Brand patty the Impossible Whopper.  Now that’s a name to reckon with. Good burger, too. It’s now introducing Impossible Nuggets. So, while there’s still time, McDonald’s, man up. Let’s see the Beyond Big Mac! Forget the ego, You might sell some burgers.
• Maybe it’s just me, but: Is anyone surprised that Sarah Palin’s court date with the New York Times had to be postponed because she tested positive for COVID? You wait years to accuse them of libel face-to-face in court, then you can’t be prepared on the day because, well, who needs masks, vaccines, etc.? She was a governor and ran for vice president, remember? Oh right, she’s a Republican.
• Maybe it’s just me, but: I still can’t get over the mission of the James Webb Space Telescope, never mind the fact that, after 30 days of travel, it’s now ready to deliver on it. The most powerful telescope ever built, the Webb is now parked a million miles away from Earth, but more than that, a million miles and untold years in the past. The giant telescope is programmed to explore the past, to record the beginning of our universe, exploring whatever planets, etc. it finds in the next 20 years or so and report back to NASA. No wisecracks here. Just good luck, James Webb, and say hello to Mr. Musk.

rjgaydos@gmail.com