By Bob Gaydos

   With the virtual disappearance of local newspapers, the crisis-of-the-moment atmosphere of news on television, heightened in recent years by social media, it’s easy for local happenings of note to sometimes slip by, umm, unnoticed. No cameras, no crowds, no name-calling, nothing going on here, folks. Just keep driving.

     Well, the other day as we drove a familiar route on Route 17 in slightly upstate New York, passing from Sullivan County into Orange County, I noticed an unfamiliar sight — a sign reading “Welcome to The Maurice D. Hinchey Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area.”

     Where did that come from? I wondered. What does it mean?

   Some research revealed that the entire Hudson River Valley, including counties bordering on both sides of the river, was designated by Congress in 1996 as the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area “to interpret, preserve and celebrate the nationally-significant cultural and natural resources of the Hudson River Valley.”

    I assume I heard about it at the time and forgot. Considering  the river’s role in so much of this nation’s history, from the Dutch settlers to the Revolutionary War, to the Hudson River School of Painters and the wealthy industrialists living in the valley, that designation makes a lot of sense. So, good for Congress.

     The area was officially renamed in honor of Maurice D. Hinchey in 2019. Considering that Hinchey probably did more than anyone else to save and preserve the river, that makes even more sense. Even better for the politicians.

     But what took them so long? And does just putting up a sign along the highway do Hinchey justice? I don’t think so. People, especially those new to the area and those just passing through, ought to know something about the name on the sign.

    So … Maurice Hinchey built a reputation in his 17 years in the State Legislature as the premier champion and defender of the environment in New York state. As longtime chairman of the Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee, he cracked down on polluters, investigated organized crime control of waste hauling, made Love Canal and toxic waste a national issue and, perhaps most importantly, raised an awareness of the importance of protecting our natural resources as a key to economic growth.

     Cleaning and preserving the Hudson River was one of his major priorities and no one worked more diligently at that.

     In addition to his 17 years in the state legislature, Hinchey served 20 years in Congress, representing an area that stretched from his home county of Ulster to the Finger Lakes region. He was a vocal opponent of fracking and consistently fought to bring resources to the Hudson Valley region that would improve the environment and boost the economy at the same time.

     A frequent visitor at the offices of The Times Herald-Record in Middletown, he spoke quietly and knowingly and dressed sharply. In sum, he was an impeccable champion for the region.

     Hinchey died in 2017, in his hometown of Saugerties, in the Hudson Valley. He was 79. Having survived cancer, he succumbed to frontotemporal degeneration, a rare terminal neurological disorder, according to his family. I was saddened when I heard the news, but his legacy as the champion of the Hudson River Valley had already been assured many years earlier.

     In fact, that legacy may be growing. Hinchey’s daughter, Michelle, a Democrat like her father, was elected to the State Senate in 2020, representing much of the same area that her father did. Among other things, she has been focusing on renewable energy and sustainable agriculture. She appears to be well aware of why her father’s name is on that new sign on Route 17.

    Hopefully, now you are, too.

                                  *** 

     From the National Park, Service website: The Hudson River Valley NHA is managed by the Hudson River Valley Greenway, a New York State sponsored program created to facilitate the development of a regional strategy for preserving scenic, natural, historic, cultural and recreational resources while encouraging compatible economic development and maintaining the tradition of home rule for land use decision-making.

The sites: https://www.hudsonrivervalley.com/sites

Bob Gaydos was editorial page editor of the Times Herald-Record of Middletown, NY, for 23 years.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

Stormy’s tawdry Trump story.

   Perfect. Poetic. The dotard was hoist on his own, uh, petard.

   With all the many sins and crimes alleged about Donald Trump, ranging from attempting to steal an election, stealing classified documents, actually stealing an election, obstruction of justice, attempted extortion of a foreign leader, inciting a riot and attempting a coup, the one that finally gets him fingerprinted involves paying a porn star hush money so she wouldn’t spill the beans about his having sex with her just four months after his third wife, Melania, had given birth to their son, Barron, and seeing the porn star several more times.

    That one. The tawdry one. The basic, dumb Donald Trump one.

   Perfect.

   Don’t get me wrong, the other stuff is serious. But Trump appears to be constitutionally oblivious to the magnitude of those other crimes. He has displayed no concept of loyalty, patriotism, honor, duty or responsibility, except as others apply those moral concepts towards him. Honesty is a foreign concept.

    But getting arrested because a porn star tried to shake him down and he had his lawyer pay her off to keep her mouth shut so he could steal an election and get to live in the White House? That’s a made-for-TV movie. That, Trump gets. It’s his entire life in a mini-series. Sex. Betrayal. Borrowed money. Lies. It suits him like a tabloid headline.

   Even the, umm, adult film star, Stormy Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford), recognizes the difference between her case and the handful of other investigations involving Trump.

    “It’s vindication,” she said in a recent interview. “But it’s bittersweet. He’s done so much worse that he should have been taken down [for] before.”

     The vindication she claims may refer to her allegation that Trump promised to get her a spot on his hit TV show, “The Apprentice,” because she was “amazing,” and, in true Trump fashion, never delivered. 

      Also to the fact that Trump’s buddy, David Pecker, publisher of The National Enquirer, paid her for her story on Trump and then killed it as a favor to Trump. And that Trump also denies the affair.

     The squashed story and the payoff to Daniels by then Trump lawyer Michael Cohen were intended to keep the story from hurting Trump’s campaign for president in 2016, and are the basis for the case against Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg. A campaign finance violation.

   Cohen served a term in the Federal Correctional Facility in Otisville after pleading guilty for his part in the payoff. He’s a key witness against Trump in this case.

    The other grand jury investigations into more serious allegations against Trump, ironically, seem to have more direct lines to proving his guilt than Bragg’s, which is considered to be a difficult case to prove in court.

    But Bragg’s is the first and that makes it important as well as historic. It may well motivate other prosecutors who now don’t need to worry about being the first to bring charges against a former president.

    And it may help Americans pitted against each other get used to seeing the man who promoted and profited from the rift for what he has always been: A cheating, lying, self-serving, hypocrite who always looks for someone else to pay for his crimes.

      Daniels, who could be considered an expert witness, says that at their first sexual encounter in his hotel room in Nevada, she felt compelled to say to Trump, “Please, don’t offer to pay me.”

      She knew tawdry when she saw it.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

President Biden shakes hands with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv.

By Bob Gaydos

    About that Joe Biden is too old to run for re-election column I wrote a little while back … I may have been a bit hasty. 

      The “old” man just took the boldest, most dramatic act by an American president since, well, I can’t remember when.

       Biden’s surprise trip to Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, was at once diplomatically and politically brilliant, as well as brave.

        Shaking hands with the Ukrainian president in the middle of a war zone in an area not controlled by American forces immediately sent two messages:

1. To Russian President Vladimir Putin: The United States of America is still the protector of freedom and democracy around the world. The leader of the Free World. Do not mess with us.
2. To Democrats (and Republicans) considering running for president in 2024: Joe Biden is still an astute politician and the leader of the Democratic Party. Don’t mess with him.

         Too old? A special military flight to Poland and then a secret train ride to Kyiv for a “golf” rendezvous, with a courtesy call to the Russians that the American president will be visiting the heart of the country they have so miserably failed at conquering so don’t do anything stupid? That’s a movie script.

        The scenes of Biden shaking hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Biden’s later comments in Poland had to infuriate Putin as much as it heartened Ukrainians and citizens of Poland and other Eastern European countries fearful of Russia’s expansionist tendencies. One year since Russia invaded Ukraine and Biden is in Kyiv, not Putin. The U.S. and NATO stand resolved to help Ukraine defeat the Russian invaders. 

       It also undoubtedly gave pause to any Democrats thinking of challenging Biden in 2024, as he appears to be planning a campaign for reelection. 

    Of course, there is also the fact that there is no obvious, younger, replacement candidate among Democrats. No charismatic leader. Nor is there anyone with the political experience and savvy demonstrated in his first two years by this president who occasionally flubs some words, stutters and walks slowly.

     As for Republican  presidential hopefuls, Donald Trump has already lost to Biden, is under several criminal investigations, any one of which could result in his indictment and, as Nikki Haley not so subtly reminded us of, is in the same age category as Biden. Over 75. Haley, the former South Carolina governor and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in the Trump administration, announced her campaign for the Republican presidential nomination by calling for competency tests for any candidate for federal office over the age of 75.

      Gee, wonder who she was talking about. Personally, I think one would have to be out of his or her mind  to run for Congress, although these days that doesn’t seem to matter in Republican primaries. But Haley’s statement represents a blatant ageism, assuming that candidates younger than 75 would automatically pass a  competency test. For what it’s worth and based on what we’ve all seen and heard, I think Biden easily passes and Trump flunks any legitimate one.

     Do I wish Biden were maybe at least 10 years younger? Sure. I’m a year older than Biden. I know the actuarial numbers on life expectancy and the daily risks of life in general for older people.

      But presidents get the best of care and it’s hard to dismiss experience and boldness, especially when combined with results.

      Biden has got inflation down to a manageable level, the unemployment rate is the lowest in decades, a wide-ranging infrastructure bill (promised, but never delivered by Trump) will bring jobs and improve bridges, highways, railways across the country, a new chips act will take much of that business away from China and Medicare recipients will get a break on drug prices. He even tricked Republicans into saying they don’t want to cut Social Security and Medicare in giving his State of the Union speech. Not a bad first couple of years, especially for an “old” man.

    An old man, by the way, dealing with a Republican party pledged to oppose anything and everything Democrats propose. In a party with a growing progressive wing, the moderate Biden has demonstrated he knows how to be president and get some things accomplished in spite of sharp differences of opinion. And, in his trip to Kyiv, he has displayed courage and leadership to go with his ability to connect with the average American.

     So, is he too old? Time and fate may ultimately hold the answer. But Biden showed me something I didn’t know was there. For now, I guess I’m hedging my bet.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

By Bob Gaydos

           Glenn Kirschner, one of the legion of former Justice Department lawyers enjoying a side gig as media experts explaining the legal ins and outs and many perils facing Donald Trump in several cases in several jurisdictions around the country, recently said that actions by federal prosecutors suggest they may think one of Trump’s many lawyers might have been in Cahoots* with the ex-president on matters regarding the many missing classified government documents.

     To all of which I say, where the heck is Cahoots? And were they hiding documents there, too?

     I first encountered the Cahoots Conundrum a dozen years ago when stories spread about members of Pakistan’s military and intelligence agencies being in Cahoots with Al-Qaeda on hiding Osama bin Laden.

     “It is disingenuous for anyone to blame Pakistan or state institutions of Pakistan, including the ISI and the armed forces, for being in Cahoots with Al Qaeda,” said Yousuf Raza Gilani, then prime minister of Pakistan.

       There were questions at the time about how the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, the most-sought fugitive in the world, could have been living comfortably with his family in a walled compound within walking distance of Pakistan’s version of West Point. Somehow, Cahoots was involved. Maybe that’s where the deal was made to hide Bin Laden.

    My research at the time supported that possibility, with Cahoots being mentioned in questionable dealings in Mexico involving the Catholic Church, the police, and drug cartels. Also in Afghanistan, involving the Afghan military and the Taliban. It seemed to be an ideal place to go to make shady deals because no one apparently knew where Cahoots was. Still don’t, apparently.

    The current Cahoots conundrum mentioned by Kirschner involves one M. Evan Corcoran, Trump and classified documents. Corcoran, a lawyer, wrote a statement for Trump stating that he was in possession of no more classified documents. This followed an FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago home that uncovered hundreds of such items.

    Trump had another lawyer sign the statement written by Corcoran and give it to the FBI. No more documents. Case closed. But the National Archives disagreed. They suggested the FBI look again. Of course, Trump being Trump, a subsequent search uncovered dozens more documents.

      So Trump and or his lawyer(s) lied to the FBI. Did Corcoran know there were more documents? Did the other lawyer? Did Trump? Was Trump in Cahoots with one or both of them cooking something up?

        Corcoran is claiming attorney-client privilege to avoid testifying before a grand jury investigating Trump’s documents stash. The other lawyer has testified to the grand jury. Prosecutors have reportedly asked a federal judge to deny the attorney-client privilege claim because they believe Corcoran’s legal services were used in furtherance of a crime. That nullifies attorney-client privilege.

     So many questions:

# Did Corcoran know there were more documents when he wrote the statement?

# Did Trump lie to him?

# Did the other lawyer know about the documents?

# Will Trump ever be indicted? On anything?

# Was Robert Mueller ever in Cahoots with Trump?

# Is Nikki Haley seriously running for president?

# Is she in Cahoots plotting with Trump to be his Vice President?

# How does Rudy Giuliani, who in the past has been suspected of being in Cahoots with Trump and others, feel about his political and legal careers now being in Limbo*?

# Does anyone know where Limbo or Cahoots is?

    It just seems to me that we ought to know more about a place where the likes of Donald Trump, Mexican drug cartels and Osama bin Laden have reportedly hung out. Also, I like Glenn Kirschner.

                                  ***

PS: Asterisks on Cahoots and Limbo are mine.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

By Bob Gaydos

The Chinese spy balloon.

  “The dividing line in America is no longer between right and left — it’s between normal or crazy.”

    Oh, Sarah, truer words have never crossed your lips. If only you realized why.

    Most critics of today’s Republican Party have been respectful enough of the usual norms of political discourse to avoid publicly saying what they really think about Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her ilk, who have mugged the party’s cowardly leaders through threats and retribution, turning it into a cabal of, well, in Sarah’s scenario, the not normal ones.

     Yes, the newly elected governor of Arkansas, who was a daily source of misinformation as Donald Trump‘s White House press secretary, meant the other guys. That’s how detached the party is from reality today. 

      Sanders’ remarks came in the Republican response to President Biden’s State of the Union address. That typically reserved, dignified event became just another excuse for the GOP problem children to act out, because that’s pretty much all they do.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders

 But I’m getting a little ahead of myself. The State of the Union boorishness and Sanders’ response capped a week of Republican nonsense.

    It started with a Chinese spy balloon. For three days, as it floated over the United States, a chorus of Republican politicians  berated Biden for allowing this violation of U.S. air space and not shooting the balloon down over Montana, where apparently people on the ground are not as important as those in Arkansas. It made America look weak, they insisted. China is snubbing its nose at us. Who would have respect for us? Etcetera.

      Biden had actually wanted to shoot the balloon down over the open spaces, but his generals told him it would still not necessarily be safe for people on the ground. The balloon was the size of three buses. It could do considerable damage where it landed and there’s no guarantee of avoiding people or structures. Shoot it down over the water, they said. We could control whatever information the device might be able to collect and once we had it down we could see what it was collecting and, in the process, gain intelligence on China. Makes sense. That’s what was done.

     China of course denied any spying, claimed it was a weather balloon. But the Pentagon said similar balloons had entered U.S. airspace three times in the Trump administration. Republicans had no comment on that.

    The most sensible explanation I heard for the inexplicable event was that someone in the Chinese intelligence community had messed up. Sending a spy balloon over the U.S. on the eve of a visit by Secretary of State Antony Blinken to China at a time of tense relations between the two country makes no sense at all. That visit was abruptly canceled by Biden, to be reset at a later date.

    Biden then focused on his State of the Union address, which detailed the massive infrastructure package he had gotten through Congress, along with the addition of thousands of jobs, reduction of inflation and a revival of the semiconductor business in the U.S.

     He asked for Republican cooperation on passing a budget, with tax increases for the very wealthy and corporations, preserving Social Security and Medicare and raising the debt limit so that the U.S. could continue to meet its obligations.

      What he got from the Republican kids smoking in the bathroom was catcalls, boos, and shouts of “liar!” “bullshit!” The feckless speaker of the house, Kevin McCarthy tried to shush his nasty little kids, but they weren’t having it. They were on national TV and they were gonna make the most of it. Buffoons.

       Then, Republicans  followed with the Arkansas governor’s comments about what terrible shape this country is in and how Biden and the Democrats are responsible for it by making people salute their flags, teach their subjects and go to their churches. Which is, of course, the only Republican agenda.

      I think most of us normal people see this, Sarah. Just sayin’.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

By Bob Gaydos

With a tip of the hat to the late, great Jimmy Cannon. …

— Maybe it’s just me, but: I’m happy to report that, after an exhaustive search of my file cabinets, mini-safe, closets, boxes that never got unpacked from the last move, junk drawer and basement, I have no classified government documents in my possession. I think.

I’d say I was 100% certain, but recent news stories suggest that such documents are turning up where people least expected them to be. Like in the homes and offices of former vice presidents, including one who is now president. I did my own search after the National Archives asked all living former presidents except Jimmy Carter to check their home files. Even though I never worked for the federal government, I just wanted to be sure because, you know, I’m a patriot. Plus I wanted to make sure no one planted any of those sneaky little documents only because I used to work for newspapers. Can’t be too safe these days.

Having said all that, I’m willing to chalk up the recent discovery of a few classified documents in the home offices of Joe Biden and Mike Pence to sloppy packing up by staff when both men left office. Nothing nefarious going on, especially since lawyers for both men apparently reported the presence of the documents as soon as they were found. No one even knew they were missing.

That’s completely different from the Trump document story. Not only did he deny having any documents at his Mar-a-Lago golf course/home, he ignored requests from the National Archives to return them, ignored a subpoena, accused the FBI of planting classified documents, had his lawyers sign papers saying there weren’t any more documents left on the premises after the FBI raid (there were), and even asked to have them returned. He also claimed to have “declassified” them. Plus, he had boxes upon boxes full of hundreds of sensitive documents at a golf resort frequented by foreign nationals, not a quiet, private office.

So, no, cry and try as Republicans might to make the Trump document story equivalent to Biden’s, it won’t fly.

Obviously, the National Archives, which must be at least slightly embarrassed by all these reappearing “missing documents” they didn’t know about, needs to review its record-keeping practices, and the whole matter of what gets “classified” should also be reviewed. By the way, Carter got a pass because the law about not taking these documents home took effect after he left office. But I’m guessing he probably had a couple gathering dust in Plains, Ga., too.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Despite all the jokes being made, I find the George Santos story sad on several levels. Sad that an individual (Santos) could be so mentally and emotionally messed up that lying is as natural to him as breathing. Sad that the state of politics in America today is such that someone like Santos could be elected to Congress. Sad that House Speaker Keven McCarthy is so devoid of moral principles and courage that he won’t demand that Santos resign. On the other hand, I am encouraged that Republicans in Nassau County on Long Island, where Santos was elected, are angry and embarrassed and are not only urging him to resign, but actually investigating some of his lies. A glimmer of hope for a party mired in cynicism.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: Philadelphia versus Kansas City is a legitimate championship game for the National Football League, even though KC got a break on that last call on the push out of bounds and Philly got a big break when the Forty-Niners lost their starting quarterback right at the start. Two legit survivors for the crown.

— Maybe it’s just me, but: When a six-year-old brings a gun to school and shoots a teacher, it’s not only school staff that has some explaining to do on how it happened, but really, where were the parents in all this? A six-year-old, apparently an angry one, goes off to school with a handgun in addition to his homework? Some serious explaining and accountability is due.

—  Maybe it’s just me, but: Ran across this brief item wandering through YouTube: “Cardi B says, ‘Don’t do butt shots.’” Umm, I’m a child of the ‘50s. Do I really need to know who Cardi B is? And what in the TikTok world is a “butt shot”?

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

Addiction and Recovery
By Bob Gaydos

    You hang around with an experienced group of people for any amount of time, with any luck, you learn a few things. 

     I’ve been writing a column on addiction and recovery for about 15 years. In that time, I have been fortunate to have many conversations with members of Alcoholics Anonymous who have decades of sobriety. They have freely shared some of their experience and wisdom with me.

      One bit of AA wisdom that I’ve thought about recently goes like this: “People who don’t have a drinking problem don’t have to control their drinking.”

       Hmmm. So why have my social media and news feeds been peppering me daily with stories on “Dry January”? Why the sudden interest in non-alcoholic beer and cocktails? What’s the big rush all of a sudden for, supposedly, thousands of people to decide to see if they can not partake of alcohol for the month of January? It’s suddenly chic?

   Alcoholics, or rather, those who insist they are not alcoholics, have been taking the post-holiday challenge forever in valiant efforts to prove to themselves and (mainly) others that they can control their drinking. Often, they’ve failed. Rehab February.

     But this is different, from what I read. This is people, many apparently younger people, supposedly deciding that it might be in their best interest to abstain from or at least reduce their alcohol intake, at least for the month.

     Given recent reports on an upsurge in alcohol consumption (particularly by women) during the pandemic, an increase in alcohol-related deaths and a myth-busting report which concludes that “no amount of alcohol” is ever good for your health, going dry or easing up on alcohol for a month sounds like a reasonable idea.

      But there are risks involved and if you’re intrigued by the idea of stopping or controlling your drinking there ought to be rules. For starters, what is your purpose? Is it, as previously mentioned, to prove you don’t have a drinking problem? If so, you need to tell other people what you’re doing so there is accountability and, crucially, protection, in case a serious alcohol problem does exist. 

  Going through withdrawal symptoms from avoiding alcohol on one’s own can be painful and dangerous. Be aware of the symptoms and get professional help if they begin. Your effort may have failed, but it might have saved your life.

     If, on the other hand, the purpose is truly to see if life can be just as interesting and fun without alcohol always being involved, again, don’t do it alone. Get some friends involved. Plan alcohol-free activities. Try some of those fancy new alcohol-free “mocktails” the Dry January movement has spawned. If you’re really serious, maybe focus more on exercise. Try to get more sleep. See if you start to feel better physically and emotionally.

     Drawing again on some AA wisdom, the key to succeeding, whatever your goal, is to be honest and realistic. Whether you’re trying to not drink for a specific month or just cut back, if you find yourself drinking or thinking you’d really like to be drinking in spite of your stated goal, by all means start over again. But be aware of any recurring pattern. There may be a problem.

      On a positive note, if Dry January results in a more responsible general approach to alcohol consumption (as brewers and distillers like to promote), it has to be good for society’s overall health. Alcohol consumption contributes to a multitude of health problems as well as highway and other accidents. It would also go along with the effort by health agencies and providers to remove the stigma and shame often attached to alcoholism by getting rid of the word “alcoholic,” which still conjures up negative images for many people. 

     Officially today, people are diagnosed with alcohol abuse disorder, mild, moderate or severe.

   According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, alcohol use disorder “is a medical condition characterized by an impaired ability to stop or control alcohol use despite adverse social, occupational, or health consequences.”

     That’s the “drinking and trouble” connection members of AA often talk about.

      On the basic issue of stopping drinking and trying to keep things simple, AA’s Third Tradition states simply that “the only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking.”

     Adding that touch of reality necessary to recovery, an AA friend asked, “Who would have a desire to stop drinking other than someone who drank too much and got in trouble over it?”

     With sincere hope for the success and good intentions of many a Dry Almost Over January, that’s a question to keep in mind for anyone planning on a dry February or Monday or maybe next Tuesday …

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

By Bob Gaydos

     Now it’s NFTs?

Trump NFTs

 Having just publicly confessed my bewilderment at the willingness, even eagerness, of many people to invest in cryptocurrency — a form of digital “money“ that is complicated to own and even more complicated to spend — I now learn there are such things as NFTs.

    Non-Fungible Tokens. 

    Who knew?

    Well, Donald Trump, of course. If it involves money and it’s hard to figure out exactly what is going on, you can be sure Trump is around. And so we have Trump Digital Trading Cards, which has introduced me to the world of non-fungible tokens.

      “Art” for crypto lovers.

      Having made a rather subdued announcement that he’s running for president again, Trump followed up with a “major” announcement: He is issuing limited edition digital trading cards containing his image in various heroic poses. No one is quite sure how many different poses there are. Supposedly there won’t be more than 20 copies of any one pose and other poses will have far fewer copies. To make them more valuable. They are yours to collect, “just like baseball cards.” Only $99 each. But you can only buy one hundred at a time.

       If memory serves me right, I used to get bubblegum and five baseball trading cards for a quarter. But that’s another story.

     NFTs are theoretically unique. That is, you cannot replace one of them with another one of the same and equal value. If you could, that would make them fungible.

     Now, right away, we have the issue of confusion. I’m pretty sure that “fungible“ is not a word with which many people are familiar. Ask the next five people you meet and see if I’m right.

    Something that is fungible is replaceable by another tangible object of similar value. You can exchange a wrinkled dollar bill for another dollar bill and it’s a fair trade, for example.

     What supposedly makes NFTs unique is that, like cryptocurrency, each has its own digital identity. In this case, a stamp. So, even though anybody can buy one of these trading cards for $99 in actual cash or the equivalent in ether cryptocurrency, and the image is exactly the same on all of them, each is supposedly a unique item.

     People have apparently paid thousands of dollars for a digital image — a non-fungible token — of some “unique” tweet or meme or other Internet creation, which they can then apparently proudly say they own. Like a Picasso.

     It’s an investment, I’m told. Aha. Here’s where I would attempt to explain how NFT’s work and why someone would want one, but I have read more than half a dozen columns from technical websites “explaining” how NFTS work and I am more confused than ever, which goes to my original point.

     If it’s too complicated and confusing for the average person to understand and if even those who do understand how it works call it “risky” as an investment, why would anyone want to get involved?

     For some, like Trump, it’s simple — to try to make some quick cash off people by playing on their emotions. It’s his go-to strategy. The images of Trump on his trading cards are amateurish, even clownish, for a reason. MAGAs have been conditioned to distrust the talented, the educated and to revel in the coarse. Stick it to the elite, the socialist leftists. Hence, the “Let’s go Brandon” signs in my neighborhood. So clever.

    The more the Trump cards are ridiculed by people with even average artistic sensibilities, the more the MAGAs will scoop them up. At least that’s what Trump is betting on. He’s betting on a feeling. He’s also throwing in an opportunity to have dinner with him at Mar-a-Lago as an enticement if you buy 45 cards in one shot. That’s $4,455.

   What any of these “cards” will be worth years from now is anyone’s guess. You can’t frame them and put them on the wall, although anyone is free to print out a copy of one of these cards and display it. They may turn into ether like the currency used to buy them.

   Still, as of now, it appears that Trump may have played his cards right and is laughing all the way to the offshore bank. The website announced that all 44,000 minted cards sold out in the first day. 

     Whether that’s real news or not and whether more cards will be minted remains to be seen. There is also the question of whether this was all a money-laundering scam for a down-on-his-luck ex-president and phony billionaire about to be indicted for sedition.

      Bottom line: If there’s money involved, there is no place that is too low for Trump to go. A wink and a nod and give me your dollar. 

     The same goes for power, as he demonstrated in the White House. He is beyond embarrassment.

      The embarrassment, sadly, belongs to us as a nation. We invested in a non-fungible fraud. We got our money’s worth.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

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

Addiction and Recovery

By Bob Gaydos
  I’ve written a column on addiction and recovery for more than a dozen years. A staple of this column has been a sort of  “word to the wise” on how to survive the holidays for those in recovery. It also serves as a guide to party hosts who may not be in recovery.

The past couple of years gave new meaning to “surviving the holidays,” but having moved into a new phase of dealing with Covid, parties are back in fashion. Still,  health precautions remain advisable. Covid, the flu and other viruses are a real threat.

The point of this column is that, whatever else is going on, this is always a treacherous time of year for people in early recovery from addiction. People who have found their way to recovery, be it via a 12-step program or otherwise, have been given suggestions on how to survive the season of temptation without relapse. If they use these tools, with practice, they can even enjoy the season.

It’s the rest of you I’m mainly talking to here. You hosts, family members, well-meaning friends who want to be supportive and do the right thing, but aren’t sure what that is. And yes, to those who don’t get the concept of addiction at all, but can still avoid harming a relationship by following a few basic suggestions.

So, some coping tools for the non-addicted host, if you will: “No thank you” is a complete sentence and perfectly acceptable answer. It should not require any further explanation. “One drink won’t hurt you” is a dangerously ill-informed reply. The same goes for, “A few butter cookies won’t hurt. C’mon, it’s Christmas.” Or, “Get the dress, Put it on your credit card. You’ll feel better.” Not really.

By the way, “No thank you” is an acceptable answer even for people not in recovery. Not everyone who turns down a second helping of stuffing or a piece of pumpkin pie is a member of Overeaters Anonymous. Not everyone who prefers a ginger ale rather than a beer is a member of AA. Not everyone who won’t go into hock for an expensive New Year’s Eve party is a compulsive debtor. But some of them may be.

If you’re hosting a party to which people in recovery have been invited, have some non-alcoholic beverages available. Not just water. Don’t make a big deal about having them, just let your guests know they are available. The same goes for food. Have some appetizing low-calorie dishes and healthful desserts on hand. Don’t point out that they’re there because so-and-so is watching his weight. Just serve them. You’ll be surprised how many guests enjoy them and comment on what a good host you are.

If you’re honestly concerned about how the person in recovery is doing, approach him or her privately. He or she might not feel comfortable discussing it in front of other guests. If you’re just curious, keep it to yourself.

Honoring a guest’s wishes is a sign of respect. Anticipating them in advance is even better. Encouraging someone to eat, drink or spend money when they don’t want to is, at the very least, not gracious. Pressuring someone to partake of something when you know he or she is trying hard to avoid it is a good way to lose a friend. Addictions are not trivial matters. “No, thank you,” is a perfectly good answer. Members of AA, OA and DA will be especially appreciative if you remember that.

And for those in recovery, remember to bring a phone with plenty of numbers and have a way to leave the party if you become too uncomfortable. There will be other parties, but there may not be another recovery.

Be smart and enjoy. Have a mask handy if need be. Enjoy your sobriety.

Happy holidays.

rjgaydos@gmail.com
Bob Gaydos is writer-in-residence at zestoforange.com.

By Bob Gaydos

    Never again, Donald Trump.

    Thank you for your decades of service to the country, but please not again, President Biden.

    Yes, in large part because of Trump’s constant need for attention, we’re talking about the 2024 presidential election already. 

     The ex-president could barely wait for the final 2022 midterm election results (which were disastrous for the out-of-office Republican Party over much of which he still commands significant influence) before announcing his candidacy for the 2024 presidential campaign.

    I guess he figures it’s either that or answer a subpoena. Or two.

    Unfortunately for Trump, except for diehard MagaLomaniacs, the bloom is off the rose for him with many Republicans, including some currently holding elected office. And, he may have to answer those subpoenas even if he is an official candidate for president.

     Attorney General Merrick Garland tried to clear the air on the subpoena front by appointing a special counsel to investigate Trump’s involvement in the January 6 insurrection, his attempts at election tampering in the 2022 election and the possession of classified documents once out of office at his home in Florida.

   The counsel, a career prosecutor and lifetime registered independent voter, is a way to separate the Biden White House and Democrats from the ongoing investigation into Trump’s activities at a time when he is a declared candidate for president. It’s a welcome step.

     Whether the appointment of the counsel clears the air for the Republican Party is another matter. Having started decades ago down the road to gaining power at any cost, the party is now paying the price for looking the other way and holding its collective nose while registering any bigoted, racist, narrow-minded American who promised to vote for any Republican who fed their fears while doing little to deal with their actual problems.

     Sacrificing policy for scare tactics and voter suppression, the party gained power with Trump’s election in 2016. Never underestimate the American voter’s appetite for shock and awe over substance. But, having no actual platform save for giving wealthy people a tax break and being handcuffed to a self-serving leader who valued loyalty over competence, the party could not sustain its grip on Washington.

    Trump’s utter lack of understanding of the role of president and the failure of most Republicans to criticize him for his pathological lying and inflammatory rhetoric, among other things, finally registered on a significant majority of Americans. He lost to Biden in 2020, a result he refuses to accept, and most of his election-denying sycophants lost in state elections this month. And Democrats held on to the Senate. Some prominent Republicans are finally summoning up the courage to criticize him. Or, to be accurate, to say he may not be good for the future of the party and, thus, their political careers.

      Which leaves us with some potential Republican presidential candidates who want to prove they can out-Trump Trump (notably Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis) and some who apparently hope voters won’t notice their complicity in quietly looking the other way while Trump was in the White House (notably former Vice President Mike Pence).

      It may be a knives-and-daggers battle among Republicans for the nomination, but there’s no way they can offer Trump as their candidate again without giving up their last chance of rescuing their party from the pit of shame into which he has dragged it.

      So what about the Democrats? They have a different problem. Biden will be 82 in 2024. (By the way, Trump will be a not so youthful 78.) Running a country is not an old man’s game except in kingdoms and dictatorships. While Biden has brought competence and dignity back to the office of president and demonstrated that the government can indeed address the needs of all the people, the daily stress of the job could well affect his performance of his duties. Indeed, campaigning for the presidency against a new, younger, bomb-throwing Republican candidate could prove to be challenging.

     More importantly, Democrats need a younger, newer, more forceful face for 2024. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 82, made that clear in announcing she would not be a candidate for House Minority Leader in the next Congress.

    The problem is, there aren’t many Democrats around who are well-known by a majority of Americans. Vice President Kamala Harris is an obvious candidate for the nomination, should Biden choose not to run. But she has been remarkably quiet in her two years as next-in-line for the presidency. That’s a contrast with her often outspoken, forceful demeanor in the Senate. A little more of that Harris would serve her and her party well.

     California Gov. Gavin Newsom is said to have his eyes on the White House and he has some national recognition. There’s also Labor Secretary Pete Buttigieg, former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, who would bring a great deal of energy to a campaign.

     Of course, the best-known and one of the most popular political figures who would make a formidable presidential candidate is Rep. Liz Cheney, vice chair of the House Select January 6 committee. But Cheney,  a Republican who has been blunt in her criticism of Trump with regards to his claims about the 2020 election being stolen and for his involvement in the attack on the U.S. Capitol, lost her seat in still strongly pro-Trump South Dakota. Right now, she’s a potential candidate without a party.

   Of course, a lot can happen in two years. But the 2024 presidential campaign simply cannot be a rerun of 2020. America needs to move on.

 rjgaydos@gmail.com

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