• Home
  • Escapes and Pleasures
  • Family and Friends
  • Go Sox
  • The Outer Loop
  • Articles of Interest

MillersTime

MillersTime

Tag Archives: Donald Trump

Understanding Trump & His Supporters

29 Saturday Jul 2017

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

"The Waking Up Podcast", Donald Trump, Podcast, President Trump, Sam Harris, Scott Adams, Trump's Supporters

The morning after Trump’s victory over Clinton, I simply posted:

The country spoke yesterday.

And we must listen.

I have tried to follow my own advice and have struggled with where my biases, my instincts, my thinking, and my emotions have led me. And as readers of this site know, I have mostly posted links to articles and books that seek to explain what I continue to find hard to understand: how is it that this President can continue to say and do what he does and to continue to have support from many of those who elected him?

Thanks to a suggestion from a MillersTime reader in the Comment section of a post a few days ago on this topic — Understanding Others: Tone More Than Policies? — I believe I now understand much more about Trump and about his supporters than ever before.

In a long interview/discussion between two individuals, Sam Harris and Scott Andrews, both strangers to me, I now have a frame that helps me see what has been in front of me but which I have not sufficiently understood. While my sympathy and views are largely similar to those of Sam Harris, it is Scott Andrews — he predicted Trump’s rise and victory all along — who is responsible for my new understandings.

You will need some time to listen to the lengthy podcast of the conversation between these two knowledgeable observers, but you don’t have to listen to the entire 2 hours and 17 minutes of that conversation. After a slowish start, the heart of what they discuss is contained within the first hour. I know that is long time to devote out of your busy schedules, but given the amount of time many of us have ‘devoted’ to reading about the latest news, fake or real, for me it was time well spent.

You can begin to listen to the Adams / Andrew’s exchange by going to: The Waking Up Podcast.

You will likely view what is happening in our country with clearer vision than many of you/us have until this point.

Share

“The Data That Turned the World Upside Down”

31 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Big Data, Donald Trump, GOTV, Hannes Grassegger and Mikael Krogerus, Hillary Clinton, Motherboard

I’ve stumbled across an article that has given me a new insight into the reason for Donald Trump’s electoral victory. This one is different from everything else I’ve read, and while it is certainly not the sole reason for his victory, it is one that has not been much in the press. I urge you to read it as it has implications beyond understanding how DT was able to win and perhaps why no one (outside of the Trump campaign) saw it coming.

Quick background. I spent five days in 2012 in Columbus, Ohio on a get out the vote (GOTV) campaign for Pres. Obama and was astounded at the planning and sophistication of that GOTV effort. In November of 2016 went back to Ohio, Cleveland this time, for a week for a Hillary Clinton GOTV. While I felt that campaign was not quite as astounding as the one in 2012, I did feel it was useful. And everyone, myself included, thought Clinton and the Dems had a much superior ‘ground game’ than did Trump and the Repubs.

What I didn’t know, and what very few others knew, was that the Trump and a small group of his campaign staff had leapfrogged the Dems and had a much more sophisticated GOTV.

Check out this article: The Data That Turned the World Upside Down

Not only will it explain why DT was able to do what no one expected, it will also tell you much about the new world of Big Data. It’s not a short article, but it certainly was an eye opener for me.

See what you think.

Share

Judging Barack Obama & Donald Trump

19 Thursday Jan 2017

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 8 Comments

Tags

Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Farewell Address, Inaugural Address, President Obama, President-elect Trump

scales-36417_1280

I had a professor in college who continually taught that “It is not what you say but what you do that counts.” That standard, he believed, could be applied to judging how you treat your mother, how a leader leads his country, or to how a nation acts in the international world.

President Obama’s two terms as President ends tomorrow, and while it will take time to fairly judge how well or poorly he lead the nation, in his Farewell Address he has given his version of what he believes he has done and what he has learned in the process.

I had not listened to nor seen Pres. Obama’s Farewell Address until yesterday. If you have not seen nor heard it, it is worth the 51:25 minutes it takes to listen to and watch it:

President Obama’s Farewell Address

Now we have both his words and his deeds by which to begin to judge what kind of President he has been.

Tomorrow, President-elect Trump’s will be sworn into office. He has already surprised everyone with his victories over the other 16 Republican presidential candidates and with his electoral victory over Hillary Clinton. What he will do as President, not what he says, is now what will be most important.

In some ways he has already begun his Presidency with his choices of those who will help him run the country – his Vice President, his Cabinet officers, and his White House staff. Now his Inaugural Address will give us a further idea of what kind of President he plans to be, what he says he will do, and perhaps how he will do it.

Let’s listen to his Inaugural Address and then focus on what he does and not on what he says.

Share

“How Trump Happened”

14 Friday Oct 2016

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 18 Comments

Tags

Donald Trump, Hilliary Clinton, Joseph E. Stiglist, Project Syndicate

How Trump Happened by Joseph E. Stiglist

NEW YORK – As I have traveled around the world in recent weeks, I am repeatedly asked two questions: Is it conceivable that Donald Trump could win the US presidency? And how did his candidacy get this far in the first place?

As for the first question, though political forecasting is even more difficult than economic forecasting, the odds are strongly in favor of Hillary Clinton. Still, the closeness of the race (at least until very recently) has been a mystery: Clinton is one of the most qualified and well prepared presidential candidates that the United States has had, while Trump is one of the least qualified and worst prepared. Moreover, Trump’s campaign has survived behavior by him that would have ended a candidate’s chances in the past.

So why would Americans be playing Russian roulette (for that is what even a one-in-six chance of a Trump victory means)? Those outside the US want to know the answer, because the outcome affects them, too, though they have no influence over it.

And that brings us to the second question: why did the US Republican Party nominate a candidate that even its leaders rejected?

Obviously, many factors helped Trump beat 16 Republican primary challengers to get this far. Personalities matter, and some people do seem to warm to Trump’s reality-TV persona.

But several underlying factors also appear to have contributed to the closeness of the race. For starters, many Americans are economically worse off than they were a quarter-century ago. The median income of full-time male employees is lower than it was 42 years ago, and it is increasingly difficult for those with limited education to get a full-time job that pays decent wages.

Indeed, real (inflation-adjusted) wages at the bottom of the income distribution are roughly where they were 60 years ago. So it is no surprise that Trump finds a large, receptive audience when he says the state of the economy is rotten. But Trump is wrong both about the diagnosis and the prescription. The US economy as a whole has done well for the last six decades: GDP has increased nearly six-fold. But the fruits of that growth have gone to a relatively few at the top – people like Trump, owing partly to massive tax cuts that he would extend and deepen.

At the same time, reforms that political leaders promised would ensure prosperity for all – such as trade and financial liberalization – have not delivered. Far from it. And those whose standard of living has stagnated or declined have reached a simple conclusion: America’s political leaders either didn’t know what they were talking about or were lying (or both).

Trump wants to blame all of America’s problems on trade and immigration. He’s wrong. The US would have faced deindustrialization even without freer trade: global employment in manufacturing has been declining, with productivity gains exceeding demand growth.

Where the trade agreements failed, it was not because the US was outsmarted by its trading partners; it was because the US trade agenda was shaped by corporate interests. America’s companies have done well, and it is the Republicans who have blocked efforts to ensure that Americans made worse off by trade agreements would share the benefits.

Thus, many Americans feel buffeted by forces outside their control, leading to outcomes that are distinctly unfair. Long-standing assumptions – that America is a land of opportunity and that each generation will be better off than the last – have been called into question. The global financial crisis may have represented a turning point for many voters: their government saved the rich bankers who had brought the US to the brink of ruin, while seemingly doing almost nothing for the millions of ordinary Americans who lost their jobs and homes. The system not only produced unfair results, but seemed rigged to do so.

Support for Trump is based, at least partly, on the widespread anger stemming from that loss of trust in government. But Trump’s proposed policies would make a bad situation much worse. Surely, another dose of trickle-down economics of the kind he promises, with tax cuts aimed almost entirely at rich Americans and corporations, would produce results no better than the last time they were tried.

In fact, launching a trade war with China, Mexico, and other US trading partners, as Trump promises, would make all Americans poorer and create new impediments to the global cooperation needed to address critical global problems like the Islamic State, global terrorism, and climate change. Using money that could be invested in technology, education, or infrastructure to build a wall between the US and Mexico is a twofer in terms of wasting resources.

There are two messages US political elites should be hearing. The simplistic neo-liberal market-fundamentalist theories that have shaped so much economic policy during the last four decades are badly misleading, with GDP growth coming at the price of soaring inequality. Trickle-down economics hasn’t and won’t work. Markets don’t exist in a vacuum. The Thatcher-Reagan “revolution,” which rewrote the rules and restructured markets for the benefit of those at the top, succeeded all too well in increasing inequality, but utterly failed in its mission to increase growth.

This leads to the second message: we need to rewrite the rules of the economy once again, this time to ensure that ordinary citizens benefit. Politicians in the US and elsewhere who ignore this lesson will be held accountable. Change entails risk. But the Trump phenomenon – and more than a few similar political developments in Europe – has revealed the far greater risks entailed by failing to heed this message: societies divided, democracies undermined, and economies weakened.

(Joseph E. Stiglitz was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001 and is University Professor at Columbia University. The article above was published today in Project Syndicate.)

Share

I Voted ‘Twice’ Today

13 Thursday Oct 2016

Posted by Richard in The Outer Loop

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2016 Presidential Election, Democrats, Donald Trump, Hilliary Clinton, Protest Vote, Republicans, Third-Party Candidates, Voting

hcvote

I voted today (absentee ballot) for Hillary Clinton for President.

As I wrote in an earlier post about the DC Primary, this choice was an easy one to make. She is by far the most prepared, most serious, most competent, and most experienced of the two candidates. This vote is not simply a “lesser of two evils” choice. While I see and know her weaknesses and ethical challenges, putting this country’s future in her hands is the only rational choice to make.

In voting for Clinton, I am also actively voting against Donald Trump. If you look at his supporters, he has clearly tapped into an unrest that pervades this country. He has correctly identified that the political establishment — Democrats and Republicans — have largely chosen to serve the interests of those who have access to power and influence in government and not to those who are struggling.

However, Trump has also demonstrated, in so many ways, that he is both unprepared to be President and that he would be a dangerous choice.  Without going into detail (no doubt the reader has his/her own list), it is clear that he has both traded upon and unleashed hatred, intolerance, and encouraged violence. We cannot afford to have a man with Trump’s temperament entrusted with the powers delegated to the leader of our country.

Not voting or voting for one of the two third-party candidates is not an option as I believe that simply throws away a vote. See my earlier post on this point, There’s No Such Thing as a Protest Vote.

For me, and for our country, Clinton is easily the best choice. And to back up my vote, I will go to Ohio from Nov. 4-8 to help with a Get Out the Vote campaign.

Share

Understanding Trump’s Appeal

10 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 14 Comments

Tags

Donald Trump, James A. Lindsay

For a few months now I’ve been ‘loosely involved’ with a group of friends who are concerned about what is happening in our politics and who have been exchanging emails about where the country is headed. One of the intents of the individual who brought this group together was to answer the question about how we might direct our energies and move beyond the “divisiveness and denouncing the other side.” The questions he posed were these: “Isn’t it our obligation to seek to understand and look for ways to heal the schism and reduce the divisiveness? Isn’t that our best response to what we see happening at this time in our history?”

One of my bedrock beliefs and something that has formed the core of my professional life (working with troubled children, adolescents, parents, and families) is that before solutions to troubles are possible it is necessary to understand what is upsetting to each of the ‘parties.’

In that light, I draw your attention to a lengthy blog post by someone named James A. Lindsay whose somewhat provocative title to what he has to say is Liberals, Want Trump to Win? Keep Calling Him a Racist.

I hope you will take the time to read what Lindsay has to say. Not because I agree with all of it nor because I think all of his views or his conclusions are valid. What is valuable is that Lindsay writes from the ‘right’ and explains what is so upsetting to others like himself.

Probably the easiest way to read the article is to click on this link, but I am also posting it in its entirety below.

Continue reading »

Share

Pseudo-Campaign, Pseudo-Candidate ?

09 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

CBS, Daniel Boorstin, Donald Trump, Les Moonves, Moyers & Company, Neal Gabler, Pseduo-Candidate, Pseudo-Campaign, The Media

 

Fotosearch_k7290340

Some blame the media for giving Donald Trump so much (free) coverage and believe it is this totally unbalanced coverage that has helped him get to where he is today.

Neal Gabler, in the article linked to below, however, states, “The far more grievous crime is what the media have been doing to our politics for decades now – something for which Trump just happens to be the chief beneficiary.”

Gabler concludes, “Trump could only make a mockery of our politics because the media already has(d).”

Take a look at this relatively short article, which is less about Trump than it is about the media.

How the Media Enabled Donald Trump by Destroying Politics First, by Neal Gabler, March 4, 2016 on Moyers & Company.

Let me and others know that you think.

Share

Listening to Trump: A Different View

06 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

Donald Trump, Kern Beare

A friend of a friend led me to Listening to Trump by Kern Beare, writing, “Best thing yet written about DJT–and very brief to boot.”

Part of me agrees, as Beare’s short piece resonates with the work I have done for most of my professional life.

And yet I don’t know what to do with what Beare’s asks.

After listening, what’s next?

Let me and others know what you think.

Listening to Trump by Kern Beare, March 5, 2016

No more histrionics over Donald Trump. We need to listen to his words, not gag on them. Why? Because he’s the relief valve for our nation’s shadow side. His words—unfiltered and unrestrained—puncture the high-pressure container of our collective psyche, releasing into the atmosphere years of suppressed hostility and meanness of spirit. Now the nation’s ears are ringing. If we listen, we can avert catastrophe. If we don’t…well then, we can’t.

Jungian psychology tells us that we all have a shadow side: those qualities, traits, beliefs and feelings we hold but, out of fear or guilt, deny. Nations, too, have a very powerful shadow side, typically claiming for themselves all the qualities perceived as “good” and rejecting—and projecting onto others—all the qualities perceived as “bad.” (When under the spell of one of the shadow’s more extreme manifestations—jingoism—even suggesting your country may have faults is tantamount to treason.)

For both individuals and nations, it takes energy to repress one’s shadow. Over time that energy builds, creating an internal pressure that at some point demands release. When release comes, it’s often in an explosive and exaggerated form: violence, addiction, extreme prejudice, or some other aberration so powerful it obliterates the agreements and norms that once held together a person’s life, or a nation’s culture.

The Donald Trumps of the world are nature’s warning signs. They symbolize what’s being ignored in the human psyche, and what can’t be ignored any longer. They tell us when that explosive release point is near. Had Germany and the rest of the world been paying attention, the first signs of Hitler would have been a catalyst for deep, collective introspection, rather than the annihilation of millions. Trump offers us a similar opportunity.

For millennia humankind has battled the manifestations of the shadow—most notably the inhumanization and devaluation of “the other”—but ignored the shadow itself. And so the pressure simply rebuilds, and the cycle of hate and violence continues. But now we’ve reached a point where the cycle is nearing its end. All that’s left to decide is what the end looks like: The emergence of a new world full of hope, or a destitute world full of suffering.

Trump is helping to clarify that choice. Let’s listen, shine light on our individual and collective shadows, and then choose the future we want.

Share

This I Believe: We Reap What We Sow

02 Wednesday Mar 2016

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 15 Comments

Tags

"Augustus", "Financial Times, Abraham Lincoln, Alexander Hamilton, Donald Trump, Federalist Papers, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Marco Rubio, Martin Wolfe, pluto-populism, Reaping What One Sows, Robert Kagan, Roman republic, Ted Cruz

A friend sent me a link this morning to an article written by Martin Wolfe in the Financial Times, entitled “How Donald Trump Embodies How Great Republics Meet Their End.”

Although the article’s title may be an overstatement, the body of what Wolfe writes parallels what I have been feeling, thinking, and saying (to a small group of friends who are concerned about what the rise of Trump means for this country and what can individuals who feel similarly do).

In another post, at another time, I will add to the theme of ‘reaping what one sows’ as I think it is not only the Republicans who must face this but also the Democrats (for not having effectively countered the Republicans).

In the meantime, see what you think about what Wolfe writes:

James Ferguson illustration
@James Ferguson, Financial Times

What is one to make of the rise of Donald Trump? It is natural to think of comparisons with populist demagogues past and present. It is natural, too, to ask why the Republican party might choose a narcissistic bully as its candidate for president. But this is not just about a party, but about a great country. The US is the greatest republic since Rome, the bastion of democracy, the guarantor of the liberal global order. It would be a global disaster if Mr Trump were to become president. Even if he fails, he has rendered the unthinkable sayable.

Mr Trump is a promoter of paranoid fantasies, a xenophobe and an ignoramus. His business consists of the erection of ugly monuments to his own vanity. He has no experience of political office. Some compare him to Latin American populists. He might also be considered an American Silvio Berlusconi, albeit without the charm or business acumen. But Mr Berlusconi, unlike Mr Trump, never threatened to round up and expel millions of people. Mr Trump is grossly unqualified for the world’s most important political office.

Yet, as Robert Kagan, a neoconservative intellectual, argues in a powerful column in The Washington Post, Mr Trump is also “the GOP’s Frankenstein monster”. He is, says Mr Kagan, the monstrous result of the party’s “wild obstructionism”, its demonisation of political institutions, its flirtation with bigotry and its “racially tinged derangement syndrome” over President Barack Obama. He continues: “We are supposed to believe that Trump’s legion of ‘angry’ people are angry about wage stagnation. No, they are angry about all the things Republicans have told them to be angry about these past seven-and-a-half years”.

Mr Kagan is right, but does not go far enough. This is not about the last seven-and-a-half years. These attitudes were to be seen in the 1990s, with the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Indeed, they go back all the way to the party’s opportunistic response to the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Alas, they have become worse, not better, with time.

Why has this happened? The answer is that this is how a wealthy donor class, dedicated to the aims of slashing taxes and shrinking the state, obtained the footsoldiers and voters it required. This, then, is “pluto-populism”: the marriage of plutocracy with rightwing populism. Mr Trump embodies this union. But he has done so by partially dumping the free-market, low tax, shrunken government aims of the party establishment, to which his financially dependent rivals remain wedded. That gives him an apparently insuperable advantage. Mr Trump is no conservative, elite conservatives complain. Precisely. That is also true of the party’s base.

Mr Trump is egregious. Yet in some respects the policies of his two leading rivals, Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, are as bad. Both propose highly regressive tax cuts, just like Mr Trump. Mr Cruz even wishes to return to a gold standard. Mr Trump says that the sick should not die on the streets. Mr Cruz and Mr Rubio seem to be not quite so sure.

Yet the Trump phenomenon is not the story of just one party. It is about the country and so, inevitably, the world. In creating the American republic, the founding fathers were aware of the example of Rome. Alexander Hamilton argued in the Federalist Papers that the new republic would need an “energetic executive”. He noted that Rome itself, with its careful duplication of magistracies, depended in its hours of need on the grant of absolute, albeit temporary, power to one man, called a “dictator”.

The US would have no such office. Instead, it would have a unitary executive: the president as elected monarch. The president has limited, but great, authority. For Hamilton, the danger of overweening power would be contained by “first, a due dependence on the people, secondly, a due responsibility”.

During the first century BC, the wealth of empire destabilised the Roman republic. In the end, Augustus, heir of the popular party, terminated the republic and installed himself as emperor. He did so by preserving all the forms of the republic, while he dispensed with their meaning.

It is rash to assume constitutional constraints would survive the presidency of someone elected because he neither understands nor believes in them. Rounding up and deporting 11m people is an immense coercive enterprise. Would a president elected to achieve this be prevented and, if so, by whom? What are we to make of Mr Trump’s enthusiasm for the barbarities of torture? Would he find people willing to carry out his desires or not?

It is not difficult for a determined leader to do the previously unthinkable by appealing to conditions of emergency. Both Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Delano Roosevelt did some extraordinary things in wartime. But these men knew limits. Would Mr Trump also know limits? Hamilton’s “energetic” executive is dangerous.

It was the ultra-conservative president Paul von Hindenburg who made Hitler chancellor of Germany in 1933. What made the new ruler so destructive was not only that he was a paranoid lunatic, but that he ruled a great power. Trump may be no Hitler. But the US is also no Weimar Germany. It is a vastly more important country even than that.

Mr Trump may still fail to win the Republican nomination. But, should he do so the Republican elite will have to ask themselves hard questions — not only how this happened, but how they should properly respond. Beyond that, the American people will have to decide what sort of human being they want to put in the White House. The implications for them and for the world of this choice will be profound. Above all, Mr Trump may not prove unique. An American “Caesarism” has now become flesh. It seems a worryingly real danger today. It could return again in future.

Many of the comments that follow this article in yesterday’s Financial Times are interesting too. Go to: http://on.ft.com/24zsLF4 and scroll to the bottom of the article if you want to read some of them. To write to the author, use martin.wolf@ft.com.

As always, I encourage respectful Comments on this site.

Share

“The Middle-Class Squeeze”

26 Saturday Sep 2015

Posted by Richard in Articles & Books of Interest, The Outer Loop

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

"The Middle-Class Squeeze", Bernie Sanders, Charles Moore, Distrust of Government, Donald Trump, Hilliary Clinton, House Republicans, President Obama, The Middle Class, The Wall Street Journal, WSJ

middleclasssqueeze                                                                      Illustration: Robert Neubecke

Thanks to an email from CT, I read an article this morning that seems to put some clarity and understanding into what may be an important (and less often discussed) factor behind many issues affecting our country.

Why is Trump hitting a note with some people in the country (beyond his theatrics)?

Why isn’t Obama getting adequate recognition for what in many ways has been a successful presidency (beyond the racism)?

Why is Bernie Sanders also hitting a note with some people in this country (beyond his progressive rhetoric and beliefs)?

Why is Hilary Clinton not walking away with the Democratic nomination (beyond her email issues, her gender, and her sometimes grating personality)?

Why are two to four dozen Republican House members (and some Republican Senators) able to have such a (negative and powerful) impact on the business of the House and the country (despite their safe, gerrymandered seats)?

Why is distrust of government at its highest level in many years (beyond the media’s inadequacy in presenting a clear picture of what is underway in this country)?

While there are differing and numerous explanations for each of these questions, I think one factor that perhaps underlies all of them and has not received sufficient discussion and understanding is contained in a recent Wall Street Journal‘s article, The Middle-Class Squeeze, by Charles Moore.

Check it out and feel free to add your opinion in the Comment section of this post.

Share

♣ Search



♣ Featured Posts

  • The List: “MillersTime” Readers’ 2024 Favorite Books
  • Returning to Sedona, AZ
  • Looking for Good Films to See?
  • And the Winners Are…
  • The Book List: 2023
  • The Lake Country: Thru Ellen’s Lens
  • I Did It Again
  • Readers’ 2023 Mid-Year Favorite Books
  • By the Sea, By the Beautiful Sea…
  • Yes, It’s True…I Biked from Bruges to Amsterdam!
  • Carrie Trauth Made the World a Better Place
  • “I Used to Be a Human Being” – Andrew Sullivan
  • Sam Miller: “There Is Never Enough.”
  • When I Was 22…
  • The Best $50 I’ve Spent All Year…Even Though It’s Free

♣ Recent Comments

  • David Price on 2025 MillersTime Baseball Contests
  • Andrew Cate on 2025 MillersTime Baseball Contests
  • chris eacho on 2025 MillersTime Baseball Contests
  • Ed Scholl on 2025 MillersTime Baseball Contests
  • Anthony leon on “The Secret History of Tiger Woods”

♣ Archives

  • July 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • March 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • April 2023
  • February 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011

♣ Sections

  • Articles & Books of Interest
  • Escapes and Pleasures
  • Family and Friends
  • Go Sox
  • The Outer Loop

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Chateau by Ignacio Ricci.