It’s idyllic. It’s also pricey, but worth the cost.  We’ll be in a large rental with lots of space to spread out and relax on multistory balconies, porches, and an outdoor area to do cookouts.  Our grandkids are 11, 11, 9, 7, and 5 years old.  They are—as we like to say—the “dessert of life.”  Gammy has plans for game nights each evening.  We’ll see how that works.  Sometimes the sweetness of these little guys fades as the evening grows long and fatigue sets in.  But it’s a fun thought.

Board games surpass the electronic distractions of the “gaming” sort.  Imagine that.  Kids playing cards, dominoes, and games that require using their hands to advance toward success as opposed to thumbs to dart electronically here and there.  Yes, we’re 75 and a bit old-style, preferring to use our eyes and hands to deal cards or manipulate small tokens in the physical realm. (I use my thumbs in conjunction with the remaining fingers to grasp a cold beverage.)

The beach at Seacrest is just spectacular.  White sand, warm, clear water that often reveals small fish and an occasional jellyfish to avoid.  The waves vary based on the wind, but they are ideal for riding the surf.  On a normal day, the adults will take turns taking the kids there.  However, the pool alternative is very enticing.

In the center of Seacrest is a huge pool complex that offers a lot of space for adults and kids alike.  Every hour, there’s a 15-minute timeout for swimmers, soakers, loungers, and those who enjoy the water without little ones splashing about.  The pool is my favorite spot to read, play with the grands, and enjoy an adult beverage.  No glassware, and better to take your own lunch made at home than shelling out for it at the poolside snack bar.

There are also many very nice shops in and near the community. Yes, both cheap and expensive stuff.  Ice cream parlors are a favorite of our grands after dinner.  All of this is within walking distance, so as the sun sets, a walk to secure ice cream in the cool of the evening is a special treat.

Each of the homes comes with bikes for residents to use.  So, touring the community the old-fashioned way is fun.  I like to take an early morning jaunt before the heat arrives.  Others do as well.  But frequently people out for a ride pass me.  The days of running are for others now.  That’s what three hip surgeries will do for you.

The downside is that we can’t take our Yellow Lab, Woody.  He’s boarding with his trainer this week.  He’ll be fine palling around with his dog friends.  But we will miss him.  So will the grands; they love him to pieces.  And of course, I will do some writing each day to preserve my sanity.  I have a book ready for a publisher but need to tie up a few edits before I send off the revised draft.

We’ll spend most evenings cooking for ourselves.  The house has a wonderful outdoor grill arrangement, and the dads will put their BBQ skills to work while others put together the healthy part of the meal.  In the morning, we’ll make pancakes. Always a favorite.  And there is also the nearby doughnut shop that serves up fresh ones at 6:00 AM.  Yep, it’s an early adventure, but few things are more fun than seeing the wide eyes of grandkids when the doughnuts arrive.   While these delights wreck our diets, they are quite happy-making.

We’ll be taking I-95 south and then, after entering Florida, I-10 westward.  It’s long, but with occasional stops (Buc-ee’s is our favorite), it’s fun, nonetheless.  If you have not had a Buc-ee’s experience, you really need to.  Their brisket sandwiches and candied pecans, well, they’re the best.  Yep, very southern also.

I recall the first time my parents took us to Florida circa 1956.  We stayed near St. Augustine and had loads of fun.  But I was a kid then.  Seventy years later, being a grandaddy is a lot more fun, even if I’m a lot slower.  To be certain, the memories that vacations like this can deliver will last long after we are gone.  And for that reason, they are very special.

In the numerous elections I stood in, the most bitter contests were the intraparty ones.  There are always differences among candidates of the same stripe.  But you would expect that the variance would be minor.  In my own tribe—the Republican Party—it wasn’t always so.  Sometimes, the differences were over issues on the margin. Others were more sharply delineated, particularly on social issues or taxation.  Often they were a matter of personality.  But frequently, the campaign could get quite heated.

In the GOP, we have had our trying moments.  During the Obama years, when the Tea Party (Taxed Enough Already) spawned, it soon was drawn into policy fights that had more to do with issues outside of its original focus, which was specifically excessive taxation. Likewise, Libertarians infatuated with Congressman Ron Paul were so unhappy that he was not nominated by the GOP for president in 2012 that they became a drag on the eventual nominee, Mitt Romney.  And of course, even the MAGA coalition so adroitly assembled by Donald Trump is now pulling at its own seams concerning tariffs, gas prices, and the war in Iran. Parties are not parties.

Today you need look no further than the Democrat Party to see that.  For years, the Democrats were satisfied to tell us that we were not spending enough on anything.  The exception was defense.  Despite their gratuitous words in support of “our troops,” they actually do not like the military because it tends to be conservative, which, of course, Democrats are not.  Otherwise, they’ve consistently ascribed to the view that the government is the piggybank by which they win votes by handing out other people’s money.  They chafe at the idea that a government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.  But that, of course, is a true threat to us all.  Big government will run our lives if we place in its hands the bridle to control us.  No thanks.

However, in recent years—a function of the civics illiteracy that teacher unions have presided over—a generation of misguided and uneducated youth has attained voting age.  They have been sold a bill of goods labeled “socialism” that is very much about handing out other people’s money, wealth, homes, and rights.  Their motto is gimme-gimme.  But there is a darker side.

The socialists advancing under the Democrat Party banner are advocating for issues that are quite apart from the Democrats we knew in the 1990s.  Those Democrats were happy to tax and spend.  But today’s Democrat socialists are unhappy unless they are confiscating and destroying.

Consider the issues they embrace. Seizing private property through rent control.  Anti-Semitism. Support for terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, thus aligning with those who are slaughtering innocent men, women, and children. Biological males playing in biological female sports. Boys “identifying” as girls and using the latter’s locker rooms.  Wide open borders.  Tourists coming to the US for the sole purpose of having babies that would then have dual US-foreign citizenship. Social programs that are fraught with fraud.  Offering Medicare benefits to people who have not paid a solitary penny into the program.  Defunding the police.  Doxing law enforcement officers who are executing the law as written.  Granting bail for criminals on the same day that they commit crimes. 

I grew up with traditional Democrats who would have rejected this.  To be sure, they wanted government to do more for the needy, but they had reasonable criteria.  Not so now with Democrats.

Indeed, today’s Democrats, focused as they are on rebuffing Trump for any reason at all, have condoned their socialist adherents in unimaginable ways.  When the communist Zohran Mamdani was elected as mayor of New York City last year, Democrat pols nervously told us, “That’s a New York phenomenon, not indicative of Democrats across the fruited plains.”  Oh really?  Now those socialists have also succeeded in several states across the country.

And the mainstream Democrat response? “We’re a Big Tent Party.” Well, that tent is soaked with a radical accelerant.  And when the match is struck, it will ignite a bonfire.  It’s time for Democrats to consider what until 5 minutes ago was unthinkable. That will require them to temper Trump-hatred and vote Republican. It may be ashes in their mouth, but better than ashes at their feet.

As an artilleryman, I learned that the Morgan Horse breed, developed in New England, was the ideal animal to pull heavy cannons and caissons in the days of horse artillery.  They were very strong and beautiful.  Compact and refined in their build, Morgans have strong legs, a straight or slightly convex profile, and a broad forehead.  They also had large, prominent eyes; well-defined shoulders, and an upright and well-arched neck.  All that works well for many purposes, and artillerymen, particularly in the Civil War era, loved them.

In WWI, when President Harry Truman was an artillery captain, his battery may have had Morgans, but more likely, mules did the work of pulling heavy cannons and related equipment.  Truman grew up plowing fields on a farm and loved animals.  So, when he assumed command of his unit, he took a special interest in the care of its livestock.  It was a defining moment for him and his men.  Truman was a geek of sorts, wore glasses—was practically blind without them—and did not fit the tough and ready profile of many of the roughneck Irishmen from Kansas City, Missouri, who populated his battery.  They weren’t very confident that Truman had “the right stuff.”  But when they saw how genuine his concern for the horses in combat was, they took a shine to him.  He would demonstrate courage and tenacity, and in the years after the war, his comrades were devoted to him, not passing up an opportunity to reunite and recount their days in combat.

In many ways, Truman—the man—was shaped by his experience on the farm where he grew up.  He loved the mules he used in farming, noting, “My favorite animal is the mule.  He has more horse sense than a horse.  He knows when to stop eating – and he knows when to stop working.”  He would frequently compare men and mules, both good and bad characteristics.  Somewhere in my notes, I recall Truman saying that you can learn a lot about people walking behind a mule all day.

So, what does this have to do with the documentary I noted at the outset?  Many of the enthusiasts who are doing so much to preserve horse breeds in America are young women.  I have observed over the years how young girls and women love horses.  We have a dear friend and his daughter who fit the mold.  I was struck by how much energy and love the young women in this documentary devoted to their horses, caring for them, breeding them, and training their steeds for development and in some cases competition.  The Morgans for pulling, the Quarter Horses for competition in cowboy pursuits, the Mustangs for reenactments of the Pony Express, and the nostalgic care for the intelligent and versatile Appaloosas cherished by westerners and Native Americans.  In each case, young women had a prominent story to tell about their love of horses and why they do what they do.  They had a profound purpose.

That made me think about the current generation of young people—Gen Z-ers—who are so engaged with the socialist agenda.  That includes seeking a government that will give them “free stuff” or caters to their preoccupation with sexual identity, and their expressed hatred for all things traditional.  They are angry CAVE people, that is, Citizens Against Virtually Everything. 

They tell you explicitly or implicitly by their dress, cosmetics, and manner why they don’t care for your way of life.  They are in your face, even when they stride past you with their combat boots as an expression of their militancy.  They are so filled with radical contradiction that they have little time for rational conversation.  They could not be more different from the young women I saw engaged in raising and caring for noble horse breeds.  To the contrary, there is very little noble in what a great many young people are doing today in our society torn asunder with disdain for tradition and the conservation of good and necessary things.

It strikes me that so many young people, girls and boys alike, lack participation in ideal things that matter.  Is it any wonder that we have so many disaffected people who lack an understanding of what is important?  Like Truman, I suppose you can learn a lot about people by observing what they do.  And the young women caring for the equine world have something to share that is noble.

What is more depressing is that this is not a surprise in America.  In many quarters, fatherhood does not hold the same respect as motherhood.  Today, fatherlessness is alarmingly high across racial lines.  Among white mothers with white fathers, the rate of single motherhood is a stunning 38 percent.  For black mothers with black fathers, the rate is a jaw-dropping 59 percent.  And for context, black Americans—only 15.2 percent of the total American population of 340 million—are 2.8 times more likely than white Americans to be imprisoned at some point in their lives.  Indeed, black men, who comprise 33.7 percent of male prisoners, are six times more likely than white men to be incarcerated in their lifetimes.  Put another way, the black incarceration rate is 570 per 100,000 adults, compared to 170 per 100,000 for white adults.  

Some claim this is a racial matter.  In fact, for both white and black prisoners, it’s a Father’s Day problem.  Is it any surprise that all male prisoners weren’t particularly motivated to send a Father’s Day card to their dads, assuming they even knew their father?  Just like black men without a father in their lives, white men are similarly vexed.  Dad’s matter.  And sons deprived of them are disadvantaged in significant ways.

I have written lately on how the far left radicals—the same half-witted people who could label “mothers” as “gestating people”—accuse men of “toxic masculinity.”  They utterly have no appreciation of how a full-time father in the life of boys and young men positively conditions them for success in life.  Men are needed to raise good men.  

That doesn’t happen by magic.  It happens when fathers impress upon their sons the importance of strength controlled by goodness. That doesn’t translate to “macho” men, but rather men who exhibit moral strength and integrity.  Men who do things the right way when no one is looking.  Men who respect women, understand the significance of long-term marriage, and the necessity of strong families for society at large.

I was fortunate—like many of you—to have a strong father.  My dad was not perfect. But he loved me, understood he had a role to play in shaping manhood for me, and knew that his place was not to be my “buddy,” but rather model manhood in a responsible manner.  He did.  And I certainly have made the effort to do that for my sons, both of whom are fine men to this day.  

Unfortunately, responsible fatherhood in America today is in rapid decline.  There are many factors.  Moral decay. Hedonism. Rejection of a biblical worldview.  Social media amounts to intellectual pornography, polluting the attitudes and rhetoric of just about everyone who falls under its influence.  It takes a very committed father these days to raise boys to be strong men in every sense of the world.

Yet men deprived of strong fathers nonetheless yearn for them.  In my years as a soldier, I witnessed how fatherless young men had as their first father figure their drill sergeant, who took a firm and personal interest in their success as young soldiers.  Contrary to popular belief, Army drill sergeants did not try to “wash people out” of the service.  To the contrary, they saw success as bringing those young men along and putting them on the road to achievement.  Indeed, rarely will you meet a former soldier who cannot immediately recall the name of his drill sergeant.  Whether they had good fathers or none at all, those young men knew that their drill sergeant wanted them to be as manly and strong as any good father would want them to be.

I’m not suggesting that fathers become parade field task masters, although there is a role for exacting standards for young boys that fathers should provide.  But I am saying that it is vitally important for fathers to be, well, strong influencers and examples in the lives of their sons.

How is that done?  Loving them.  Caring for them.  Letting them know that you see in them a man who will not only be good, but is ready to pass on to their sons the values that are needed to sustain strong men in our society.

This Father’s Day, don’t bother with a card.  Show dad the good man you are.  That’s enough for Father’s Day.

Bees are fascinating creatures.  With over 20,000 known species, they include honeybees, bumblebees, and stingless bees, all of which live in highly hierarchical colonies. Yet many bee species live in solitude. 

Bees are admirably diligent and very different from carnivorous or omnivorous insects.  Bees are herbivores, specifically feeding on nectar as a carbohydrate source for metabolic energy, pollen for protein, and other nutrients to feed their larvae. 

Like people, bees are found on every continent except Antarctica.  And they are necessary for habitats on the planet, where insect-pollinated flowering plants are the direct beneficiaries of diligent bees.

They seem quite happy working.  In that regard, the bee unemployment rate is almost nonexistent.  They don’t complain that they don’t have paid sick leave or demand that certain bees deserve preferential treatment based on the species.  Bees don’t have unions.  They are just happy to have a job and focus on what needs to be done and do it well. Bees don’t expect that others will do their work for them.  They know their skill set and set about it every day that the weather permits.

Bees don’t lobby others for special treatment. They don’t expect it.  All they expect is that life will present itself for the single opportunity that is before them.  To make things better. And on that score, they are much needed.  Agricultural sprays are their most profound threat.  They are exposed to many chemical stressors. The primary culprits are synthetic agrochemicals and industrial pollutants that threaten vital pollinators.

Bees play an important role in pollinating flowering plants, like our apple, peach, and cherry trees at the river that cross-pollinate to produce fruit.  Remarkably, it’s estimated that one-third of our food supply depends on pollination by insects and birds.  But by far the bulk of that work is accomplished by bees in the wild or otherwise domesticated by beekeepers.

Yet in the past fifty-plus years, there has been an alarming decline among species of wild bees and related pollinators.  Some of that is due to the stress created by increased parasites and disease, residential pesticide use, and a concomitant reduction in the number of wild flowers overtaken by development, biodiversity loss, and ecosystem degradation.  I suppose that if our bees at the river could talk, they would thank my wife for planting the lavender that they are so eagerly engaged with daily. Yet all they know is that it is there and important to what they do.  They work tirelessly, and just watching them suggests contrasts for me.

Look at our society and culture today.  Take note of how many people expect that the government will take care of them from cradle to grave, meeting their every need.  That spending other people’s money is the way to get ahead in life.  Perish the thought that you might have to work, even five days of the week.  Our lavender-tending bees have no such expectations: they live for the opportunity to work.  They are made to work as we are, created to tend to the earth and care for all that the Creator made.  Bees don’t believe “we have it coming to us.”  They go out and get it, and then use their efforts to help themselves and even us.  They instinctively fulfill the purpose for which they are made.  In that regard, their quite personal work ethic abounds in the form of a gift to others. 

So many in our society believe they should be the recipient of gifts, not be so to others.  Add to that sorrowful lot those in the political class who are delighted to spend other people’s money, until there is none left to spend, requiring that we go into a disastrous cycle of debt that our children and grandchildren will bear.  At the same time, too many people miss the dignity and character-building of hard work.  Unlike bees, the elected class loves having others do the work while they enjoy the honey of power and prestige.  You would think those who rule over us would take note of how the work ethic has been undermined in America.  They seem quite enamored of burdening us with overregulation, excessive taxation, and endless pontification about how much good they are doing for us.  Bees don’t bother us with such gaslighting. 

Our river bees offer a better example for all.  Hard work matters. Diligence is important, necessary, and beneficial to others.  We need to be more like bees.  

A Date with History: Desert Redleg: Artillery Warfare in the First Gulf War

This will be the second time I’ve lectured on this topic at Cantigny.  The First Division Museum sponsors this historical series, and it’s a wonderful service to those who can attend.  This particular lecture will be an in-person presentation, and I will be autographing books for people who attend the event.  I will also be discussing how the First Gulf War differed from those we will fight in the future.  There are many lessons from both the Ukrainian and Iranian wars.  These lessons and the amazing technologies that have advanced in recent years will combine to shape a very different reality for future conflicts.  In that regard, the Army will always go forward best by going back first.  That is why I do these lectures here and in other places.  We cannot afford to disregard what we have learned in past conflicts as we prepare and modernize our forces to engage in those that will surely come. 

The Beauty of our Nation

Despite the political conflict and silliness that make our society coarser and more unattractive, we live in a beautiful land.  Our trip westward, helped by dry sunny weather, was one that revealed remarkable sites.  Escaping the concrete terrain of the Northern Virginia beltway, crossing the western reaches of Maryland into Pennsylvania was a relief.  The panorama of hills and mountains is glorious, and despite the mortifying gymnastics of dodging numerous tractor-trailers, we enjoyed taking in the sights.  As we traveled through Ohio toward Toledo, the hills and farms reminded us that we are a nation of hard workers.  Farmers, blue-collar workers, and all those who work diligently in flyover country are hardly recognized by gasbag politicians who pass the time attacking one another over issues that are not remotely of concern to taxpayers.  But as you drive, you appreciate people.  The homes they occupy, the businesses they work in, and the schools they attend.  It’s hard not to admire our people, the same folks who our politicians believe are incapable of seeing through the nonsense in Washington and state capitols.  They deserve better.  We should give it to them.

A Small Town

We spent the first evening on our journey in an idyllic small Midwest town, Perrysburg, in Wood County, Ohio.  With a population of over 25,000, it’s as Midwest, I suppose, as Midwest could be.  We drove through the town after having a pleasant dinner and were delighted by the beautiful homes that border the south side of the Maumee River, about 12 miles southwest of Toledo.  Lawns manicured, people walking their dogs, pushing babies in strollers, kids riding bikes along the sidewalk, churches on every corner, and well-maintained homes distinctly different from one another.  Absent was the hectic Beltway traffic and stretches of monotonous track housing.  Perrysburg has character.  And it was easy to imagine living happily there, away from the busyness of Northern Virginia.  Of course, there is our Tidewater haven to think of in the Northern Neck.  We are already missing that.  But it was pleasant to see the peacefulness of a place they call Perrysburg.

Gas

Well, it’s expensive.  But not uniformly.  In Blue states like Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, gas is well over $4.00.  That is almost exclusively due to taxes.  In Ohio and Indiana, it was 40-50 cents cheaper.  So, the art form is timing refueling when you cross the right state line.  We fueled up in Indiana to make sure we did not leave our cash in Illinois.  You can’t always avoid the high costs.  You have to refuel when needed, and that may mean paying more.  But you can lessen the cost with some strategic buying.  And like many of you, we long for the day when the conflict in the Middle East will end, and gas prices will come down. But it’s a price I am willing to pay if we wind up with a world that does not have a nuclear Iran.

German Cuisine

Last night we found a German restaurant in the suburbs of Chicago.  Shelley and I have fond memories of living in Germany from 1985 to 1988.  So, we enjoyed reminiscing as we partook of jäger schnitzels and assorted side dishes.  Yes, apple strudel too.  It’s been a good trip so far, but we’re looking forward to returning to Virginia, which holds much of the same beauty we are seeing now.

A few thoughts while driving.

On other occasions, I forget to turn off the sprinkler in my “beer garden” at the river, or “riv’ah” as slowly pronounced in the “Naw’thin Neck.”  That place, bounded by the Potomac on the north, the Rappahannock on the south, and the Chesapeake Bay on the east, is where I do most of my book writing.  Typically, I’ll turn on the sprinkler, go inside, get enthralled with scribing, and forget that I am mercilessly drowning my vegetables.  Fortunately, it’s a raised bed, just about to hip level, so the water drains well when it occurs to me to stop the flood.  Oh, and the reference to “beer garden?”  That is because when I weed the garden, I can set my beer on the raised ledge to weed the bed.  Easy on the back, while accommodating my thirst for a cold “bev’age,” yet another colloquialism.

Checking the oil and watering the gardens are important.  But not that important. What is?  At three-quarters of a century old, I still do some important things.  Gone are the days of earlier significance, a 28-year military career, and another decade and a half in Virginia’s legislature.  Now the important things tend to center on relationships.

Most recently, I built a toy battleship for my youngest grandson, who is 4, and lives in Kansas City.  He’s a very bright lad who loves animals, but I had a piece of wood in my shop that gave every evidence it would make a fine replica of the USS Missouri (BB-63).  Pulling the right pieces of spare wood together, I fashioned a reasonable facsimile of the legendary battlewagon for him to slay fleets of imaginary adversaries. Years from now, that toy may or may not exist.  But maybe he’ll remember he had a grandaddy who made it for him, and think fondly of it.  And then, hopefully, will do something similar for the future apples of his eye.

Not long ago, I spent time with fellow veterans of the 1st Infantry Division with whom I served in the First Gulf War.  Those are special relationships to me, particularly since this year was the 35th anniversary of our successful effort to liberate Kuwait from Iraq’s aggression in 1990-I991.  I wrote a book about that because I thought it was important to chronicle it.  But more importantly, reuniting annually to be with my comrades in arms is very important.  One day, we’ll be gone, but since this reunion stretches across multiple generations—Vietnam, the First Gulf War, and the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq—it’s an opportunity for old soldiers to pass the transcendent lessons on to younger ones.  They will tell our stories and theirs, too.  It’s important. As we like to say, half of the war stories are true, and the other half should have been.

There are other things I do that are important.  A few weeks ago, I spent time with five other Army officers from my days as a young lieutenant.  I was the junior fellow in the pack.  They were all like big brothers I never had.  And wise beyond their years, at least I thought so.  In a fashion, they imprinted me with good thinking that I carried with me in my profession throughout my Army career.  Occasionally, I would reach in and dispense that wisdom to others.  Funny how that works, young soldiers equipping others to be old ones. These relationships are also important.  They must be cared for and nourished, even until we join the immortal ranks of soldiers past.

So, there are some important things I do in relationships that are significantly more valuable than checking the oil and subjecting my vegetables to Noah-like diluvial punishment.

However, consider this relationship as found in an exchange between Jesus and a learned man in Matthew 22:35-40. A lawyer asked, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And Jesus said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.  This is the great and first commandment.  And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.  On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

Important stuff, indeed.

So over time, Republican party leaders made the case that bringing Libertarians into the fold would solve the problem.  It wasn’t that easy.  When Mitt Romney won the GOP nomination for President, it was libertarian-leaning Ron Paul who stole the thunder at the Republican National Convention in 2012.  Not satisfied with Romney, Libertarian delegates made a spectacle at the convention, insisting on a platform to their liking. They didn’t get it and eventually walked away from both Romney and the GOP.  It was a marriage of sorts without a sufficient prenup.

With the rise of Donald Trump in GOP politics, the rift between the GOP and its libertarian cousins was somewhat pacified.  This was more a function of Trump’s overwhelming manhandling of establishment GOP politicians, including the Libertarian upstart Rand Paul. Trump cleared the field like a harvester with a sharp scythe. So effective was he in revealing the weaknesses of past GOP candidates that Libertarians were left without a choice but to join what became known as the “Make America Great Again” or “MAGA” movement.

In large part, Trump sated the Libertarian beast. His campaign rhetoric fit nicely into what are generally regarded as Libertarian principles. That included individual freedom and the belief that people should have the right to make choices about their own life, body, and property, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others.  On economic issues, they agreed with Trump to enhance free enterprise.  They liked his renunciation of foreign wars and an adventurous foreign policy.  And they were particularly persuaded by his call for limited government.

Many conservative Republicans agree with these principles, but are uncomfortable with the liberal bent of Libertarians on social issues and their non-interventionist tendencies, which amounts to a dangerous isolationism.  However, conservative Republicans tended to support the war on drugs. They were very committed to protecting traditional marriage.  And they understood that—like it or not—America has an important role to play in securing world peace according to international norms.  Libertarians would defenestrate that, preferring to stay cuddled between two massive oceans and pretend the dangers we face will comport with their Pollyannish view of world affairs.  They won’t.

What has emerged in this union is a failed governance symbiosis, particularly in Congress, where prominent Libertarians dispute with the Trump agenda and the governing objectives of the Republican majorities.  In the Senate, Kentucky’s Rand Paul frequently is a thorn in the side of the President and the Senate’s leadership.  It’s not uncommon for him to vote procedurally with the Democrats, along with unhappy liberal Republicans.  In the House of Representatives, fellow Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie was a carbon copy of Paul.  He too vexed the House leadership, often siding with Democrats on thorny issues for Republicans.  In Massie’s case, his obduracy vis-à-vis President Trump was so profound that it incurred the President’s ire, which led to Massie’s defeat in the GOP primary in Kentucky on 19 May 2026.  He is gone.  And with his departure, it is time to rethink the Republican-Libertarian experiment.

Some assert that politics is about addition, and not subtraction.  In general, that’s indisputable.  But when it comes to governance, a party needs to set aside individual issue predispositions to attain governance objectives.  When you have politicians like Paul and Massie who insist on “my way or the highway” positions, governance can be very hard, if not impossible.  Moreover, such discord does not advance the necessary unity to combat the liberal and now socialist agenda or the Democratic Party.  The liberals are ecstatic when the GOP fights among itself on issues that frankly should solicit unity, even when the solutions proffered are imperfect.

I conclude this.  It is time for clarity between the GOP and Libertarians.  Either Libertarians get on board with a unified approach to governance, or they take to that highway they so much prefer on occasion.  It’s time for the Republican Party to return to nominating Republicans, not discordant Libertarians who give every evidence of bucking the team for their own political purposes.

The Republican Party must reconnect with its foundational principles of more freedom, lower taxes, and greater opportunity in a world where the US projects strategic power to protect those goals.  If Libertarians agree, fine.  Otherwise, they should get their own ticket.

The Supreme Court of Virginia acted as Chief Justice John Marshall advised in Marbury v. Madison when he wrote that “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”  Moreover, Virginia Justice D. Arthur Kelsey noted in reversing the redistricting scheme that Marshall’s law professor, George Wythe, emphasized two important duties of the courts.  The first is “to declare constitutional boundaries of political power.” The second is exhibiting “the courage to ‘fearlessly’ protect them.”  Justice Kelsey and the majority of the court have done both exceedingly well.

They, in a fashion, upended the plans by the Democrat Governor, State Senate, and House of Delegates to defenestrate Virginia’s constitutional provision abolishing partisan redistricting, substituting a new amendment to allow Gerrymandering solely by the General Assembly pursuant to its most partisan political designs.  Such was an affront to the rights of Virginians by ignoring the Constitution’s procedural requirement that any amendment must be approved by the General Assembly twice, once before the next general election, and then again by legislators after that election.

The wisdom underlying this procedure was to deliberately slow the amendment process so that the voters would have an opportunity to signal their approval or disapproval of legislative candidates supporting controversial amendments.  Indeed, dissatisfaction at the polls over a proposed amendment could result in its failure to pass in the subsequent legislative session following that election.

At issue before the court was whether the General Assembly passed the proposed amendment prior to that intervening election.  The Republicans protested that it had not, pointing out that voting in the 2025 general election began on 19 September and ended on 4 November, Election Day.  Yet the General Assembly’s initial vote for the proposed constitutional amendment to go before the electorate occurred on October 31, after over 1.3 million votes—40 percent of the entire vote—had already been cast in the election cycle.  The court agreed, concluding that the election is not simply a date on a calendar, but rather a period of time starting when people begin participating in early voting and concluding on what we call Election Day.

In citing their opposition to Democrat lawyers seeking to ignore that elections begin with the first casting of early votes, the court settled on a precise definition to resolve the issue.  “History confirms that ‘election’ includes both ballot casting and ballot receipt.”  Indeed, in the 63 prior constitutional amendments adopted since 1971, “The Commonwealth has identified none in which the General Assembly passed a proposed amendment after voting in the general election had already begun.”  In essence, the court concluded that “The Commonwealth implicitly concedes that early voting is one of the combined actions of the election when it recognizes that early voting is ‘casting a ballot to be counted on Election Day.’”

In that regard, the court made clear that when citizens cast ballots early, “the durational term ‘election’ and the determinate term ‘Election Day’ fit together perfectly.

In essence, what the ruling Democrat majority advocated—with the clear approval of Governor Abigail Spanberger—amounted to “denying over 1.3 million Virginians their constitutional right to have a voice in the debate over whether their Constitution should be amended—thereby eroding one of the core rights that Article XII, Section 1 was intended to safeguard.”

Their final verdict was resounding. “For these reasons, we hold that the definition of ‘general election’ in Article XII, Section 1 describes the combined actions of voters casting ballots and officers of election receiving those votes and closing the polls on the last day of the election.”  It was a conclusion a blind Bartimaeus could have seen before he was miraculously healed.

Despite a resounding defeat in this case, Democrats will now seek an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.  It is a petulant act of intransigence in the face of sound legal reason. As Justice Kelsey noted, “While the Commonwealth is free by its lights to do the right thing for the right reason, the Rule of Law requires that it be done the right way.”  Democrats didn’t, and the court’s decision was a frank and firm critique of calcified legislative minds more interested in attaining power than judiciously and legally employing it.

When our nation was established in 1776 and further refined as a constitutional republic in 1787, following the adoption of our Constitution, we were not led by idiots—quite the opposite.  Our leaders then were men influenced by the Enlightenment era.  They devoured the Greek and Roman classics and were enlivened by the brilliance of Enlightenment writers.

• Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was an English philosopher and scientist who explored the scientific method involving observation, experimentation, and inductive reasoning, all designed to expand human knowledge. 
• René Descartes (1596–1650), a French philosopher and mathematician who coined the phrase “Cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore I am.”  That idea became foundational in modern philosophy, which saw value in doubt and deductive reasoning.
• John Locke (1632–1704), another English political philosopher, advanced the essential idea that governments derive their legitimacy from the consent of the governed and that natural rights like life, liberty, and property are inherent in our creation as humans.
• Montesquieu (1689–1755), a French political thinker, proposed the separation of powers in government, influencing modern democratic systems.
• Voltaire (1694–1778) of France was a philosopher who advocated for freedom of speech, religious tolerance, and separation of church and state.
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), another French philosopher, focused on the idea of the social contract and popular sovereignty, and how both influenced democratic thought.
• David Hume (1711–1776) was a Scottish philosopher who applied reason to history, religion, and politics, while emphasizing skepticism and empiricism.
• Adam Smith (1723–1790), a fellow Scot economist and philosopher, is credited with founding modern economic theory in his The Wealth of Nations.  Smith promoted free markets and the “invisible hand” whereby economies work best when there is less government intervention in free trade, both domestically and internationally. 
• Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), a German philosopher who systematized Enlightenment thought, emphasized ethics, autonomy, and the role of reason.
• And finally, Englishman and American patriot Thomas Paine (1737–1809) was a political thinker whose Common Sense and The Rights of Man inspired our revolutionary movement.

Our founders, especially Virginia’s Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and Patrick Henry, drew substantially from these remarkable thinkers as they shaped and perfected America’s founding.  Were they with us today, 250 years later, to see what has become of the nation that they founded, they would be stunned.  To be sure, they would be amazed by our scientific and social progress.  They would be in awe of how the United States would rise to be a superpower, possessing political, military, economic, and informational abilities that far outstrip any other nation in world history, indeed put men on the moon.  Yet they would be alarmed.

What would they think about New York City being led by an ideologue who despises private property, the rule of law, and a common American identity?  How would they regard the mayor of Seattle, Washington—a state they hardly envisioned—who is gleeful that people of wealth are fleeing her city when faced with raw wealth confiscation?

What would those Virginians think of the current Governor of their Commonwealth, who brazenly disregards her responsibility to hold criminal illegal aliens to account when they ravage our streets and kill innocent people, even while courts release offenders to commit more crimes? 

What would they say of a Congress that refuses to fund the government over puerile and selfish issues?  What would they think of Federal judges who the US Supreme Court routinely overrules for rendering aggressive activist decisions that obstruct the Chief Executive in his Constitutional duties?

How would they view people who openly call for the assassination of political leaders with whom they disagree?  How would they react to the gutter-like language used in political discourse, as if cursing is acceptable instead of decent vocabulary?  What would they say about the rise of a political class that acts more like an aristocracy than citizens who seek election to serve the people, not to accrue power so that they can enrich themselves at the expense of taxpayers?

And what would they say of us, the voters, who routinely return such people to the halls of power?  Ben Domenech is right.  We should consider the possibility that we are being led by idiots.  Yet so too we are acting doltishly by putting them in power in the first instance.  I suspect they would say to us, consider the Classical and Enlightenment thinkers, and stop the idiocy.