Time To Reflect

Every once and while it is worth the time to reflect.

Time to count our blessings.

Time to focus more on what we have than what we don't have.

Time to consider those who went before us and sacrificed so much that we can live like we do today.

I thought about all of this as I saw some of the headlines over the last week.

It starts with those who are unhinged with anything that Donald Trump does.

Their derangement now even extends to Trump's efforts to beautify the nation's capital for the 250th anniversary of the United States.

Some people are so consumed with hatred for Trump they are willing to sabotage the Reflecting Pool between the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial.

It does not bother them to tear down America as long as they can diminish Trump.

Link: https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/2068771851397111886

There are also people calling themselves "Team Algae" and cheering for algae growth in the Reflecting Pool.

Link: https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/2068842606436790767

This is what they see as the best use of their time?

I think it might be useful for them to spend some time to reflect.

That advice also extends to former President Barack Obama.

Obama said this during the grand opening of his $847 million Presidential Library in Chicago.

Obama fails to recognize that there would not even have been a Declaration of Independence and a United States of America as we know it if the Founders had not done what they did at the time.

The first draft of the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson actually did contain a provision that attacked slavery and the King's actions in "suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce."

Jefferson and many of the Founders wanted to end slavery as part of a new and free country.

Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration of Independence

This passage was deleted in the final Declaration that was approved because it simply was not possible to ban slavery and have a United States of America that was free and independent of England at that time.

The southern states would not agree to that provision.

This is how www.blackpast.org  describes the "The Deleted Passage of the Declaration of Independence".

When Thomas Jefferson included a passage attacking slavery in his draft of the Declaration of Independence it initiated the most intense debate among the delegates gathered at Philadelphia in the spring and early  summer of 1776.  Jefferson’s passage on slavery was the most important section removed from the final document.  It was replaced with a more ambiguous passage about King George’s incitement of “domestic insurrections among us.” Decades later Jefferson blamed the removal of the passage on delegates from South Carolina and Georgia and Northern delegates who represented merchants who were at the time actively involved in the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. 

Why did Jefferson and other Founding Fathers accede to removing this language?

Quite simply, if they were to be successful in breaking away from Great Britain, and gaining independence, all 13 colonies had to be totally united. Everyone who put their name on the Declaration of Independence was literally putting their their life, livelihood and fortune on the line. 

As Benjamin Franklin famously told those that were assembled to sign the Declaration on July 4, 1776,

"We must all hang together or most assuredly we will all hang separately."

It is also important to remember that slavery was not an American invention. It was a fact of life for thousands of years all around the globe.

Slavery was introduced to the American colonies by the British and the slave trade continued to be legal in Great Britain for many years after the United States gained freedom.

Jefferson went on as President to sign the law banning the importation of slaves in the United States in 1807.

The larger goal of independence from Great Britain took precedence in 1776 as it was not possible to move forward with only 9, 10 or 11 of 13 colonies united on the issue of slavery. 

Tough compromises are necessary on tough issues. Moving forward allows for a fight for another day. Attempting to take on the issue of slavery at that time accomplished nothing for the cause of freedom in the 1770's---for anyone---colonists or slaves.

Does Obama think things in the world would have been better over the last 250 years if there was no United States of America?

Obama and others who disparage the country and its founders should take the time to reflect on that question.

Finally, I cannot stop seeing the mass of foreign visitors here for the World Cup posting on social media about all of the amazing things they are seeing in the United States of America during their visit.

Seeing for themselves what we have and our way of life that is far removed from the narrative promoted in the foreign press.

Also far removed from the concrete and chaos of New York City and other big cities they typically might visit. They are seeing first hand the privilege it is to see how Americans live in the suburbs and exurbs of the nation,

This woman describes it as the World Cup becoming a Discovery Channel for the rest of the world.

Air conditioning. Free rest rooms. Free refills. Ice machines. Buc-ees. Ranch dressing.

Many are also commenting on the friendliness and helpfulness of the Americans they encounter.

The left-leaning magazine The Atlantic could not let this feel good story about the United States stand so it did its best to pour "ice cold' water on it after reciting some of the social media fervor about America.

Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/06/world-cup-tourists-america/687572/

The article fell flat when balanced against reality.

Social media is filled with posts like this about the reaction of foreign visitors to the American lifestyle.

If you doubt the reality, consider these announcements that I saw in the last couple of days merely on the subject of the discovery of ranch dressing by those foreign visitors.

They don't seem to want to travel anywhere without it.

There has to be a lot of foreign visitors loving ranch dressing to cause these reactions.

The TSA must be confiscating a lot of ranch dressing.

Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/tsa-reminder-world-cup-fans-ranch-dressing-counts-as-liquid-2026-6

And that has even led Kraft Heinz to introduce TSA-approved travel kits for those World Cup ranch dressing lovers.

Source: https://fortune.com/2026/06/22/kraft-ranch-dressing-tsa-approved-travel-world-cup-visitors-chugging/

For those of us who live in the United States this all might be reminder to take the time to reflect as well.

We have it pretty good and it has been that way for a long time.

That is why it is so hard to understand why so many don't appreciate what they have and are intent on tearing it down.

I have reflected on that for a long time and I still don't understand it.

An Inconvenient Truth + 20

Al Gore first put together his slide show about what he claimed would be the devastating effects of global warming over 20 years ago.

With the help of Producer Laurie David, the Gore material was made into a documentary in 2006 entitled, "An Inconvenient Truth" for which the film won the 2007 Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature.

In the film Gore claimed that our weather would get increasingly warmer due to man-made effects caused by the use of fossil fuels. 

Our climate would become more severe with more hurricanes, tornadoes, drought and wildfires. 

The Arctic would be ice-free in summers by 2016 and polar bears would become extinct.

Gore stated that the snows of Mount Kilimanjaro would be gone within a decade.

Humanity itself would be threatened by climate change.

In his previous book, Earth in the Balance,  published in 1992, Gore predicted that in the next few decades "up to 60 percent of the population of Florida may have to be relocated" due to rising sea levels.

That claim was consistent with this New York Times article from 1995 claiming that by 2020 most of the beaches on the East Coast of the United States would be gone.

Let's not forget this prediction that Greta Thunberg amplified on social media in 2018 that she subsequently deleted five years later.

I wonder why?

Now that 20 years have passed, how have the predictions of Al Gore and all the other climate alarmists turned out?

There has been a slight increase in global temperatures amounting to about 0.53 deg C since 2006.

Credit: https://x.com/JunkScience/status/2062312556564189292

Global satellite data is only available since 1979.

However, temperatures are still much lower than they were in the 1930's despite massive increases in the amounts of global carbon emissions over the last 100 years.

That is evident in looking at the number of extreme heat days in the United States since 1895.

The extreme heat in the 1930's caused massive drought conditions in the Midwest and resulted in 

2.5 million people leaving their homes in a desperate migration in search of work and better living conditions. 

They moved from an area that became known as The Dust Bowl which suffered severe dust conditions during a drought that lasted a decade.

20% of the population of Oklahoma alone was forced to leave the state in the 1930's. 

Can you imagine what would happen today if we had this heat and drought?

It would all be blamed on man-made climate change and billions and billions of dollars would be spent with no effect.

Oklahoma has also been known for its tornado activity.

The number of strong tornadoes (EF2 and higher) has decreased over the years even with increasing carbon emission levels.

The number of hurricanes has also not increased in the last 20 years despite rising CO2 levels.

The same is true with wildfires.

Far less acreage around the world today is being consumed by wildfires than in the past.

Climate-related deaths continue to fall.

Source: https://x.com/RoyPentland/status/2066256166733152701/photo/1

Florida, which Gore predicted would see up to 60% of its population have to relocate due to rising sea levels, has seen its population explode.

Florida's population has increased by over 30% (18 million to an estimated 24 million) in the last 20 years.

That is 4 times the population that Al Gore suggested Florida was heading for due to climate change in his 1992 book.

In 2013, DNC Chairwoman and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was claiming that her South Florida Congressional District would be under water in a few short years.

Over a decade later aren't we beyond a "few short years"?

Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.), who represents the Miami area, warned that unless climate change is addressed “in a few short years,” rising sea levels will force her to represent areas more than two hundred miles away.

“I will eventually represent Orlando if we don’t do something about making sure we can reduce global warming,” she said on Fox News this morning. Wasserman Schultz’s current residence, Weston, Fla., is 224 miles away from Orlando.

Her district is still high and dry and there is still no beachfront property in Orlando.

However, Wasserman Schultz has now seen her south Florida district redistricted and earned the contempt of Black Democrats as she has decided to run for the Democrat nomination for Congress in a majority Black district in the Miami area.

It also makes you wonder why she would want to run for a seat in Congress from a district that will be underwater in a "few short years"?

Source: https://www.wlrn.org/government-politics/2026-05-26/wasserman-schultz-dnc-election-black-district

And that ice-free Arctic?

At the end of last summer, Arctic sea ice extent was actually larger than it was in 2012---34% more expansive than 13 years ago.

Credit: https://x.com/TonyClimate/status/2008211253328773506

This is the Arctic sea ice extent as of June 20, 2026.

Source: https://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png

It also should be noted that Arctic temperatures since May have been running at record lows.

That ice-free Arctic that Al Gore predicted looks further and further away.

The polar bears are also not going extinct.

Their population is rising.

Credit: https://x.com/BjornLomborg/status/1596907585084719104

Mount Kilimanjaro still has plenty of snow despite the fact that it is on the equator in Africa.

Source: Google AI

Those "Inconvenient Truths" that Al Gore talked about 20 years ago have mostly been shown to be Untruths.

Projections and predictions do not override real world data.

It should also be noted that even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently recognized that the apocalyptic climate scenarios it has been promoting for the last 15 years are implausible.

Source: https://modernity.news/2026/05/05/ipcc-admits-apocalyptic-climate-scenarios-are-implausible/

Those IPCC scenarios were the ones that fueled the insane climate change agenda and resulted in trillions of dollars in green agenda items promoted by politicians in the United States, Europe and Australia.

At the same time, China, India, Indonesia and others barely paid it any mind.

They carried on because they know that economies and humanity really suffer without affordable and accessible energy..

Source: https://e360.yale.edu/features/china-coal-five-year-plan

Source: https://www.carbonbrief.org/new-coal-plants-hit-10-year-global-high-in-2025-but-power-output-still-fell/

We now find all of the hysteria was implausible as if the last 10-20 years has not already confirmed it 

not to mention thousands of years of climate history before there were any carbon emissions to speak of?

To wit, we know there was an ice age.  We also know the ice melted.  How did it ice up? How did the ice melt?

All of this occurred without the slightest intervention of humans.

Even if the data shows the earth is warming, how do we know it is caused by man when you look at past history? 

Of course, the IPCC  retraction has received almost no mentions in the mainstream media.

I doubt few of you have have even heard about it.

A Google search turned up no mentions of this story in the corporate media other than this headline in The New York Times.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/26/climate/emissions-worst-case-scenario-rcp.html

Some risks may have been overstated?

You think?

I guess it is also an inconvenient truth to remind everyone that in 2000 Al Gore came within 537 votes in Florida of becoming President of the United States.

I am guessing that Al Gore would not feel too bad if two-thirds of Florida was underwater

Those 537 votes in Florida in 2000 is just another reminder that no matter how bad you think things have been, they could have been much, much worse.

May God continue to bless the United States of America.

And our climate

After all, it is important to remember it is ultimately under HIS control... not ours.

What---Me Worry?

We seem to live in a world filled with anxiety.

A lot of people find a lot to worry about.

In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health reports that 19% of Americans have some type of anxiety disorder annually.

A third of Americans will deal with an anxiety disorder some time in their lives.

Young people are much more likely to experience some form of anxiety disorder than older people according to CDC data from 2019.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db378.htm

Anxiety is also more prevalent in females (19.0%) compared to males (11.9%).

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db378.htm

Anxiety has also increased in recent years driven by increases in rates in younger adults.

Rates among those Age 50+ have remained stable.

Source: https://slowrevealgraphs.com/2024/05/28/prevalence-of-anxiety-by-age-generation-in-the-us/

Consider all of this anxiety and then compare it to this factoid that I recently came across from Brandon Luu, MD.

91.4% of those things that people worry about that causes anxiety never materialize.

If fact, the most common occurrence in those who worry is that none of it actually happens.

Is this the reason that older people have less anxiety?

Have they learned over the years that many worries are not worth worrying about?

What is worrying is the increase in anxiety among young adults.

Notice that it began to spike in conjunction with the introduction of the iPhone.

Jonathan Haidt wrote a book that argues that the rewiring of childhood from "play-based" to "phone-based" has been responsible for a collapse in the mental health of young people.

Source: https://www.anxiousgeneration.com/book

In The Anxious Generation, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt lays out the facts about the epidemic of teen mental illness that hit many countries at the same time. He then investigates the nature of childhood, including why children need play and independent exploration to mature into competent, thriving adults. Haidt shows how the “play-based childhood” began to decline in the 1980s, and how it was finally wiped out by the arrival of the “phone-based childhood” in the early 2010s. He presents more than a dozen mechanisms by which this “great rewiring of childhood” has interfered with children’s social and neurological development, covering everything from sleep deprivation to attention fragmentation, addiction, loneliness, social contagion, social comparison, and perfectionism. He explains why social media damages girls more than boys and why boys have been withdrawing from the real world into the virtual world, with disastrous consequences for themselves, their families, and their societies. 

Perhaps it is time to return to a simpler time when young people of my era in the 1960's were reading the satirical humour publication, Mad magazine, and taking to heart the advice of its fictional mascot and cover boy Alfred E. Neuman.

Trust and Understanding

Last week I wrote that Donald J. Trump was sitting abreast "The Hinge of History" as we are waiting to see what will happen in Iran over the next several months.

Whether he likes it or not, the final verdict on Trump's legacy will be defined by Iran.

It is important to remember that history is only written by the winners.

If Trump is successful in neutering Iran, its terrorist meddling in the Middle East, providing more freedom to the Iranian people and denying them a nuclear weapon, he will be the winner and history will treat him exceedingly well.

If the Iranian regime survives relatively intact, the Middle East continues to be a hot mess, the Iranian people continue to suffer and the nuclear threat is not definitively quashed, Trump will be end up being compared to Jimmy Carter rather than Abraham Lincoln or FDR.

We now have a supposed "deal" with Iran that is referred to as a "Memorandum of Understanding".

However, from what we know right now, the "understanding" seems to be in the eye of the beholder.

The Trump administration has an understanding of the deal that seems quite different than the understanding of those in the Iranian regime.

It is difficult at this point to understand what the understanding really is when viewed objectively.

We will really not know if this is good or bad for the United States (and Trump) until the "understanding" turns into a real agreement that includes the final resolution of the nuclear issue.

However, as I stated in that last post, if I were Trump I would not trust my legacy to any "deal" with Iran.

I am going to wait to see how this evolves before making any other judgments.

There is too much I don't know that Trump does know.

I do know that Trump knows that his legacy is on the line with Iran.

I do know that Trump does not ever want to look bad or lose.

I do know that Trump is indefatigable and tireless and will not rest until he wins at anything he does.

In that regard, I refer you to the post below that was published on X by someone who goes by the name Cynical Publius that aligns closely with my views..

The views of Cynical Publius on Iran right now can be summarized this way.

Trump has earned our trust. 

Trust the plan that he is pursuing.

He knows more about what he is doing than I do.

However, right now I have to rely more on blind trust than clear understanding of where this leads.

I cannot find much fault in the thoughts below.

I have largely been quiet on this matter lately, mostly because I don’t think anyone in the general public has the first clue as to what is actually going on in terms of negotiations (me included), but let me please offer some thoughts on things I am certain are true at the time I write this:

1. The Iranian mullahs are/were implacable enemies of Western Civilization, and have a goal of global jihad by any means necessary.

2. Neither the Iranian nor American media can be trusted to report accurately on the purported agreement.

3. “MOU” means “memorandum of understanding.”  In corporate law, another term for this is a “term sheet.”  Basically it is an outline of basic terms and serves as a basis for negotiations between the parties towards a more fulsome, definitive agreement.  Nothing at the MOU stage is definitive.

4. The Trump Administration could do a better job of keeping the American public informed on this matter.

5. Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities have been decimated.

6. Iran’s ability to export terrorism has been greatly impaired.

7. Multiple layers of the mullahs' leadership are now dead, and those currently in power are acutely and uncomfortably aware of this fact.

8. The only viable means of ultimate regime change in Iran is the Persian people rising up and overthrowing the mullahs.

9.  An Iran with nuclear arms would be the worst threat to human civilization since the medieval era Bubonic Plague epidemic.  The JCPOA was enabling them to build such weapons.

10.  President Trump had no choice but to take the military actions he has taken thus far, because of the nuclear and terror threats.

11. America and Israel assumed that the Persian people would take this opportunity to violently overthrow their theocratic dictators.

12. Because the Persian people are thus far collectively unwilling to walk through the door of regime change that has been made possible (admittedly with great cost to them), President Trump is now faced with a dilemma: either commit ground forces to Iran (with half of the USA wildly opposing such action) or negotiate with whomever is actually in power at the moment (with the other half of the USA wildly opposing such action).

13.  President Trump has earned our trust—in all matters (not just Iran) he has consistently prioritized American interests properly more so than any other President since Ronald Reagan.  There is no one I trust more to navigate such a complex, potentially “no win” situation than President Trump.

14.  America and the world are currently in a far, far better and safer situation today than if no military action had been taken.

15. All military options remain open to the USA.  Virtually no military options (other than internal repression) remain open to the Iranian leadership.

***********

I have always despised all that "Q" nonsense, but at the moment I believe the following words are actually the best course of action for Americans with respect to the Iran conflict: “Trust the plan.”

In the coming days consider the differences of opinion you might see in the comments of Republicans and Trump loyalists who might raise questions and doubts about where the Iran policy is going.

Then contrast that with the total silence about anything from the Democrats yhat was ever said on anything Joe Biden did.

There was no pushback or questions about his failed immigration policy, the vaccine mandates, men in women's bathrooms or his obvious physical and mental lapses.

Everyone was 100% in lockstep until they weren't.

What does that say in itself?

There should be the freedom and strength of character for anyone to question the merits of what is going on.

However, if those with TDS want to disparage and demean Trump's commitment to this nation I recommend that you consider what the now 80 year old President did in the last few days it its service.

Saturday--Negotiated final terms in the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran

Sunday--80th Birthday and attended UFC fight on White House grounds on Sunday night

1217am Monday--Boarded flight to Europe for G-7 Meeting

 830am Monday (US Time)---Participated in working meeting with French President

1000am Monday---Reception with G7 leaders

1030am Monday---Dinner with G7 Leaders

1200am Tuesday---Working Session with G7 Leaders

130am Tuesday---Meeting with the Emir of Qatar

215am Tuesday--Meeting with the President of the UAE

300am Tuesday---Working Lunch with G7 Leaders

How could anyone argue that Joe Biden was a better President?

We have come a long way in the last two years.

Trump presided over this a couple of nights ago.

Joe Biden sent his wife to preside over this two years ago.

Credit: Getty Images
Source: https://beelineblogger.blogspot.com/2019/06/the-indefatigable-donald-trump.html

I trust most of you know where I am coming from.

Rx Revolution

Prescription drugs were not covered under the original design of Medicare.

Among the reasons were that there were limited prescription drugs in the mid-1960's, most private plans did not include a drug benefit and there were concerns about the trajectory of future costs.

Those concerns were well founded.

Spending on retail prescription drugs has increased from $3.7 billion in 1965 to almost $500 billion today.

Source: Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker

Prescription drugs were added to Medicare under Part D during the George W. Bush administration effective in 2006.

In the last 50 years prescription drugs have been developed and marketed for just about any human condition.

I remember back in the mid-1980's going through a one or two days when I lost my appetite.

I went to lunch with co-workers who were eagerly scanning the menu to bulk up as much as they could. 

I was perfectly content with a small cup of soup and saltines

I felt perfectly fine otherwise. No fever, No aches, No pain or anything else.

My thought at the time was that if I could develop a pill that curbed food cravings in the same way that I felt it would be worth billions of dollars.

Little did I know that 40 years later that day would arrive with the development of GLP-1 drugs.

A medication that curbs food cravings and helps you lose weight without all the mental requirements that usually accompany staying on a diet is worth a king's ransom.

Consider the market possibilities in the United States alone.

The CDC reports that 40.3% of the U.S. population of those age 20 or more is obese (BMI >30).

It is 46.9% for those between the ages of 40-59.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db508.htm

This translates to more than 100 million adults in the United States with obesity.

74% of American adults are overweight according to the CDC (BMI 25.0-29.9).

There is a lot of money to be made by Pharma with GLP-1 drugs.

There is also tremendous potential for the United States to save on health care costs if fewer people are overweight.

One study calculated that obesity doubled the medical expenditures of adults relative to those of normal weight and raised expenditures on inpatient care, outpatient care, and prescription drugs.

GLP-1 drugs are revolutionary on many dimensions---improving self image, improving health and reducing health costs in addition to the money that Pharma can make by selling them.

Despite high initial costs for the medications of over $1,000 per month when they were first introduced, prices have become more affordable principally due to pressure from the Trump administration.

Understanding the potential cost benefits to Medicare, the Trump administration has negotiated lower costs for eligible enrollees in a pilot program beginning July 1 that will provide the drug for a $50 monthly co-pay.

The Pharma companies have also extended attractive self-pay discount prices.

This is a Google AI overview of typical pricing and a cost comparison overview for various GLP-1 drugs.

What results are patients seeing who are using GLP-1 drugs?

Clinical trials for the first generation of GLP-1 drugs showed typical weight loss of 15% for drugs such as Wegovy and Ozempic after one year.

The second generation GLP-1 drugs such as Mounjaro and Zepbound were more powerful and participants averaged a 20% weight loss.

In addition, many patients see improvements in blood sugar control and cardiovascular protection among other health benefits.

The third generation GLP-1, Retatrutide, is still in clinical trials and does not yet have FDA approval.

However, many believe this drug could eventually end up being the blockbuster medication in this sector.

Weight loss of as much as 25% in 48 weeks has been shown in the clinical trials.

Source: https://revolutionhealth.org/blogs/news/glp-1-weight-loss-medications?srsltid=AfmBOoqrz_Faf3iOtqasO50vSe_YM3uaRz0W8y1BXwneZIXxezjQqdiE

What are the downsides of these drugs?

Any new pharmaceutical comes with questions about possible longer term effects that might not have been discovered in the clinical trials.

Sometimes there are unexpected benefits.

For example, early studies suggest that GLP-1 usage may actually reduce the longer term risk of breast cancer in women.

The two concerns that I see the most involving these drugs are that the weight loss effects are not limited just to fat loss. 25%-40% of the weight loss can be in lean body mass due to the rapid weight loss.

The other concern is that these drugs may not just curb your appetite for food but also work on the portion of the brain that surrounds motivation, drive and pleasure.

Some employers have expressed concerns that some on the drug are not putting in the same effort at work they did before.

The flip side is that it has also been reported that the drug lowers general compulsiveness and cravings.

Some report less drinking, scrolling on their phone or shopping while on the drug.

I was surprised to learn that almost 1 in 5 American households already have had someone take a GLP-1 drug. That is 10 million people. However, that is still only about 10% of Americans who are obese.

The market potential is huge and it has been barely tapped to this point.

There will undoubtedly be further innovations and refinements beyond what Retatrutide will bring.

The costs of the drugs will become more affordable and accessible to more people over time.

Of course, nothing occurs in a vacuum.

What are the possible secondary and tertiary effects of an Rx Revolution of this magnitude?

This is an interesting question in that regard.

There is a basis for that question.

The reported changes in consumption of various food categories of those on GLP-1 medication is profound.

Fruits and vegetables up almost 75%.

Consumption of burgers and pizzas down by a similar percentage.

It appears that the financial impacts of GLP-1 drugs on the food industry are already being felt.

This is especially true in the snack foods sector.

However, this might also be the result of some states no longer allowing snack food to be food stamp eligible.

Frito-Lay has recently closed two plants. 

Smuckers has written down almost $3 billion in total of the $5.6 billion it paid in 2023 for Hostess which makes Twinkies and Ding Dongs.

We are in the midst of an Rx Revolution.

However, that revolution may eventually encompass much, much more beyond the pharmaceutical sector.

The HInge of History

It has been said that history is written by the winners and victors.

Losers do not often get the chance to write history books.

Napoleon said it as did Churchill.

Donald J. Trump sits on the hinge of history right now.

What happens in Iran over the coming months will either place Trump among the most consequential Presidents in the modern era 

OR

His legacy will be defined by a failed attempt to confront Iran and remake the geopolitical future of the Middle East.

Trump literally sits astride a hinge of history that could go either way.

Whether he likes it or not, the final verdict on Trump's legacy will be defined by Iran.

If Trump is successful in neutering Iran, its terrorist meddling in the Middle East, providing more freedom to the Iranian people and denying them a nuclear weapon, he will be the winner and history will treat him exceedingly well.

If the Iranian regime survives relatively intact, the Middle East continues to be a hot mess, the Iranian people continue to suffer and the nuclear threat is not definitively quashed, Trump will be end up being compared to Jimmy Carter rather than Abraham Lincoln or FDR.

The hinge of history can swing either way as I write this.

And it could swing widely either way.

Trump took a huge gamble in confronting Iran.

Doing so took enormous courage that no one else in the world was willing to do over the last 47 years.

At this juncture, it bears repeating what I wrote at the beginning of the Iran conflict when the first bombs starting dropping.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not Afraid To Be Great

(published March 2, 2026)

Eight years ago, one year into Donald Trump's first term as President, I wrote this.

I don't know if Donald Trump will be a great President, average, or terrible when history is written.

What I do know is that you cannot be great unless you are not afraid to be great.

I also know that Donald Trump is not afraid to be great.

That has been proven to be even truer in Trump's second term.

Consider just a few examples over the last year.

Proceeding with his tariff strategy despite claims by almost all economists that it would lead to higher inflation and wreck the U.S. economy.

It hasn't.

Launching an audacious bombing mission last year to take out Iran's nuclear facilities.

Using U.S. Special Forces to snatch Venezuelan President Maduro and bring him to the United States for trial while also stopping the flow of oil from that country to Cuba and China.

Of course, the biggest of all bets was Trump partnering with Israel in the last few days to target Iran's military capabilities and its terror-supporting regime.

You could not put down a much bigger bet than that one.

If Trump is successful, the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism will be neutralized.

A potential nuclear and strategic threat will be eliminated.

The Middle East might actually find peace.

Israel might find itself secure.

The United States might be able to pull back its significant military presence in the region.

China, which has relied on cheap oil from Iran and Venezuela, may have to turn to the United States for oil to power its economy.

The Iranian people will be freed from the brutal theocracy they have had to endure for almost 50 years.

The benefits of Trump's move, as he would say, are HUUUUUGGE!

Of course, huge potential benefits invariably involve significant risks.

What happens if Iran's missiles do significant damage to the US Naval fleet?

Or to American allies such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait or the UAE?

What if the world economy starts to teeter with an extended war?

What about the price of oil?

Or a crash in the stock market.

What if Iran retaliates with sleeper cells in the United States?

Any time you undergo military action there are second, third and fourth order effects that can occur.

Of course, great Presidents usually come about by facing great challenges. In many respects, the times make the man. It was certainly true with Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt.

Greatness does not follow when taking the easy road. It only graces those who are not afraid of the challenge on the hard road.

Success is never assured. Trump may fail bigly. However, he is not afraid to be great. 

That in itself is a rare commodity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The resolution of the Iran conflict has not gone as quickly as Trump forecasted at the outset.

The Iranian regime has also proven more resilient and sinister than expected.

After the initial bombing campaign, Trump figured he could negotiate a deal to get what he wants rather than bomb Iran back to the stone age.

It proved hard to negotiate when you were not sure who had the power in Iran to negotiate with and also have confidence the deal would be honored.

Iran clearly believes that they could delay, stall and wait out Trump in a test of wills.

Trump finally lost patience and resumed the bombing on Wednesday.

Someone blinked in the aftermath of the recent strikes and Trump called off another night of bombing on Thursday afternoon  claiming there is a deal.

Of course, we have heard that before.

Can we believe it?

Can we believe anything the Iranians say?

Will the nuclear material be removed from Iran?

Is it really going to change the behavior of the Iranian regime long term and bring stability to the region?

Can it be said that Donald Trump won when all is said and done?

Donald Trump is abreast the hinge of history.

The answers to those questions will likely determine Trump's place in history.

However, if I were Trump, I would not trust my legacy to any "deal" with Iran.

I would want an undisputed, inarguable, irrefutable victory.

Deals rarely are wins. 

The best ones are win-wins.

History thereby is written by two rather than by one.