It Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Serious

The Federal Reserve met this week and decided to make no change in its interest rate policy.

It was the fourth straight meeting in which rates were left unchanged.

Chairman Jerome Powell stated that the reason was that the Fed needed more confidence that inflation is coming down. He cited uncertainty about the effect of tariffs on inflation as the primary reason that they did not have more confidence that inflation was controlled.

Link: https://x.com/RedWave_Press/status/1935430219105529861

Of note, the Fed cut interest rates four times amounting to a one percent total decrease between August and December, 2024 but have held rates steady since Donald Trump became President.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate

By comparison, the European Central Bank has cut rates eight times in the last 12 months totaling two percentage points and Canada has cut seven times for a total of two and a quarter points.

The Fed policy has also been to hold tight on interest rates despite the fact that Core inflation was just .1% last month compared to expectations of .3%.

It was the lowest year over year inflation rate (2.8%) in four years.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-rate

In fact, the Fed was lowering interest rates in August through December of last year when inflation was running considerably higher than it has since Trump took office at the end of January.

Powell is still saying that he expects the Fed to lower rates at least two times before the end of the year. I wonder how he can stick to that forecast while also saying he is not confident enough in the inflation data?

My concern is that the Fed will be too late in lowering rates just as they were abysmally late in raising rates as they kept telling us that inflation was "transitory" during the Biden term.

I am no economist but I am seeing a number of "For Sale" signs on houses in my area that I have not seen in a long time, we are seeing increasing reports of layoffs and consumer spending last month was down.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/17/retail-sales-may-2025-.html

It raises a question as to whether Powell and the Fed are motivated more by politics right now than sound economic policy?

At the time Trump first announced his tariff policies it was condemned by an overwhelming number of economists. Most argued that it would make the inflation we saw the last few years much worse.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1igx6u4/economists_agree_trump_is_wrong_on_tariffs/

Perhaps that will be proven true but the fact that we still have not seen evidence of it in the CPI numbers thus far is already befuddling to those same economists.

From The Economist.com earlier this month.

Source: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/06/05/trumps-tariffs-have-so-far-caused-little-inflation

At the same time, the trade deficit has been been halved from $120 billion to $60 billion a month since Trump's tariff policy was first announced.

Source: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade

And both personal income and personal savings is up since Trump took office.

Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI

The Federal Reserve Board of Governors in Washington, D.C. employs more than 400 Ph.D. economists.

I hope that they know what they are doing.

Of course, you may recall that it was the judgment of Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve economists in 2021 that any inflation resulting from the Biden fiscal stimulus bill during Covid would be "transitory".

We know how that worked out.

Lest we think that economists opining on the American economy might have it wrong it is nothing compared to what we have seen in Argentina.

Economists were predicting doom in Argentina if conservative Javier Milei was elected and instituted his government budget cuts and free market reforms.

That was then. This is now.

Argentina is now projected to have the highest percentage GDP growth in the entire Western Hemisphere for 2025 and 2026.

Source: https://x.com/DrEliDavid/status/1932532980066460026

A the same time, monthly inflation has been reduced from over 25% per month to 2% per month.

I have nothing against economists.

However, I am not interested in predictions and forecasts.

Show me the data and facts if you want to persuade me.

Unfortunately, too often the the factual reality that unfolds does not match the forecasts of the economists.

Warren Buffett makes the point much better than I can.

All of this would be funny if it were not so serious.

The decisions the Fed makes affects every American in some way---their jobs, home values, stock prices, retirement savings, student loans and more.

Does the Fed really know what they are doing?

We can only hope.

Sharp Contrasts

It was hard to ignore the sharp contrasts that were in the news this weekend.

On the one hand you had the celebration and military parade in Washington, D.C. to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States Army.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/watch-crowd-sings-happy-birthday-trump-us-armys-250th-parade

That celebration was accompanied by a lot of flag waving, patriotism, pomp and circumstance to honor the Army that mustered together to fight the American Revolution and has defended freedom for the United States and around the world ever since.

On the other hand, we had liberals gathering in cities around the nation to protest against Donald Trump on what they called a "No Kings" day of defiance.

The contrast could not be sharper.

The "No Kings" protestors typically argue that Trump is a "threat to democracy", an "authoritarian" or wants to ignore the Constitution.

"No Kings" Protest in Akron, OH
Source: https://www.beaconjournal.com/picture-gallery/news/politics/2025/06/14/no-kings-day-protests-akron-ohio-photos-trump-military-parade/84175558007/

In fact, a recent study indicated that the average MSNBC/CNN viewer has heard that Trump is a fascist or dictator seven times per day since he announced his candidacy for the 2024 election.

Source: https://x.com/amuse/status/1934806362636141014

Repetitive messaging like this is very effective at shaping audience beliefs and behaviors in that it is the most basic principle of propaganda.

Let's go beyond the propaganda and put all of this in context with a a few facts.

First and foremost, people in countries ruled by authoritarian dictators or kings would not be able to gather and protest as we saw this weekend. Ask those who live in North Korea or Iran how that would work out.

You might also recall that Hillary Clinton's campaign manufactured and paid for the entire Russian collusion hoax in 2016 that was designed to prevent Trump from being elected in a free and fair election.

It was the Democrats who continued promoting the Russian collusion hoax for almost the entire first Trump term in order to hinder the democratically elected President from pursuing his agenda.

It was the Democrats who manipulated the 2020 Democrat primary process when it appeared that Bernie Sanders had the grassroots support and momentum to win the Democrat nomination and put all of the establishment support behind Joe Biden.

It were Democrats in almost every swing state during the Covid pandemic who ignored state laws and constitutional requirements and allowed liberalized mail in voting without legislative approval.

During Covid we also saw authoritarian school closures, mask and vaccine mandate and business closures that were largely promoted and supported by Democrats.

We saw Joe Biden totally ignore the law in contravention of his Constitutional oath and allow millions of illegal immigrants into the country in violation of federal law.

We also saw Democrats impeach Trump twice, raid his home and indict him four times in an attempt to prevent him from running for President again.

At the same time, Democrats were covering up Joe Biden's mental incapacities and rigging the primary process so that no Democrat could effectively challenge Biden as the party's nominee in 2024.

The Democrats mounted legal challenges in a number of states in an attempt to keep Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  off of the ballots in the Democrat primaries and, later, to prevent him from running as an Independent before RFK ultimately dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump.

The Democrats also attempted to bar Trump from being on the ballot in several states.

When Biden's mental weakness became obvious to all after the debate with Trump, the Democrats anointed Kamala Harris as their candidate without receiving a single vote.

Where were all of these protestors when these authoritarian acts and threats to democracy were taking place?

A lot of the energy underlying the "No Kings" protests last weekend involved complaints about Trump's deportation efforts. 

"No Kings" protest in Grand Rapids, MI
Credit: https://www.fox17online.com/news/local-news/no-kings-rally-in-grand-rapids-draws-thousands-to-protest-trump-administration

"No Kings" protest in Salem, OR
Credit: https://www.statesmanjournal.com/picture-gallery/news/local/2025/06/14/photos-no-kings-protest-trump-oregon-state-capitol-salem/84191063007/

However, again, much of that is clearly driven by media narratives.

The fact is that Donald Trump is merely enforcing the federal law that is in place on the books regarding immigration.

Those protesting may not like it but it is the LAW.

Where were the complaints about the deportations that were undertaken by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama?

Source: https://x.com/firejack007/status/1932983381463126095

What about  the "due process" argument in the deportations that these Democrat Presidents undertook?

Where were the federal injunctions from the courts when previous Presidents were deporting illegal immigrants?

The protestors complaints with Trump seem to center on the fact that as President he is following an agenda that is totally consistent with the platform he ran on---closing the border, mass deportations of illegals, tariffs, extension of the Trump tax cuts,  DOGE, etc---and won the election with a majority of the electoral and popular vote.

It does not seem that they understand the definition of democracy.

There has been no bait and switch. The policies that Trump is pursuing are what the people of the United States voted for when they elected Donald Trump. 

I am also old enough to remember when we saw headlines like this on CNN when Barack Obama was President.

How did President Trump react to all of this vitriol and anger over the weekend?

Yes, the contrasts could not be any sharper.

Father of the Centuries

A special shout out to all the fathers who are BeeLine followers on Father's Day.

Since it is Father's Day I thought it was appropriate to highlight the interesting story that I came across involving the recent death of the grandson of the 10th President of the United States John Tyler.

John Tyler was born in 1790 and became the President in 1841 upon the death of William Henry Harrison just 31 days into his term.

Tyler served just one term and is best known for his strong support for the annexation of Texas into the union which at the time was very controversial and generally opposed by many in Tyler's Whig Party.

Tyler is also known as the President who fathered the most children----15.

He had eight children with his first wife who passed away at age 51 while Tyler was President.

Tyler remarried two years later to a woman who was 23 at the time (Tyler was 54) and had an additional seven children with her.

He fathered son Lyon in 1853 when he was 63. He had two additional children after Lyon with a daughter born in 1860 when Tyler was age 70. 

John Tyler passed away at age 71 in 1862.

Lyon Gardiner Tyler became an educator and historian and served as President of the College of William and Mary from 1888 to 1919.

Lyon had three children with his first wife who died in 1921,

He married a woman 35 years his junior after his first wife's death and Harrison Ruffin Tyler was born out of that union in 1928 when Lyon Tyler was 75 years of age. Lyon passed away at age 81.

Last month Harrison Ruffin Tyler passed away at age 96.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2025/05/29/nx-s1-5415207/president-tyler-grandson-harrison-ruffin-tyler

His death came a remarkable 235 years after the birth of his grandfather John Tyler.

This graphic makes it a little bit easier to understand the generational math.

It is pretty incredible to consider that just three generations of Tylers spanned four different centuries.

I will leave it to others to select their favorite father of the year in 2025.

However, John Tyler was certainly a Father of the Centuries with what he set in motion.

He and his son were fathers for the ages.

Harrison Ruffin Tyler lived for 96 years but he could not match either his father or grandfather as far as fatherhood goes.

He only had three children and the last was born when he was 33 years old.

However, when it comes to being present on this earth as a father to his children, Harrison Ruffin Tyler puts his ancestors to shame with those 60+ years he was alive for his children.

What Would Hamilton Say?

There is no Founding Father that is more popular with liberal Democrats than Alexander Hamilton.

I don't know if that is because he was the leading advocate for big government among the Founders, he was a migrant himself or that he was only 21 years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed.

All of these were probably factors in why Lin-Manual Miranda decided to make Hamilton the focus of his Broadway musical that further added to the aura that surrounded Alexander Hamilton as the darling of the liberal elites.

The 'Hamilton' musical recently celebrated its 10th anniversary on the stage.

 

Source: https://www.newyorktheatreguide.com/theatre-news/news/a-timeline-of-hamilton-on-broadway-and-beyond

I have never seen 'Hamilton'.  I have heard it is a great production.

However, I am a "facts and data" guy who also believes that history matters.

 I can't see the sense of depicting our Founders as a diverse cast of characters any more than I would go see a play or movie that would cast a white man as Nelson Mandela or an Asian playing Christopher Columbus.

It is nonsensical for my simple and sensible mind to comprehend.

Just as nonsensical is what is going on in Los Angeles right now.

The rioting and mayhem is bad enough.

Worse yet are the Democrat politicians and mainstream media who are attempting to defend it.

An image from the "peaceful protest" in LA.

Compare this to the worst image you can find of the so-called "insurrection" of January 6th, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol.

Attacking the police and setting at least one cruiser on fire in the mostly peaceful protest.

Credit to Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) who is willing to call it anarchy and chaos.

How is it that John Fetterman, who suffered brain damage as a result of a stroke, displays more common sense and clear thinking than almost every other elected Democrat?

Or any number of members of the mainstream media.

"It's just a bunch of people having fun watching cars burn" according to one mainstream media reporter in LA.

Link: https://x.com/ThomasSowell/status/1932067165856829818

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is attempting to blame President Trump for the riots because ICE was enforcing the immigration laws.

If Trump and ICE would just continue to ignore the law and their oaths under the Constitution then everything would be fine.

Of course, looking at the images from the protests it does not appear that many are concerned about the the Constitution and laws of the United States of America.

Were truer words ever said than by this woman?

This brings us back to Alexander Hamilton.

What would he say about all of this?

Hamilton was a migrant himself having arrived in Boston in 1772 at the age of 17 from Nevis which was then part of the British Leeward Islands.

By 1776 he was fighting on behalf of the United States in the American Revolution and later became an aide of General George Washington.

He signed the U.S. Constitution in 1787 at the age of 32.

It turns out that Hamilton had an opinion on mass migration that he shared in an article in the New York Evening Post in 1802 warning that unrestricted immigration would weaken national unity, introduce foreign biases and complicate and confound public opinion.

You can read Hamilton's words below as if they were written today rather 223 years ago.

This is what Hamilton wrote about uncontrolled immigration in 1802.

“The consequences that must result from a too unqualified admission of foreigners…

The safety of the republic depends essentially on the energy of a common National sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias, and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.

The mass influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.

The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils, by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others. It has been often likely to compromit the interests of our own country in favor of another.

To admit mass foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens, the moment they put foot in our country, would be nothing less, than to admit the Trojan Horse into the Citadel of our Liberty and Sovereignty.”

Hamilton made many of the same points in another article that same month of 1802 that also included this passage.

The present desire of America, is to produce rapid population, by as great importations of foreigners as possible. But is this founded in good policy?” “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale, against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers, by the importation of foreigners?

It is for the happiness of those united in society, to harmonize as much as possible, in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent.

Every species of government has its specific principles: Ours, perhaps, are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English Constitution, with others, derived from natural right and reason. To these, nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchies. Yet from such, we are to expect the greatest number of emigrants. They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing as is usual, from one extreme to another.

It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. Their principles with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion to their numbers, they will share with us in the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass. I may appeal to experience, during the present contest, for a verification of these conjectures: but if they be not certain in event, are they not possible, are they not probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience for the attainment of any degree of population desired or expected? May not our government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable? 

It appears to me that those liberal and progressive elites that adore the character that Lin-Manuel Miranda created in his musical may be surprised to find out what the actual views of Alexander Hamilton were on mass immigration--legal or illegal.

Hamilton also understood the importance of law and order to the fabric of a society.

The immigration laws exist to provide order and to protect our society from masses who might undermine the character and values of our society if immigration is not controlled.

The immigration laws were established to provide order for our society. The laws were considered necessary to provide for the entrance of an established number of immigrants annually that could be assimilated without disrupting and degrading the experience of U.S. citizens and others who are rightfully here.

The compounding effects of uncontrolled immigration is the reason that the immigration laws were put on the books in the first place.

When the law is ignored or not enforced, chaos is sure to follow due to the compounding effects of large numbers of people the society is not prepared for.

Adding too many immigrants, too quickly,  puts added pressure on the social order if those immigrant numbers outpace the ability to integrate and assimilate them into the general population.

What we are seeing in Los Angeles underscores exactly how right Hamilton was.

We have millions of people who have entered this country illegally that have no allegiance to our country, its values or its principles.

Many have no heart and soul for the United States. They are only here for a paycheck or welfare check.

The problem was ignored by both parties for years like a pot simmering on a stove at low heat that no one was unwilling to confront.

Joe Biden took office and turned up the heat to such a degree that the pot boiled over and touched everything in our society.

Supporting these illegals has puts unnecessary economic strain on everything in our society---our water, our sewer systems, our roads, the electric grid, our infrastructure and our environment. It contributes to congestion and urban sprawl. It has put financial strain on our schools and health systems. It has fueled cost increases in housing and rents due to the mass influx of illegals.

Even worse is the social discord and disunity that has come with it.

Donald Trump did not cause any of this. He is just trying to clean up the mess.

As for Alexander Hamilton...he warned us.

Why didn't anyone but Donald Trump pay attention?

Clash of the Titans

Last week we saw a Clash of the Titans as Elon Musk and Donald Trump jousted with each other on social media after Musk criticized the "Big Beautiful Bill" passed by the House.

Needless to say, President Trump was not happy about Elon bashing the "Big Beautiful Bill" that contains most everything he promised on the campaign trail.

Link: https://x.com/overton_news/status/1930669747760222461

It spiraled down from there. Musk starting attacking Trump personally and even stated that he wanted to start a third political party.

Trump said he has no interest in talking with Musk and stated that "Elon's totally lost it."

What do I make of all of this?

Trump and Musk are both very strong-willed individuals who are used to winning and being successful.

They are both right when it comes to the "Big Beautiful Bill".

Musk is right on principle.

Trump is just being practical considering the political realities right now. 

I wrote about the contradictions involved in this legislation in an earlier blog post titled "Principled or Practical?" right after the House voted on the legislation.

There is a lot to be said about upholding your principles.

However, we live in the real world.

When do your principles have to give way to practical reality?

This was a question that every Republican in the House of Representatives had to answer this week when the "Big, Beautiful Bill" budget reconciliation came up for a vote on the House floor.

The bill (H.R. 1) passed the House yesterday morning by one vote---215 yea, 214 nay.

Two Republicans voted no. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Warren Davidson (R-OH).

Principles only go so far in Washington, D.C. 

There is no political will or urgency to do anything about the federal debt right now. 

This year has proven that the Democrats are even opposed to cutting waste, fraud and abuse.

There was not even enough Republican support in Congress to codify  a fraction of the DOGE findings of waste, fraud and abuse at USAID and other agencies.

 

Elon Musk is right on principle. However, he appears to already be living on Mars.

There is absolutely no way you are going to get any Democrat to vote for anything that advances the Trump agenda.

And if you could only get the current bill passed with one vote to spare among Republicans in the House it it is clear that making even the smallest modifications will disrupt the delicate voting alliance that led to passage in the first place.

Of course, the bill must still clear the Senate which presents a separate challenge despite the fact that being a "Reconciliation Bill" it is not subject to filibuster and can be brought to a final vote with only 51 rather than 60 votes.

Many, perhaps including Musk, do not seem to understand, some of the critical details underlying the Reconciliation Bill

It keeps being reported that this bill will add to the deficit but that is all a function of the funky budgetary rules that the Congressional Budget Office uses.

For example, if current law continues all of the previous Trump tax cuts from his first term will expire and taxes will go up massively.

The CBO is counting the extension of current law as adding to the deficit when the actual budget numbers will not change form year to year.

The only budget "cuts" allowed in a Reconciliation Bill are to mandatory spending programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. There are no cuts to Social Security and Medicare in the bill.

The only real change to the Medicaid rules will be to disallow Medicaid benefits to any able-bodied Americans of working age who refuse to work. This is the same rule that was put in place during the welfare reform law during the Clinton administration that was later repealed by Obama.

I am sure that Elon Musk is frustrated that Congress has not moved to legislatively approve some of the recommended DOGE cuts. However,  all of these involve discretionary spending programs that cannot be done through reconciliation. 

This is also the reason that Trump's campaign promise to exempt Social Security benefits from taxation is not in the Big Beautiful Bill.  The rules do not allow this change to be done through reconciliation. This will have to be done in a separate bill. In the interim, the BBB provides for a $4,000 senior citizen bonus income tax deduction for those with joint incomes below $150,000.

My view is that Musk miscalculated in all of this.

He let frustration with the process get the better of him.

Principles are great but you also have to be practical.

Yes, Musk is the world's richest man but he is not going to win going up against the world's most powerful man who is also very popular with most Republicans right now.

Attempting to get the federal government on the right path is significantly more complicated than getting a rocket on the right path to Mars.

Musk has already deleted several of his more inflammatory tweets about Trump but he may face an uncertain path back to good graces with Trump and the Republican party.

Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-elon-musk-feud-epstein-x-truth-social-democrats-live-updates-b2765886.html

At the same time, it is unlikely that the Democrats are going to be welcoming Musk to their party,

Democrats have shown they are against even the most minimal spending cuts.

Democrats have made clear they are not even interested in touching waste, fraud and abuse in the current budget. They have attacked Musk and DOGE at every turn.

Elon's opinion on what is going on in Los Angeles right now is also not a very popular opinion with Democrats.

Anything to resist Trump and his policies is perfectly fine. 

Elon Musk may find he is not welcome in almost any political circle.

And when you are outside the circle of trust in politics, you are pretty much nowhere.

Credit: https://www.redbubble.com/i/art-print/Circle-of-Trust-by-The-sign/19803609.1G4ZT

Remembering Normandy

 It is hard to think of June 6th on the calendar without remembering the sacrifices and heroism on this date 81 years ago today on the beaches of Normandy.

I have written about D-Day several times in these pages over the years.

Following is a blog post I wrote seven years ago shortly after visiting those D-Day beaches.

Read this and take a moment to reflect on what those men did for the cause of freedom on what has been called "The Longest Day".

D-Day Remembered

(originally published June 6, 2018)

Last September I was able to fulfill a longstanding wish to visit the beaches of Normandy where American, British and Canadian forces came ashore in their quest to defeat Nazi Germany in World War II.

It was a memorable experience to tour the beaches and fields where so many brave men fought and died for the cause of freedom.

You cannot help but feel emotion as you look at the beautiful views and countryside while also thinking about the bravery, commitment and sacrifice that was made 74 years ago.

Here are a few pictures that I took as I visited those beaches in Normandy.

I am also re-posting a blog post I wrote five years ago about June 6, 1944---The Longest Day.

There are no words to describe how grateful I am to all those who embarked on that journey across the English Channel on that day. For all too many it was not their longest day---it was their last day.

Gold Beach--British Invasion and site of the makeshift harbor where 300,000 men and the material to support them were brought ashore in the 6 days after D-Day
Arromanches, France

Remains of a German pillbox at Pointe du Hoc which were prime objectives of the US Army Rangers led by Col. James Rudder.
The Rangers had to scale a 100 foot vertical cliff from the beach to get to the pillbox.
70% of the unit were killed or wounded in the first two days after landing on Omaha Beach

Another view of the pillbox.
This is what awaited the Rangers after they finished their 100 foot vertical climb up the cliff from the beach.
How willing would you be to charge this position as machine gun fire strafes the top of the cliff from above?

The vestiges of a bomb crater at Pointe du Hoc

Omaha Beach Memorial

Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial

The Longest Day

(originally published June 6, 2013)


June 6. The Longest Day.




Credit: OmahaBeach.org

How many people today remember the significance of this day?

My first real exposure to the events and sacrifices of that day were in 1962 when my father took me to see the movie, The Longest Day, about the Normandy invasion of Europe.  He was a WWII veteran and he wanted to make sure that I understood what went on that day.  He told me after the movie, "I hope you never have to go through anything like that but you need to appreciate the sacrifices these men made for you."

Over 6,000 Americans lost their lives that day 69 years ago on the beaches of northern France.  By contrast, that is roughly equal to the total lives lost in over ten years of the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It was a day of incalculable horror and heroism.

I hope we never forget men of courage like Walter Taylor who pushed forward as so many others fell (or drowned) around them.

This article from the examiner.com, "Remembering D-Day", written two years ago by Christopher Coughlin, is worth the read.  You might also want to read this 1960 account of the "First Wave at Omaha Beach" by S.L.A. Marshall, the U.S. Army's chief historian, for a more comprehensive view of what transpired on those beaches that day.


From "Remembering D-Day".

History shows that on June 6, 1944, 160,000 US and allied troops were involved in Operation Overlord, the code name for the invasion of Europe. It was and remains the largest amphibious operation in history.

June 6th was also expected to be one of the most lethal days for US troops in American history, with carnage unheard of since the American Civil War.

Allied high command was so concerned about the anticipated, epic levels of violence, destruction and death that would meet the first wave of troops that they were reluctant to assign veterans of other invasions, fearing the men would be overwhelmed and break down. As a result, two of the three US divisions assigned to hit the beaches at Normandy had never been in combat.

And as history turned out, the high command's expectations of violence were more than justified.

At Omaha Beach, the US 1st and 29th Infantry Divisions, and the 2nd and 5th Ranger Battalions, faced the veteran German 352nd Infantry Division, one of the best trained units in the German army.

Through acts of commission and omission, the majority of the allied landing craft missed their assigned sectors on Omaha Beach, causing confusion, and in some instances, landing American troops directly in front of German machine gunners.

As a result, casualties among the first wave of troops were nothing short of catastrophic, where surviving American soldiers were leaderless, isolated and traumatized by the violence surrounding them. The situation was so grave that senior commanders considered abandoning Omaha altogether.

But from the unspeakable carnage came a profound courage.

This is where Lt. Walter Taylor enters the story.

Slowly, small units of infantry, based on nothing more than individual initiative and survival instinct, formed up as ad hoc groups, and began to move the 1,000 yards off the beach to dunes to take on the German pillboxes and establish an allied foothold in Europe.

It was at that critical time of decision that Lt. Walter Taylor, Company B (or Baker), 116th Infantry, of the 29th Division, landed with the second wave.

Coming ashore, Taylor didn’t know that his commanding officers were already dead.
But, seeing the chaos, Taylor immediately took the initiative.

He led a group of men off the beach, crawling past the obstacles, barbed wire and mine fields, and eventually over the sea wall.

He continued to lead his men straight up the bluff and into the town of Vierville, where he engaged the Germans in a two-hour fire fight, and won without losing a man.

It was only later, meeting up with other elements of Baker Company, that Taylor realized that he was in command. The sergeant did a head count – there are only 28 men out of the original 240.

Undeterred, Taylor proceeded to lead the 28 men inland against an imposing German fortification with rock walls and artillery proof tunnels.

Taylor engaged the Germans there and continued the fight throughout the day, leading a force mixed from his company and several Rangers, trying to reach goals outlined in the Overlord plan for Day 1. This despite the fact, borne out on Normandy, that no battle plan survives the beginning of the battle.

By nightfall, Taylor and his men made camp near the village of Louvieres. An allied runner found them with a message to fall back to meet up with the remnants of the battalion, closer to the sea.

Taylor had led his men to a place a half a mile ahead of the rest of the United States Army in Europe. It was an incredible accomplishment.

From the "First Wave at Omaha Beach"

Taylor is a luminous figure in the story of D Day, one of the forty-seven immortals of Omaha who, by their dauntless initiative at widely separated points along the beach, saved the landing from total stagnation and disaster. Courage and luck are his in extraordinary measure.

Later, still under the spell, Price (one of Taylor's men) paid the perfect tribute to Taylor. He said: "We saw no sign of fear in him. Watching him made men of us. Marching or fighting, he was leading. We followed him because there was nothing else to do."

Thousands of Americans were spilled onto Omaha Beach. The high ground was won by a handful of men like Taylor who on that day burned with a flame bright beyond common understanding.

God bless Walter Taylor and all the courageous men who stormed the beaches of Normandy 69 years ago today.  We all owe them a debt of gratitude.  May the memory of their service and sacrifice never be forgotten. Let's hope that the flame that burned bright by their actions will never be extinguished.

Second Lieutenant Walter P. Taylor, United States Army, was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for extraordinary heroism in connection with military operations against an armed enemy while serving with the 116th Infantry Regiment, 29th Infantry Division, in action against enemy forces on 6 June 1944. Second Lieutenant Taylor's intrepid actions, personal bravery and zealous devotion to duty exemplify the highest traditions of the military forces of the United States and reflect great credit upon himself, the 29th Infantry Division, and the United States Army.

General Orders: Headquarters, Ninth U.S. Army, General Orders No. 75 (1944)

Action Date: 6-Jun-44

Service: Army

Rank: Second Lieutenant

Regiment: 116th Infantry Regiment

Division: 29th Infantry Division

Source: Military Times Wall of Valor



Postscript: After I wrote this blog post 5 years ago the son of Walter Taylor posted this comment on my blog to complete the story.

"Walter P Taylor Jr who received the DSC on D Day did survive the war but not until he received two purple hearts. One at St Lo and another in Belgium. Walter married my mother who was serving in the American Red Cross in Nice France. Lt. Walter P Taylor was reassigned there at the very end of the war as part of a detail to detain "very bad Germans and Frenchmen" for the occupation forces. Walter was assigned here because he spoke fluent German. Walter studied German in high school and was sent to Germany in 1936 as an exchange student. Walter who was born in 1915 died in 1973. Pictures and documents available."

---Geoff Taylor sudbury3333@gmail.com


I also received this comment from Nicolas Bulte this past February (almost 5 years after I wrote the original blog post and several months after I had visited the Normandy.  I wish he had seem my blog post earlier.  It would have been nice to connect.

"I'm the owner of the farm-manour house of l'Ormel in Vierville where Lt. W. Taylor took shelter and so courageously distinguished himself on D-Day. Very happy to welcome you here if you happen to pass by Normandy and grateful for any additional information you may have about this particular action."

It all goes to show you what a wondrous thing the internet is.

Racism Wherever You Look

It seems we are told that there is racism almost everywhere you look in the United States.

Let's consider a few examples.

Seattle public schools shut down its program for gifted and talented students this year because it was oversaturated with White and Asian students.

It was considered not inclusive and equitable enough.

In order to qualify for the GATE program a student had to be in the top 2% on standardized testing exams.

The gifted and talented program has been replaced in favor of a more “inclusive, equitable and culturally sensitive” program.

Of course, the Seattle schools were also at the forefront of the "Math Education is Racist" movement a few years ago.

Source: https://www.hoover.org/research/seattle-schools-propose-teach-math-education-racist-will-california-be-far-behindseattle

According to Seattle educators, math instruction in the United States is an example of “Western Math,” which apparently is the appropriation of mathematical knowledge by Western cultures. While everyone agrees that two plus two is four, three times three is nine, and that there are three hundred and sixty degrees in a circle, Western Math critics worry about more nuanced issues, such as why we teach kids Western counting and not, for example, how the Aborigines count.

Students will be taught how “Western Math” is used as a tool of power and oppression, and that it disenfranchises people and communities of color. They will be taught that “Western Math” limits economic opportunities for people of color. They will be taught that mathematics knowledge has been withheld from people of color. 

However, I am trying to figure out if Western Math disenfranchises people and communities of color why is that those of Chinese and Indian ancestry dominate almost all math competitions in the United States and the world.

They are also certainly not products of Western culture.

Here is the U.S. team of high school students that placed first (out of 108 countries) in the International Mathematical Olympiad last year. 

Source: https://maa.org/news/usa-first-at-imo/

China placed 2nd, South Koreas 3rd and India 4th.

We also have a New York City councilwoman asking the NYPD to delete its gang database because of "racism".

It has been reported that 98% of the individuals in the database are Black or Hispanic.

Is that an example of racism?

It is possible.

However, isn't it also likely that most gangs in NYC today are populated by Blacks and Hispanics than other races.

Charges of racism were also recently made by WNBA player Angel Reese after she had another altercation with Caitlin Clark.

Reese charged that Indiana Fever fans directed racist and hateful slurs against her in a recent game.

However, after an investigation of the charges, the WNBA stated they could find nothing to substantiate that it occurred.

Why do we see racism brought up so many times today?

However, what about when the roles are reversed and we see minorities becoming the majority?

Racism is never an issue in these instances.

Consider the following.

70% of the players in the WNBA are Black.

81% of the players in the NBA are Black.

56% of NFL are Black and another 14% are other minorities.

31% of MLB players are Hispanic out of 39% who are from minority groups.

Source: Grok

These professional leagues seem to be "oversaturated" with minorities.

Is this evidence of racism against Whites?

Should the leagues be disbanded because they are not "“inclusive, equitable and culturally sensitive” to the racial composition of the nation at large? 

We see the same thing with many college athletic rosters.

Should we use racial quotas to correct the inequities?

Has anyone suggested disbanding high school athletic teams in Seattle if they are not inclusive and equitable to Whites and Asians?

Is there racism in the United States?

It would be foolish to argue that it is not present in some form.

However, not everything is based on racism if you do not get the result you want.

And any racism that exists is a fraction of what it was 25, 50, 75 or 100 years ago.

Looking for racism in everything and anything only serves to diminish instances of real racism

Why then do we see racism reported wherever you look?