One Nation, Indivisible?

On July 14, 2024, one day after the attempted assassination of President Trump, President Biden, in an Oval Office address, told Americans that US politics must never become a "killing field.” He warned that "political rhetoric in this country has gotten very heated, and urged Americans to "take a step back. … No matter how strong our convictions, we must never descend into violence. … We cannot, must not, go down this road again (referring to recent acts of political violence).” … “In America we resolve our differences at the ballot box; not with bullets."

But why has it taken eight years from President Biden to deliver this speech?

Compare President Biden’s July 14 speech, with his political rant in Michigan on July 12 — one day before the attempted assassination of Trump.

“We’re going to stand up for our Constitution and … democracy … Donald Trump is a loser. … a convicted criminal. …. Convicted … of 34 felonies of paying hush money to a porn star, … Mr. Trump raped her.                                                                                                                                          

“Donald Trump is a business fraud. … He was fined $400M for providing false information to banks. 

“He’s still facing charges of mishandling classified information, … charges for … trying to overthrow the election on January 6, and … charges in Georgia for election interference.\

 “Trump is a threat to this nation. He ran a violent mile on January 6th to overturn the results of the election — to hold on to power. …. We saw with our own eyes how he sent thousands of people to attack the Capitol. We saw the police being attacked; the Capitol being ransacked; a mob hunting for speaker Pelosi; gallows being set up for vice-president Pence.

“Trump is … unhinged. He’s snapped. He refuses … to say he’ll accept the result of this election. He says if he loses there will be a bloodbath; if he’s elected, he will be a dictator on day-one. … [O]ver my dead body! … Trump … will deploy the Department of Justice to prosecute Trump’s enemies. … Trump will eliminate the Civil Service, … hire tens of thousands of civil servants who are loyal only to him. They’ll have to take a loyalty oath. He’ll … round up over 10,000,000 people … and put them in detention camps. … Trump calls [illegal aliens] “animals.” … America… wake up and realize what Trump and his MAGA Republicans want to do!”

"Americans want a President and not a dictator. …. No self-respecting American President would ever be a Putin (puppet? puppy?), like this guy is. … I’ll be damned if I will allow Donald Trump to take this nation away." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UFF6GEcazc

So, for the next 100 days, now that President Biden has pulled out of the race, how will the Democrats behave? Will they behave like the sober Biden of July 14, or will they ape the Joe Biden of July 12?

And which President Trump will we see? A pre-July 13 Trump or a post-July 13 Trump?

I have said before, no American politician is “Hitler.” It is long past-time to stop the vile name-calling? Time to honestly debate the issues on the merits.

Our Supreme Court has said that the remedy for speech that is misinformation/lies is “counter- speech.” Let them, for example, discuss “illegal aliens.” If 10 million illegal aliens are good for the country, the new Democrat nominee — whether Vice President Harris or whoever — should be able to adduce facts to justify her/his policy; if bad, President Trump should be able to adduce facts to show the detriment to the country.

Prediction: Between now and the election, I predict that we will see a kinder, gentler, more human Donald Trump. Sadly, I predict that Democrats will revert to President Biden’s Michigan form — “Trump is Hitler — unhinged — a threat to democracy, etc.!”

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on July 26, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

An opinion devoid of the slightest factual basis

Earlier this week, MSNBC host Joy Reid, on Tik Tok, proudly told the world that to avoid another term of Donald Trump being President, that she’d “vote for [President Joe] Biden in a coma.”

To those in the Democrat Party who wish to replace President Biden on the Presidential ticket, Reid said “Let me know, when you guys are finished fighting amongst yourselves, who I gotta vote for in November to keep Hitler out the White House.”

Joy Reid’s comparison of Trump to Hitler is her opinion. But Donald Trump has a political record. Accordingly, hard facts abound showing exactly what Trump did during his four years as President. Which of those facts would give an iota of support to Reid’s inane assertion that “Trump is Hitler?”

Joy Reid is a 1991 Harvard Univ. graduate with a “concentration” on “film studies.” What seems patently clear is that Reid seems to lack even the least passing knowledge of Hitler and his Third Reich. No person with a scintilla of intellectual integrity who has read William L. Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, or studied WWII, would ever compare Trump — or any other American politician — to Adolf Hitler.

Here is a timeline of Hitler and his deeds:

January 1933: Hitler become German Chancellor;

February 1933: Reichstag destroyed by fire; Nazis blame Communists;

March 10, 1933: Nazi burn books opposite Berlin University;

March 1933: Enabling Act passed. Hitler given power to rule by decree for 4 years;

Hitler proclaims Nazi Party the only permitted political party in Germany. All other parties and trade unions are banned. German states stripped of autonomous powers. Nazi officials become state governors;

February & March 1933: Mass arrests of Left-Wing opponents;

March 1933. Dachau Concentration Camp [“CC”] goes into operation;

April 1933: Communist Party banned;

May 1933: Socialists, trade unions and strikes banned;

Spring/Summer 1933: Early “CCs” are set up throughout Germany;

June 1934: Hitler eliminates all opposition within Nazi Party. Hitler personally arrests Ernst Roehm, his Chief of Staff. When Roehm refuses to use the pistol offered him to end his own life, he is shot to death — executed — without prior trial;

July 1934: President Hindenburg dies. Hitler abolished the office of the President, and names himself “Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor;”

1935: Hitler decrees military conscription;

September 1935: Nuremburg Laws strip Jews of citizenship; makes them “subjects:”

July 1936: Sachsenhausen “CC” begins operations;

July 1937: Buchenwald “CC” starts operations;

December 1, 1937: 7746 prisoners now in “CC;”

March 1938: Hitler orders the German Army to invade and seize Austria. Austria annexed;

June 1, 1938: First official execution in “CC;”

June 30, 1938: About 24,000 prisoners now in “CC;”


September 1938. Hitler threatens war with Czechoslovakia. To avoid war, Chamberlain and France agree that the Czechs shall cede the Sudetenland to Germany. Hitler promises he has “no further ter-ritorial ambitions in Europe;”

November 1938: Crystal Night. 7,500 Jewish shops are destroyed; 400 synagogues are burnt. The attack is portrayed as a spontaneous reaction to the death of a German diplomat by a Jewish refugee in Paris. It is actually orchestrated by the Nazi party;

November 1938: About 50,000 prisoners now in “CC;”

March 1939: In violation of the Munich Agreement, Hitler troops the seize rest of Czechoslovakia;

May 1939: Ravensbrück “CC” for women starts operations;

August 23, 1939. Germany and Russia sign a “Non-Aggression Pact;”

September 1, 1939. Hitler “blitzes”/overruns Poland;

April 9, 1940: Hitler attacks and occupies neutral Denmark and Norway:

May 10, 1940: Neutral countries Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg are bombed and invaded in furtherance of Hitler’s invasion/war on France:

June 1940: Auschwitz “CC,” in German occupied-Poland, begins operation;

September 7, 1940 to May 11, 1941: Hitler’s air force bombs/blitzes England, including London and Coventry;


June 1941: Beginning of “euthanasia” of mentally-deficient and ill prisoners;

June 1941. In violation of his Non-aggression Pact, Hitler invades Russia;

September 1941: First mass-gassing of Soviet prisoners-of-war in “CCs;”

December 1941: Some 80K prisoners in “CCs:”

January 1942: Wannsee Conference to provide for the “Final Solution” for “Jewish question;”

Spring 1942: Mass transportation of Jews to Auschwitz begins;

Spring/Summer of 1942: SS establishes first gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau;

September 1942: About 110,000 prisoners in “CCs;”

February 1943: Mass deportations of Gypsies to Auschwitz begins;

August 1944: 524,000 prisoners in “CCs;”

Early 1945: 700,000 prisoners in “CCs;”



So, Ms. Reid, when during his four years in office, did Trump commit any act comparable to any of the acts committed by Hitler, listed above?

When did Trump order the mass-burning of disapproved books? Rule by decree under an Enabling Act? Outlaw opposing political parties? Ban unions? Strikes? Order Mass arrests of political opponents? Of Democrats? Of Republicans? Set up concentration camps? Order the mass arrest of Jews? Invade neutral countries? Bomb them to bits? Order mass execution of any prisoners? Pass a law stripping anybody of their citizenship? Bomb population centers? Exterminate the mentally ill? Gypsies? Millions of Jews? Approve a “Final Solution?”

Joy Reid has expressed her opinion of Trump comparing him to Hitler. Where are the underlying facts to support her opinion? Or is her opinion of Trump based solely on irrational political hatred?

Trump can fairly be accused on childishly calling his opponents names — of being a “bull in a china shop.” But neither Biden nor Trump can rationally be compared to Hitler.

And Ms. Reid, if Biden goes “comatose,” what unnamed, unelected individual will be our secret “acting” president? It doesn’t seem to matter to Ms. Reid.

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on July 10, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

Lies, Opinions and Political Puffing

We all know what a lie is. When someone states as fact something that he knows to be untrue, that is a lie.

But what about opinions? If a weather man predicts a bright sunny day, and it rains all day instead, is he a liar? Not if he gave his honest opinion based on the best meteorological available to him. But what if all the meteorological data indicates a day of heavy rain, and our weatherman nevertheless, with no meteorological basis, predicts a clear, sunny day? Is he a liar?

When I was a boy, my mother played golf at Tam O’Shanter Country Club in Niles, Illinois during the hey-day of the club. I can say, without lying, that on one occasion, mom was the women’s club champion. I was there when she finished. And I still have her trophy showing she was club champ, and the small plaque that for one year graced her locker in the women’s locker room. My recollection is that mom won the championship twice, but I have no evidence that she did. I therefore cannot honestly say she was two-time club champ.

I can recall as a boy asking mom what was the lowest handicap she ever carried. She replied, “Six.” I was a bit surprised, because par was 72, and I did not recall her shooting in the 70s. But handicaps fluctuated, and I knew she generally played around 80-82. And I also knew that my mother never lied. In fact, the rule among her many friends was, “If you don’t want Marge’s honest opinion, don’t ask for it!”

Which brings us to last Thursday’s Presidential Debate.

As a judge, in assessing the credibility of witnesses, I always took account of two “cautions:” (1) A man who lies about little, insignificant things, is also apt to lie about important things, when the lie will benefit him; (2) A man careless enough to lie about a fact which can easily be disproved, will probably lie whenever he believes it is to his advantage.

A number of seemingly unimportant statements were made at the very end of the debate:

(1) Biden averred he had “his handicap down to a 6 while VP:”

(2) Trump to averred he “hit the ball 280 years:”

(3) Trump averred he “just won two club championships — not even senior events;”

(4) Biden implied he could carry his bag of golf clubs during the round of golf, and Trump couldn’t.

All four of these claims are subject to being easily proved or disproved. The voters are entitled to see if one or both of these guys were lying — stating as fact things they knew to be untrue.

I suggest they take a day off and play a televised round of golf at Saukie Golf Course in Rock Island. They could each carry a “Sunday Bag” (2 woods, a putter and five irons). This would not be impossible. I know an 84-year man who does just that 5 days a week.

If Trump is indeed a club champion-type who hits the ball 280 from the tee, he can show his prowess. If Biden indeed is a 6, or even a 10 handicap, he can prove it. Whether either has the stamina to be President, will be quickly shown as they trudge up and down Saukie’s ravines. And just in case the ravines prove to be too much for either man, the political parties could pay for paramedics and ambulances to stand by. And perhaps, the candidates could have a side bet: the loser drops out of the Presidential race.

It is time for these two guys to “put up, or shut up.”

Now a few thoughts about other “statements” made at the debate:

1. President Biden’s stated that he was "the only President this century" and "this decade" that did not have any troops "dying anywhere in the world." Were not 13 killed during the Afghan pullout? 3 more in Iran? Was that knowingly-made false statement of fact? A mere opinion? A mere lapse of memory?

2. President Trump’s claim that before Covid we had “the greatest economy that we've had in our history, the best.” False statement of fact made knowingly? Trump’s opinion? Obvious political puffing?

3. President Biden claimed that “The U.S. economy added 15 million jobs between the time U.S. President Joe Biden took office and May 2024.”

As per Snopes: “As the U.S. economy kept on recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, it had gained 15.6 million jobs as of May 2024. However, about 9 million of those jobs were lost during the pandemic, so the net jobs gain from pre-pandemic levels was 6.2 million.”

Was Biden expressing a mere opinion? If he was making a statement of fact, was it a material misstatement of fact to take credit for 15 million jobs, when only 6.2 were new jobs? A lie? Would an honest man have stated the case the way Snopes did?

4. Trump’s statement that the Ukraine War and the War in Gaza would have never happened had he been President. Statements of fact? Or self-serving opinion? Unprovable either way?

My point is this: politicians who knowingly lie are scoundrels unworthy of election. Politicians who merely give opinions are the norm. But are politicians who state “opinions” without factual underpinnings, in the face of clear, contrary underlying facts, tantamount to liars?

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on July 3, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

A Theology of Love rather than a Theology of Sacrifice and Atonement

It has now been a bit more than five-years, since my daughter’s God-mother died following a long and miserable battle with cancer.

When I was told her death was imminent, I stopped by her home one night to say good-bye. I don’t recall how our discussion began, but the two of us eventually began discussing how an all-loving, all-just God could require his blameless son to die ignominiously, nailed to a cross as an atonement for the sins of mankind.

During the discussion, we also wondered how an all-loving, all-just God could have punished men and women for all generations for the “sin of Adam and Eve” — for eating fruit from the forbidden tree. How could an all-loving, all-just God impute the “sin” of Adam to men and women who did not exist at the time of “Adam’s sin,” and who had no part in committing that sin?

Both before and after that night, I have pondered these questions. I have never been quite able to accept that an all-loving, all-just God demanded a blood sacrifice of his only, and entirely innocent and blameless, son to restore God’s children to God’s friendship.

So, did Christ come into the world to be sacrificed? Not if we take Christ at his word. At John 14: 6, 7, Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, then you will also know my Father. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

I have never doubted that God and Christ were omniscient. Afterall, Christ told his apostles that “The Son of Man is to be handed over to men and they will kill him, and three days after his death the Son of Man will rise.” Mark 9:31.Actually, Christ predicted his death and resurrection three times.

Over time, I have concluded that God sent his son incarnate to show mankind the way that God wants us to walk, the truth that we have an all-loving, all just father, and that if we walk His way, our reward is eternal life.

That God sent his wholly-blameless son into the world to be “murdered” and “sacrificed,” seems utterly inconsistent with Christ’s teaching that God is an all-loving father. What all- loving father would require his son to be crucified — sacrificed?

So, did God intend that Christ be sacrificed? Or did he, in his omniscience, simply know that it would happen?

Did God really intend that his son be crucified as a condition of restoring his own children to his friendship? That’s the essence of “atonement theology.” In the words of my daughter’s God-Mother, “surely an omniscient, all-loving God could have come up with another way to reconcile mankind to Himself, short of ordaining his son’s crucifixion.”

But if God did not intend his son be sacrificed, who did?

Did the Romans and/or Jews who killed Christ think they were offering a “sacrifice” to God? Or did the Jewish leaders insist on Christ death because they believed him guilty of blasphemy?

Certainly, Pilate did not order Christ execution as a “sacrifice” to the Jewish God or any Roman God. Christ was condemned as a criminal.

Did Christ intend to sacrifice himself? Was Christ suicidal? If so, why did he pray that the Father might let the cup pass by?

Is it not equally probable that Christ became incarnate to show mankind the “way” to please God, and the “true way” to achieve everlasting life, knowing that men would put him to death, but also knowing that God would place His supreme “stamp of approval” upon all He did during his mission on Earth, by raising him from the dead, on the third day — precisely as he had predicted.

This op ed was prompted by a short article that a Protestant-thinker and lawyer-friend sent me earlier today.https://cac.org/daily-meditations/at-one-ment-not-atonement-breaking-up-old-logic-2020-02-05/

I had not realized that as early as the 13th century, there were theologians who questioned how an all-loving, all-just God could send his beloved son to Earth, and demand his crucifixion. Among them, were the scholar and theologian, Duns Scotus, and members of his Franciscan Order.

The Center for Action and Contemplation sums up Dun Scotus’ position thusly:

“Duns Scotus was not guided by the (Jewish) Temple language of debt, atonement, and blood sacrifice, which was understandably used by the Gospel writers and by Paul. Instead, he was inspired by the cosmic hymns in the first chapters of Colossians and Ephesians and the Prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18). While the Church has never rejected the Franciscan position, it has remained a minority view.”

“Our sin could not possibly be the motive for the incarnation! Only perfect love and divine self-revelation could inspire God to come in human form. God never merely reacts, but supremely andfreely acts out of love. 

“Jesus did not come to change the mind of God about humanity. It did not need changing. Jesus came to change the mind of humanity about God! God is not someone to be afraid of, but is … on our side.”

Whether all this plays any part in church closings, I leave for you to decide.

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on June 19, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

Imagine an America with no Churches and no Synagogues.

On the feast of Pentecost, commemorating the birthday of the Christian church, the Roman Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Peoria, announced that between now and May 2026, “the diocese will be “reshaped” from 156 parishes to 75 parishes, with 129 worship sites.”

Two reasons are given for the contraction: a decline in Mass attendance by the faithful, and a prediction of a shrinking number of priests. Seventy percent of the 145 total priests ministering in the diocese are over the age of 50. According to the diocese’s projections, in the next 10 years, there may be fewer than 100 active priests.

But then, what happens when the number of active priests falls to 50? When even fewer “Catholics” attend Mass? Remain active in their parishes? Will half of the remaining parishes be shuttered?

How many parishes can be closed before the Catholic Church fades into utter irrelevance? And what happens, when it does?

For 2000 years, the Catholic Church has taught that there is an all-loving God who eternally rewards men for the good they do, and punishes them for their evil deeds. And that Christ, his only son, is the way, truth and life.

What happens when the Jewish/Christian God comes to be regarded as nothing more than a pious fable? Who/What replaces him?

Does each man become a little “god” who creates his own rules — his own divine law?

Once you’ve rejected the Jewish/Christian law-giver, who replaces him? If there is no divine law-giver, who punish violations of the laws of our society, that go unpunished by our criminal justice system?

A man commits murder, and by perjury convinces his jurors that that he is innocent. A dictator, operating on the principle of “might makes right” confiscates and amasses a personal fortune of half the wealth of his country, while unjustly executing millions of his countrymen? A tyrant, who like the Roman emperors of old, declares himself “the only true god?” Without divine punishment of evil in an after-life, where is the “justice?”

Before you applaud the decline of the Catholic Church, and/or the decline of the other organized Christian religions, consider what you are seeing in the news:

Mobs of masked criminals invade a jewelry store, smash the counters, and in two minutes loot a million dollars-worth of jewelry;

Organized gangs send kilograms of fentanyl across our southern border, earning millions of dollars — which in the course of three years kills 300,000 U.S. citizens;

Young street-gang members shoot down city streets, killing members of the rival street gang — and bystanders,

Do the people who do these things believe that if not punished in this life, that that will be in the next?

Do they believe in the Judeo-Christian teaching that we must love God with out whole heart, soul, mind and strength, and love our neighbor as ourself?

If you love your neighbor as yourself, do you steal his goods? Sell him deadly drugs? Shoot and kill him in a dispute over who can sell illegal drugs in a given neighborhood?

Or does each such predator set himself up as “god,” and determine for himself what is “good” and “evil?” Does “might make right?” Does possessing the deadliest gun make right?

And if the Christian churches and the Ten Commandments are relegated to the scrapheap of history, how many cops will we needed to protect the disabled, the elderly, the meek and the peacemakers from the predators? One in every home? Two? How many on every street corner?

In a nation where every inhabitant loves God and loves his neighbor as he loves himself, few, if any, police officers will be needed., In a nation where every man is a law unto himself, an officer at every street corner will not be enough.

When the churches and synagogues are gone, who will teach that there is a God, and that that God rewards good and punishes evil? Not the public schools. In many cases, not even the parents. So, who? Hollywood? The internet?

The Ten Commandments, which Judaism and Christianity teach are God-given, are the underpinnings of our criminal law. It is in the Ten Commandments that we have “objective” right and wrong. Without a divine lawgiver, one man’s guess as to what is right and wrong, is as good that of any other. Without a God, we are all little gods, and right and wrong becomes “subjective” to each one of us.

A few years ago, the beautiful Tri-City Jewish Center closed. Now 81 Catholic parish will die, in large part because many Catholics have lost interest and no longer attend.

The choices people make have consequence. The state, by its criminal law, will still teach what is right and want is wrong. Some parents will still take the time. But without the churches teaching that God ordains what is right and what is wrong, and punishes transgression of his laws, the state loses the strongest underpinning of its laws.

I therefore mourn that the loss of 81 Catholic churches as a great loss to our society. I would feel the same way if 81 protestant churches were to close. I would also mourn the loss of the last Quad City synagogue.

Without a divine law-giver, do we revert to the law of the jungle? To might makes right? You decide.

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on June 9, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

Is it fair to label the President, “Genocide Joe?”

The so-called protesters at Columbia and the other colleges, have taken to calling President Biden, “Genocide Joe,” largely for the military support that the President is supplying and has supplied to Israel, in the days following October 7, 2023— the day when Hamas broke into Israel, murdered Jewish men, women and children, took men, women, children and the elderly hostage, and raped Israel women.

While “Genocide Joe” may have a nice ring to it if you are unhappy with our President’s support of Israel, does it have a right of truth to it? I don’t think so.

Taking for purposes of argument the figures of the Gaza Health Ministry as true, Reuters reports that as of April 30, 2024, 35,535 Palestinians have been killed and another 77,704 have been wounded.

Israel says its war is against Hamas. But who elected Hamas? Put Hamas in power? Provides the “warriors” for Hamas?

Prior to 10-7, the Hamas “soldiers,” lived and made their war preparations among the Palestinian civilian population. On that day, the emerged from Gaza, murdered, raped and took hostage. They then slipped back to hide among the civilian population. They now claim, “You can’t retaliate for our war crimes, because if you do, you will kill innocent civilians.”

Hamas, which adhered to no “rules of war” on October 7, now demands that Israel scrupulously abide by all “rules of war,” while all the while hiding among the civilians of Palestine. And all the while continuing to hold non-combatant Israelis as hostages.

Israel, of course, has the power to burn the other cheek. But Hamas could end the fighting in an instant by coming out from among the civilian population, surrendering, and facing a war crimes trial before neutral nations.

When in December of 1941, the empire of Japan executed a sneak attack at Pearl Harbor, the U.S declared war on Japan. The war ended only when the U.S dropped two atom bombs on Japan. It didn’t have to end that way. Japan had beaten back all the way from New Guinea, the Pacific archipelagos, the Philippines to Japan’s home island. We could have invaded and suffered a million casualties, and inflicted millions of casualties on Japan. Or Japan, knowing that it couldn’t win, could have surrendered before the bombs were dropped, Was President Truman “Genocide Harry,” or did he do what had to be done to end the war and avoid far greater casualties?

If Israel quits now, and Hamas survives, how long will it be before Hamas again emerges from among the civilian population and repeats October 7?

I am sorry, but for supporting Israel, I cannot agree with the protesters that President Biden should fairly be called “Genocide Joe.”

But then is there anything President Biden has done that might support labeling him “Genocide Joe?”

President Biden seems to support abortion without any limits. In the words of Vice-President Harris, “Joe Biden and I have a different view … we believe no politician should ever come between a woman and her doctor.” So, if five-minutes before delivery of a healthy, full-term baby, would Biden and Harris really stand by if the mother and her doctor decided to abort/kill a perfectly healthy child?

If it is “genocide” to kill Palestinian civilians who put Hamas in power, and who support Hamas and its October 7th atrocities, how can it be anything but “genocide” to abort an unlimited number of perfectly-healthy children, minutes before they will emerge naturally from the mother wombs?

And then, what about the President turning a blind-eye to the fentanyl crisis at our southern border?

CBS news reports that, “In 2021, 90% of some 80,000 opioid-related deaths involved fentanyl.”

PBS reports, “Drug deaths nationwide hit a new record in 2022. 109,680 people died as the fentanyl crisis continued to deepen, according to preliminary data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

“In 2023 the overdose death rate topped 112,000 in a 12-month period for the first time," according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


In the last three years, what has President Biden done to staunch the flow of fentanyl manufactured in China and sent through Mexico into the U. S. to kill nearly 300,000 Americans?

Closed holes in President Trump’s border wall? Declared “war” on the fentanyl smugglers?

If it is “genocide” to supply Israelis with weapons used to kill 35,000 Palestinian civilians, and if the President’s primary duty under the Constitution is to “preserve and protect,” why isn’t President Biden properly labeled “Genocide Joe” for exacerbating problems at the southern border by his acts in furtherance of keeping our southern border wide-open, except at the ports of entry? Or will the label be proper only after 400,000 American die from fentanyl overdoses?

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on May 24, 2024. 
Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea

Biden's political version of 'stolen valor'

Every so often, President Biden says something so bizarre that even the mainstream media is forced to report it.


On April 17, while campaigning in Pittsburgh, Fox News reports that Mr. Biden told members of the United Steel Workers a bizarre story of about his long-deceased uncle, Ambrose “Uncle Bozey” Finnegan.

"Ambrose Finnegan, we called him Uncle Bozey, he was shot down. He was Army Air Corps before there was an Air Force. "They never recovered his body, but the government went back when I went down there, and they checked and found some parts of the plane,"

"He flew those single-engine planes as reconnaissance over war zones, and he got shot down in New Guinea. They never found the body because there used to be, there were a lot of cannibals, for real, in that part of New Guinea."

Mr. Biden’s account, notes Fox, bears scant resemblance to the official report of the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency.

"For unknown reasons, this plane was forced to ditch in the ocean off the north coast of New Guinea." … "Both engines failed at low altitude, and the aircraft’s nose hit the water hard."

The report also said three men failed to emerge from the sinking wreck and were lost in the crash, one crew member survived and was rescued by a barge, and that Finnegan’s remains were not associated with any of the remains recovered from the area after the war and are still not accounted for.


The report filed by the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency makes no mention of (1) Uncle Bozey’s plane being shot down; in fact, the cause of the crash was determined to be failure of both engines. Additionally, the official report (2) makes no mention of no mention of “cannibals,” no suggestion that President Biden’s uncle was eaten by cannibal, or that the plane carrying went down in the 200-miles stretch of ocean between New Guinea and Los Negros, near enough to New Guinea for cannibals to canoe out for dinner.


So, how does a rational Democrat explain the President’s latest surreal personal account? Did it really happen and did the military get the facts wrong? Is the president lying about his family history in an effort to convince a few steel workers to vote for him? Does Mr. Biden have a screw loose?

But resume enhancement is nothing new for the president.

"In the first year of law school, I decided I didn't want to be in law school and ended up in the bottom two-thirds of my class." … "And then I decided to stay, went back to law school and, in fact, ended up in the top half of my class."

He later admitted that he graduated 76th in a class of 85.

And then there was his recounting of how he was arrested for trying to see Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

And then his story, told while in Maui, to show his sympathy for those who had lost their home to volcanic fires, about his house burning down due to a lightning strike. "To make a long story short, I almost lost my wife, my '67 Corvette and my cat."

In 2004, the American press still fact-checked Democrats, unlike today.

A 2004 report from The Associated Press, archived by LexisNexis, said lightning struck the Bidens’ home and started a "small fire that was contained to the kitchen." The report said firefighters got the blaze under control in 20 minutes and that they were able to keep the flames from spreading beyond the kitchen.


The military has a term for claiming you earned a medal when in fact you didn’t is “Stolen Valor.” President Biden seems obsessed with enhancing his political resume — the political version of “stolen valor.”


The problem with being untruthful of little things, is that it makes hard for the voters to know if you are telling the truth in big things.

Both of our candidates for the presidency have a serious character flaws. Mr. Trump says things that are crude and unpresidential. Mr. Biden says things that are patently untrue, and often screwy.

First Published in the Moline Dispatch and Rock Island Argus on April 24, 2024. 

Copyright 2024, John Donald O'Shea