Author: AR

We’re only a little more than halfway through the month. What is the media asking? 

To be clear, not all media sources are good at said act of inquiry, as typically a question encourages us to think as opposed to tells us what to think. There’s a difference. Here’s the first 75 we’ve seen thus far…

1. Are Media Pollsters Incompetent or Deceitful?
2. Biden still thinks he could have beaten Trump. Do we really need this?
3. Biden’s Wheelchair?
4. Birthright citizenship reaches the Supreme Court. What’s at stake?
5. Can Farage Keep Winning, All the Way to Downing Street?
6. Can Hakeem Jeffries Break Through?
7. Can Trump Secure a New Iran Deal?
8. Can You Replace Steph Curry?
9. China Deal Is Better Than Expected. Will Critics Admit It?
10. Could Trump’s $5K ‘Baby Bonus’ Idea Reverse America’s Declining Birth Rate?
11. COVID-19: Did the Experts Get It Right?
12. Did Donald Trump — or ABC News — choose who would interview the president? Why does it matter?
13. Did our politics fail us during Covid?
14. Did Donald Trump Lose China Trade War?
15. Does Shedeur Sanders’ draft position lower NFL expectations?
16. Harris 2028?
17. Has America Given Up on Children’s Learning?
18. Hogg Out at DNC?
19. How Can You Be a Cop in a City That Hates You?
20. How Did So Many Elected Dems Miss Biden’s Infirmity?
21. How good are the Indiana Pacers?
22. How Will Pope Leo XIV Lead?
23. Is California Finally Ready to Try Compassion?
24. Is Harvard Complying With the Tax Code?
25. Is It Time for Unions To Rethink Everything?
26. Is Jeff Bezos Selling Out the Washington Post?
27. Is There a Strategy Behind Trump’s Trade Deals?
28. Is There More to Fetterman Story?
29. Is Trump Breaking the Law?
30. Is Trump Endangering His Past Middle East Successes?
31. Joe Biden Agrees To Do ‘The View’ This Week, But Why?
32. John Fetterman: Politically Inconvenient or Unfit to Serve?
33. McMahon: Last Secretary of Education in History?
34. NBA Draft lottery: Who has the best chance for the No. 1 pick?
35. Oh, Canada, you do know you’re taking advantage of the US, right?
36. Out of work and on the dole — is Uncle Sam contributing to young men’s malaise?
37. Private Equity and Hospitals: Have They Finally Gone Too Far?
38. Should Pete Rose get into the Hall of Fame?
39. The tariffs are here. Inflation isn’t. What gives?
40. The US and China are finally talking. Why now?
41. The U.S. Provides $4 Billion a Year to Israel. Is That a Bad Thing?
42. Trump China tariff truce ignites stock markets – will it also pump up president’s poll numbers?
43. Trump Economy Too Good To Ignore?
44. Trump says he wants to reopen Alcatraz. What is it? Why did the prison close?
45. Trump’s Tattoo Fantasy Raises the Question: If He Were Senile, How Would We Know?
46. We Know How To Fix Government – Will We?
47. What If We’d Treated Einstein Like ICE Is Treating This Brilliant Harvard Scientist?
48. What is behind the new Pope’s chosen name, Leo?
49. What Exactly Is Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission—and Why Have Some Experts Raised Concerns?
50. What Is Habeas Corpus and How Is It Under Threat By the Trump Administration?
51. What tariffs has Trump announced and why?
52. What’s in Trump and Republicans’ giant tax and immigration bill?
53. What’s in Trump’s ‘Big, Beautiful’ Bill?
54. Whatever Happened to the Power Elite?
55. Which Generations Will Decide New York’s Mayoral Race?
56. White Smoke Signals a Pope Has Been Chosen. What Happens Next?
57. Who Is Dr. Casey Means?
58. Who Is Helped By the Sanctions Against China?
59. Who is Robert Prevost?
60. Who was ‘Shoeless’ Joe Jackson?
61. Who’s To Blame For The Left’s ‘Assassination Culture’?
62. Why are Republicans so obsessed with such a small percentage of people?
63. Why Do More Police Officers Die by Suicide Than in the Line of Duty?
64. Why Is US High-Speed Rail Taking So Long?
65. Why were India and Pakistan on the brink of war?
66. Will Congress Finally Defund Planned Parenthood?
67. Will Democrats Keep Defending Sanctuary Cities?
68. Will Harris Run in CA?
69. Will Mormons Save the Great Salt Lake?
70. Will Newsom Listen to CA’s Call for Public Safety?
71. Will the Creative Class Go MAGA?
72. Will the First American Pope Be a Pontiff of Peace?
73. Will the first American pope stand up to Trump?
74. Would the Left Finally Explain the Inexplicable?
75. Would Work Requirements Cut Medicaid Costs?

We’ll keep asking… hopefully answering some, too.

Respectfully…

AR

[Note: Sources include but are not limited to the following: All Sides, American Greatness, Associated Press, The Athletic, BBC, CBS News, Chicago Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, CNN,The Daily Signal, Deseret News, The Dispatch, ESPN, Financial Times, FOX News, The Free Press, Grind City Media, The Guardian, The Hill, Issues & Insights, MediaPost, The Nation, The New Republic, New York Post, New York Times, The New Yorker, Newsweek, NY Magazine, Vox, Pew Research Center, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Politico, Project Syndicate, Racket News, Rasmussen Reports, RealClearPolitics, Reason, Reuters, Sacramento Bee, US News & World Report, USA Today, Time, Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post.]

Five years ago, I penned an unedited version of the following. I didn’t necessarily have the intention of re-posting, but when I came across it recently, I felt like it was such a good reminder for me and many  —  the encouragement to see the beautiful in places where we previously could not…

* * * * *

A little over 18 years ago, I felt like I got burned. Here I was, our third son had just been born, and within an hour, the very intelligent but awful-beside-mannered geneticist was in our room, suggesting this must be “the saddest day of your whole life.”

There’s something within me, hearing those words once more, that makes me want to fight  — not giving another the power to declare for bad or sad what God has allowed to play out for good. It wasn’t that the day wasn’t hard, sad or some other semi-well-intentioned adjective. It just wasn’t an accurate way to characterize what the day actually was.

There’s something about having a child born with a disability that’s humbling from the onset. There’s this big pit in the stomach and gulp in the throat that parents who share the experience can immediately recognize in one another, just looking them the eye. It’s a little of the unthinkable… unplanned and shocking, too… what just happened? … how do I do this?… what are we supposed to do now?…

And just like that, you have to throw your plans and expectations right out the nearest window.

For Josh, it was trisomy 21 — Down syndrome — or a third copy of that twenty-first chromosome. Additionally, he had an atrioventricular (AV) canal defect, meaning there was a hole between his heart’s chambers and the valves that allow the blood to flow — an unsurvivable condition unless fixed in the early months of life.

Also for Josh, he got sick before then with a nasty respiratory virus (aka RSV). As documented here, we spent most of the month of March of 2002 in the cardiac ICU wing at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital. Joshua was on a respirator most of that time, unable to breathe on his own, with many moments terrifyingly touch and go.

But once the shock wears off and the medical issues are for the most part dealt with, then comes real life. Real life for the parents of children with special needs means changing your expectations, loving them just like any other kid, preparing them for adulthood, focusing more on what they will teach you as opposed to what you will teach them.

I can remember thinking at some point in those early years… “Yeah, fine… this is all well and good and true. He’s kind of cute right now. And everyone always talks about how loving kids with Down’s are. But what about when he’s not so little any more? What about when he’s all grown up, puberty’s past, and maybe not so cute? “

If I’m honest, I admit, that future day scared me.

Friends, today is that day. Today, Josh finishes his last day of high school.

And it’s a little crazy. I mean, with the spring of 2020 being nothing like how we thought the spring was going to be, the reality is that the story of my life is nothing like I thought it was going to be. But what’s crazy? 

It’s better.

I have learned more. Grown more. Been tugged and stretched and maybe cried more. Learning more about who God is and who I am in relation to him. But it has never been anywhere close to the so-called saddest day.

Four days ago, in fact, I was standing in my kitchen, so proud of myself for making a homemade, pretty gourmet-ish sauce. As the container I was holding slipped out of my hand, I instinctively brought my non-oven-mitt-covered hand over to catch the falling container. I instantly, painfully burned a good two-and-a-half by four inch section of my left wrist; it was nothing short of awful.  Just yesterday, no less, I looked down at my still sore, probably-now-scarred arm and noticed something new…

In the middle of the charred skin, there is a well-defined, small shape. Clearly, there is a heart, smack dab in the middle of my wound. Yes, I was wearing a thin bracelet with a small heart charm. With burning hot sauce caught on the charm but the bracelet not immediately removed, the charm essentially served as a branding device on my wrist. But what was so unpredictable, was that it was only when I was willing to look past the burn and the pain — which still exist — could I finally see the beautiful. Now, that is all I see.

What a glorious day today is… It is beautiful indeed.

Joyfully…

AR

Yes, it’s true. I am glued to my television every time there’s a conclave or the election of a new pope. It’s also true that I am not Catholic; however, I have deep respect for the Catholic Church  and find the process of selecting a new leader fascinating…

“Eligo in Summum Pontificem” — or “I elect as Supreme Pontiff”.

Those are the words printed on the top half of the rectangular ballot that each of the 133 cardinal electors had in their hands earlier this week. The bottom half was blank, leaving space for each of the electorate to write in the name of their desired candidate.

When a candidate receives at least 89 votes — or a two-thirds majority — he is elected as the new pope. This week, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost was chosen as the 267th Bishop of Rome. He is now to be known as Pope Leo XIV. Before we continue, no less, a few more facts add insight into this new, global leader…

• He was born in Chicago to a father of French and Italian descent and to a mother of Spanish descent.
• He has two brothers; he is the youngest of the three.
• He served as yearbook editor-in-chief in high school.
• He graduated from Villanova with a degree in math.
• He is a dual citizen of the U.S. and Peru.
• He is known as “Bob” or “Rob” to friends.
• He received his MDiv from a seminary in Chicago.
• He is fluent in English, French, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese and can read Latin and German.
• He’s an amateur tennis player.
• And he does the daily “Wordle.”

One of the things that fascinates me in current day is the race to define the new pope. Not to define him by his nationality nor even the baseball team he roots for. (Note: we’ve already seen claims clamoring for loyalty to both the Cubs and the White Sox.) But rather, there seems a very intentional race to define the pope politically…

Is he liberal? Is he conservative? Is he a centrist? What policies is he passionate about?

Outlets on the left and the right have immediately attempted to frame expressions from then Cardinal Robert Prevost to paint a picture of a current pope who aligns with their political beliefs.

And just like that, they all miss the point. 

While technically the head of both Church and state — there is no separation as the Vatican is its own city-state — the primary role of the Pope is to pastor the Catholic Church, guiding its global community of approximately 1.3 billion people. He shepherds his people, encouraging them to grow in their faith.

Let us be clear. Members of the Catholic Church are followers of Jesus Christ. They love and serve a triune God — meaning Father, Son and Holy Spirit — Jesus being the son of God made man. The core beliefs of their faith are that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, died on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins, and is the only person on this planet to be resurrected, as all sorts of witnesses saw him, a truth that can’t be ignored and changes us today. They teach, too, consistent with the historic scriptures, that Jesus is absolutely coming to Earth again. Certain disciplines and practices are deeply important, as ways to honor God and authentically connect with him; these include communion, confession, prayer and more. The Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God; it’s a vital source of knowledge, guidance, and further connection with God. They teach obedience. They teach paying attention to the Holy Spirit and being obedient to his prompting. The Church encourages growth in one’s faith, recognizing that faith is the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen. The bottom line is that the Catholic Church encourages fellow followers of Jesus to find meaning and purpose in life by having a relationship with God, reflecting his unrivaled values of compassion and love.

Again, while personally I am a very imperfect follower of Jesus, I am not Catholic. But I deeply respect the Catholic Church.

And it’s so clear to me that any attempt to frame Bob/Rob/Pope Leo XIV as politically aligned, pales in comparison to what he’s actually called to do.

Respectfully…

AR

There’s indeed been some wild trials as of late. Allow us to briefly identify a few legal cases prior to today’s primary point…

First, from Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham, Massachusetts, a small town located on Boston’s southwestern border…

Karen Read is on trial for the 2022 death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, who was found dead in the snow outside a home in Canton, Massachusetts. Read is accused of intentionally striking O’Keefe with her SUV after a night of drinking, and then leaving him there to die in the freezing cold. She faces charges of second-degree murder, manslaughter while operating under the influence, and leaving the scene of a fatal accident. Her first trial in 2024 ended in a hung jury, and a retrial began last month. Note that some of the evidence is indeed contentious (and societally noteworthy), including a Google search regarding “how long to die in cold” and when exactly it was made that night. Was it genuine concern or a dreadful conspiracy?

Next from New York City and the New York Court of Appeals…

The retrial of Harvey Weinstein has begun. With his 2020 conviction overturned, the court is hearing new charges against the previously highly successful American film producer. He is charged with multiple rape and other sex crimes. Over 100 women have accused Weinstein of being sexually harassed or assaulted, many who are well know actresses. What makes Weinstein’s case seemingly significant is that he socialized with many Hollywood A-listers and politicians, particularly within the Democratic Party. Most have denounced him; he has also denied all charges. Significant also in this retrial is that the cultural moment has shifted since his conviction, with the #metoo movement having evolved from its original momentum and zeal.

And lastly, from the Royal Courts of Justice in central London…

Attempting to overturn a 2020 decision by the UK government, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, lost a legal challenge denying him automatic, taxpayer-funded protection. His security was downgraded after he made the decision to stop being a working royal and moved to the US. (Apparently, he wanted to keep a few things.) Judge Sir Geoffrey Vos ruled that while Harry’s safety concerns were both “powerful and moving,” Harry’s “sense of grievance” did not “translate into a legal argument.” In response, the former royal gave a reportedly surprise, lengthy interview to the BBC, in which he said he was “devastated” after losing the decision.

One of the things I oft find interesting is how we as a public react to prominent trials and legal scenarios. The bottom line is this: we have an opinion.

How profound, right?

… O.J. Simpson… Casey Anthony… Derek Chauvin… Bill Cosby… Jussie Smollett… Martha Stewart… Donald Trump… Bill Clinton… the guilty and the not… 

We have an opinion. And let us be clear; there is nothing wrong with having an opinion. It is completely ok to think something’s right, wrong or somewhere in between. It’s completely ok to think he/she did it or did not… he/she deserves it or does not.

The challenge within our opinion is the certainty which accompanies our conviction. In other words, the “I know he did it!”… “I know he did not!” And just like that we forget one of the most important realities that the decade of media-and-cameras-everywhere often, so ostentatiously obscures…

We weren’t there.

We weren’t there when the impetus for the legal case happened. Our opinion is based on what other people saw and said. Maybe they have bias. Maybe they have a skewed perspective. Maybe it’s skewed for reasons unknown to them. Maybe some other experience has shaped how they relayed what they saw and said.

Our vantage point is most always limited. Such is wise to remember. It should also impact and alter how we express our opinion.

Respectfully…

AR

As we continue to attempt to wisely and respectfully navigate through a culture full of conversational land mines, often the question arises as to why.

Why the division? Why so polarizing? Why is conversation so hard?

By no means do we have all the answers. Also by no means will we ever think we do.

No doubt social media has fueled the conversation-less rhetoric; it’s easy to sit behind a keyboard and post something without looking another in the eye. No doubt, too, as addressed here recently, did the evolution of Twitter/X play a role, a place where journalists gathered but in the original 140 character limit, it was clear their objectivity was fanciful at best. Then, also, we have the rise of candidates on all sides of the aisle who believe denigration is an appropriate means of communication — and because we like the side of the aisle the wanting leader represents, our emotion muffles our wisdom, prompting us to cheer as opposed to demand better.

But as the division continues and we witness how the public continues to express themselves, there seems a undergirding premise that fuels the tenacious talk. (Note: it’s talk — not conversation; conversation requires an actual exchange of ideas… respectfully, hopefully too, of course.)

The premise thus that we find so fascinating is the number of people and number of us who in our expressions attempt to claim some sort of moral superiority. Let us define the term.

Moral superiority is the belief that one’s actions are justified by having higher moral values than others. It’s the belief that one’s actions and values are more just, ethical and/or right than those of others. They believe that they are clearly, morally superior.

We see it often these days. Haven’t you noticed what’s wrong with everyone else?…

Don’t you see what I see?

Don’t you believe what I believe?

And just like that, everyone who doesn’t think like me is wrong. In fact, we assume that if someone doesn’t think like me, they are simply ignoring an unpleasant reality. 

The challenge is that to conclude that one is morally superior to another, we each have to ignore something… maybe it’s something I have to ignore in me… maybe it’s something I have to ignore in someone on my preferred side of the proverbial partisan aisle… maybe it’s something I’ve chosen to ignore in our current or most recent president… The point is that moral superiority typically only exists if we ignore something significant, something that makes the narrative we wish to present a little less true.

I appreciate much the insight of Stephen Batchelor, said so poignantly yet accurately. Batchelor is a Scottish Buddhist author and teacher, known worldwide. He once said, “The greatest threat to compassion is the temptation to succumb to fantasies of moral superiority.”

Oh, so true.

The belief or attitude of being morally superior kills our compassion for whole segments of people. It makes our content less credible, our voice less valuable, and builds blindspots of which we are grossly unaware. Moral superiority then gives free license to any in the audience to quit listening to the one who presumes he or she is more right.

Friends, let me offer a concluding, personal note…

One of the best things about writing this blog for the last 17 years is that I’ve had opportunity to realize how wrong I can be.

That’s not past tense; it’s an ongoing, current reality.

Democrats, Republicans, all leaners in whatever direction and members of other demographics, allow me to encourage you…

Resist the lure of moral superiority. Maybe then you’ll be more listened to.

Respectfully…

AR

Last weekend was the annual NFL draft — officially known as the “Annual Player Selection Meeting.” While a total of 257 players were picked by the professional football teams, there was one story in particular that seemed to have lessons surpassing the sports world. Such was the case of Shedeur Sanders. Allow us to briefly provide context…

Sanders is 23 years old. He is the most recent winner of the “Johnny Unitas Golden Arm Award,” presented annually to the nation’s top quarterback in college football. The award is not solely based on one’s on field ability, but is given to the QB who also “best exemplifies character, scholastic and athletic achievement.”

Sanders is the son of Deion Sanders, an outstanding athlete himself in both professional football and baseball, known as “Prime Time.” While the moniker was bestowed by a teammate in high school, it has long lasted, due no doubt to both his flash on the field and oft-articulated faith in oneself. 

Deion is a Christian man. He has openly shared that he became a follower of Jesus Christ in 1998, shortly after his first divorce. While experiencing all sorts of success, it wasn’t enough; it simply wasn’t satisfying. There was no lasting peace. He went from being actually suicidal to surrender, concluding only a relationship with Jesus would allow for that deeply craved by all of us, lasting peace. Said Deion, “Nothing helped me and delivered me and got me to the next day except for Jesus. I mean that was it when I said I surrendered. I gave my life to the Lord. Things began to change slowly but surely over (the) process.” 

Indeed it is a process. And the reality is for all those who “give their life to the Lord,” they remain imperfect. That’s the zillion dollar understanding of the day. So often we look around at those in the church, and we see all this crud. We see people say some awful, hurtful things. They, though, are imperfect, too. And thus they don’t always mirror an accurate reflection of who Jesus is nor how he directed us to treat one another.

I’m no one’s Holy Spirit. And let none of us ever claim to be. But unfortunately, Deion, no doubt fueled by the fierce love a father has for his son, has said some hard things. Allow me to respectfully change the word “hard”… some rather boastful, non-humble things. For example, as Deion has said…

• “Do not allow my confidence to offend your insecurity.”
• “People say there’s no ‘I’ in team. Well, there’s not. But there’s an ‘I’ in win.”
• “Confidence is my natural odor.”

Specifically, too, he spoke about Shedeur, prior to the draft…

• “He will be a top 5 pick.”
• “I know where I want [my son] to go. There’s certain cities where it ain’t going to happen.”
• “There are teams I won’t allow him to play for.”

To be clear, when the season was over, prior to the individual evaluation period, Shedeur was expected to be an early first round pick. And then as the draft played out over last Thursday, Friday and Saturday, no team picked Deion’s son in the first round. Nor in the second or third. Not even the fourth. Thought to be one of the biggest slides ever in the NFL Draft, Shedeur Sanders was selected in the fifth round, by a team who had drafted another QB in front of him.

Why the slide? Lots of people have lots of reasons…

Was it collusion by NFL owners and GM’s?… Was it racism, not wanting to hire a confident, bold young black man as some have surmised?… Was it that he really wasn’t that good, and the evaluations were off?…

I have long been a fan of Deion Sanders. No doubt the family faces significantly more scrutiny than most… Was there a perceived lack of humility in both father and son?… Some have suggested the son had more than one interview with an NFL head coach and/or assistant in which he wasn’t prepared nor was he demonstrably humble. The humble part gets my attention.

We don’t know why the slide for Shedeur. I feel for the young man, as no doubt the slide from round 1 to 5 is accompanied by an ample share of embarrassment. 

But what we do know is that football is a team sport. We know that the quarterback is a vocal leader. We also know that humility is one of the most attractive, effective qualities in great leaders. 

With all due respect to the entire Sanders family — one can be confident and humble at the exact same time. Humility will also, always be most attractive.

Respectfully…

AR

I pull up to that four-way stop countless times a week. There’s nothing atypical about the intersection. Two roads in a residential area… speed limit maybe 25… all arriving in all directions come to a full stop before anyone can proceed.

This particular morning there were four cars at the intersection that arrived at seemingly adjacent times. Not the same time, but certainly close.

Of no question, I was the last to arrive. It wasn’t debatable. I was the fourth of four. 

The two cars to my immediate left and right were each there first. But there was also a pedestrian. In our neighborhood (and yes, elsewhere), pedestrians come first; they generally have the right away. 

And so, after the pedestrians made their way across the street, after coming to a complete stop, the two vehicles to my sides proceeded to first move through the crossing, passing one another along the way.

It was then only me and the car directly across from me, time for us to cross on the same street in opposite directions.

I was turning left, in front of the other car. 

I began to turn.

As the car opposite me simultaneously started to proceed, the driver came to an abrupt halt. Not only did she stop. She stopped close enough to me to look me in the eye. Let me say it a different way…

To glare.

It was indeed not a kind, good-to-see-you glare. Not at all. 

I don’t think I’m going out on a limb here in saying that the driver coming the other way was clearly peeved — nettled by my attempt to turn in front of her. She looked at me, stared at me, and mouthed a few choice words (… appreciate the soundproof glass in my car…). While I couldn’t hear her, nor discern exactly what she said, it seemed her thoughts and words went something like this…

How dare you. I was here first. You know it. You saw me. How dare you try to turn in front of me! Are you that arrogant? Are you so privileged that you think it’s ok for you to go first? You know you are wrong; it’s my turn. Shame on you. Yes, shame on you. What you think is so wrong.

Yes, she is right. To turn in front of her would have been wrong. She was there first. I was there last. And while I’m no fan of shame, I’ll echo her words in shame on me if I believe I’m right…

But there’s one problem… one problem the driver of the other car did not know. And she did not know what she did not know.

The driver of the car coming in the opposite direction of me had her blinker on. She had on the blinker signaling she would also be turning in front of me. Traffic standards dictate then that we turn at the same time, each in front of the other.

But the problem was that she didn’t know what she didn’t know. She was unaware of her own turn signal, an action she would have had to initiate.

Because the woman was blind to her very own actions, she chose to lash out in disgust at those around her. She justified glaring, shaming and shouting because she was blind to her own circumstances.

It makes me wonder…

When am I so blind? When are we so blind of our own actions and circumstances? Even when right in front of us?

Sounds like pause before lashing out is wise…

Respectfully…

AR

“In case you haven’t noticed… journalism is in deep trouble. This is in large part because Americans have lost faith in journalists. According to Gallup, roughly two-thirds of Americans had a great deal of faith in the news media in 1970. Today, only 31% of Americans say the same — while 36% say they have no faith in the news media at all.

How can that trust be rebuilt? Are we destined to live in a world of different realities and alternative facts? Should the mainstream media apologize for all they have ignored or covered up or gotten wrong over the past few years?

To boil it all down: does real, honest journalism have a future in America?” — Bari Weiss, April 2025

It is indeed interesting where people get their news from — that is, if they’re still paying attention at all. The challenge, too, is that this thing that we call the “mainstream media,” as Weiss would attest, doesn’t really represent the mainstream nor does it capture the attention of most of country.

It is no longer simply assumed that NPR is trustworthy. Same for longtime standard newspapers such as The New York Times, New York Post and Washington Post, especially each of their opinion pages. ABC, CBS and  NBC are regularly doubted. And the trustworthiness of cable ventures CNN, FOX News and MSNBC have long been in question.

So what makes them trustworthy? What determines whether a journalism outlet is a reliable source of news?

It’s not simply bias; in fact, some would say there is no such thing as unbiased news. As said by the frequented Intramuralist source All Sides, it is hidden media bias that “misleads, manipulates and divides us.” We would be wise, therefore, to learn how to spot it, rather than allow it to feed the narrative already building in our brains. Hence, we consider the following:

• Does the source distinguish between editorials and fact?
• When opinion is offered, is that clear? Do they say so?
• How well-sourced are their stories? Are they transparent about who their sources actually are?
• How much persuasive rhetoric do they use?
• Are they insulting of any?
• Are they prone to the use of sensationalism?
• Are they willing to report on a story in a way that’s different than everyone else?
• Have they acknowledged places where they were wrong and corrected their mistakes?
• Do they present full context?
• Are there news events they are unwilling to talk about?

As for me, my primary news is read — not watched. I read RealClearPolitics, All Sides and The Free Press routinely. I will also tune into Axios, Newsweek and the Wall Street Journal.

From a podcast perspective, that’s where I will tune into podcasts with openly stated both right and left biases, with Bari Weiss’s “Honestly” being my current fave. Why?

Bari is smart, fair and witty woman. She’s incredibly discerning. She is a Jewish lesbian and former writer for both the Wall Street Journal and New York Times. She resigned from the Times in 2020 after “constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views.” In her resignation letter she said that intellectual curiosity was now considered a “liability” for the paper, evidence of the evaporating trustworthiness. 

One of the more insightful podcast episodes I listened to recently was when Weiss met with the founders of Axios, persons who were previously respectively employed by The Washington Post and Time. They are persons believed to be credible, meaning not hidden with their bias. Together they had a conversation about the increasing mistrust of the media.

Interestingly, they identified the following as what they believe to be the main factors as to why the media has taken such a credibility hit in the last decade: (1) the beginning of Twitter, in which groupthink was prominent and reporters began openly sharing their bias in full view… (2) the word policing that arose during the Covid years, with media leading the way in what we could/could not say… (3) the response to Donald Trump’s first election and the agendas in their succeeding coverage… and (4) the coverage of Joe Biden and his clear decline. Their point was that each of those aspects contributed to our current, collective mistrust of media.

Here’s wishing for more. It would just be nice to trust what we watch and read.

Respectfully…

AR

It’s the one story that gets me over and over again. 

There was a young man, probably in his early/mid twenties, who had had enough. Like many young adults of his time, he was loose, carefree, and really didn’t do a lot of thinking about what mattered most in life. He lived for the moment… no matter how it would affect life later. He didn’t care.

His relationship with his family wasn’t great; they were clearly unenamored with his happy-go-lucky living and his unwillingness to help around the home. His father was deeply concerned. His mother spent days on her knees praying. And his older brother was disgusted; it wasn’t fair that his sibling refused to participate in any household responsibilities. 

Let’s be honest; the young man cared only for himself, rarely thinking of others. He only did what he wanted to do. He was hurtful, and he was rude. 

Living for the moment, he became increasingly demanding. So much so that he went to his father, insisting on his inheritance now. He wanted the money to sustain his lifestyle. His father, loving his kid unconditionally even though his kid couldn’t see it, obliged. He gave him in dollars half the value of the property their family owned.

Ungrateful as the young man was, he took the money and ran… off to the big city, still no care in the world.

There the son did all he wanted. He ate, drank and partied with the best of them. He could care less about cost; if he wanted it, he bought it. For years he engaged in a reckless way of living — living for the moment, blowing all his money, working never, and committed to no one or nothing long term. Note that the recklessness was less about his actual activity than his care and gratitude for others. It was minimal and inconsistent at best.

All was wonderful and fine in the young man’s mind. That is, until the money was gone.

There was no one to help out, no one to grant a favor. The young man treated most all relationships terribly.

And so regrettably, with nothing on his resume to qualify him for something more, he got a job picking up the city’s trash — up early in the morning, ’til late at night, manual labor, cleaning up everyone else’s garbage. It was ugly and hard. He made little and ate little; he was miserable for months.

He didn’t know what to do. The only person he thought may love him still was his father. He always said he did. He always said he would. The young man had treated him terribly; more than anything, he had simply ignored him. He expressed no care, no gratitude; he lived his life in a way that never acknowledged a dad who loved him so.

And thus the young man scraped up his last bits of money, bought a bus ticket, and made the long, pensive journey home.

It’s sobering to imagine all that happened next. The boy dejectedly saunters up the long drive — totally opposite the hop, skip and a jump he left with years before — still unsure of what he’s going to say… Will they forgive me? I didn’t know what I didn’t know...

And in the picture that causes me most pause, we’re told that while he was still a long way off, his father sees him. His father sees him because he was outside, waiting, believing one day his son would return. And he doesn’t just stay on the front porch, crafting a well-deserved rebuke; he runs. He runs to his son.

Midway down the drive, they embrace. They cry. The tears just fall. The son attempts to get some words out… “I’m sorry. I didn’t know. I treated you so badly. I didn’t acknowledge you — wasn’t grateful for you.” To which the father simply says, “It’s ok. You are home! Let’s celebrate. Time for a feast… my kid is home!”

On Easter especially, I think of this story. It reminds me of how God craves a relationship with each of us. But we aren’t robots; he allows us to choose him. The reality is we are always welcome home, no matter who we are, what we’ve done or what’s been done to us. That’s the message of Easter. There is no situation too far gone, no heart too broken, and no story too messy that God can’t redeem. That’s the hope we carry today.

Happy Easter, friends.

Blessings to you always…

AR

For some time now persons have asked me what my greatest political fear is. Allow us some radical candor this day…

I’m afraid that someone will assassinate Pres. Trump and 30% of the country will cheer.

That has nothing to do with supporting or opposing the sitting President. That has everything to do with people being so blinded by their opinions and passions that they can no longer see the difference between right and wrong.

Early Sunday morning while he and his family were asleep, the home of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was allegedly, intentionally set on fire by a 38 year old man. The man has been charged with attempted murder, terrorism, aggravated arson and more. The house looks horrific. Details about motive continue to unfold, but the initial investigation reveals that the man admitted to “harboring hatred” toward the Keystone State Governor.

A few more details…

Shapiro is a Democrat. 

I don’t care.

Shapiro is Jewish.

I also don’t care.

What I care about is that Shapiro and his wife Lori and four children are ok. People need to learn to disagree in a way that doesn’t allow hatred to harbor in their heart and then justify responding in such ugly, untenable ways. There is zero justification for violence. Sadly, no less, we don’t learn that from a totality of our leaders. Way too many utilize vicious and violent rhetoric. Way too many of us are ok with it; we even cheer.

Hear the reaction of fellow Pennsylvanian, Sen. Dave McCormick. Note that McCormick is a Republican.

(I still don’t care.)

“… No matter the motivation, it’s important for all Americans to recognize that the demonization of political opponents and those with whom we disagree must stop. I made this same argument after witnessing the terrible near-assassination of President Trump and murder of Corey Comperatore in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Shapiro is a Democrat. I’m a Republican who supports President Donald Trump. But this isn’t a moment for partisanship. It’s time for all Americans to disown, condemn, and make every effort to stop political violence. And we must likewise call on our political leaders to avoid language that vilifies those on the other side.

When political figures or activists characterize a person or group as irredeemably evil, they plant a poisonous, dangerous seed. As violent language becomes more pervasive, our political system will slip further past the boundary between honest, even intense political disagreements, and nurturing a climate of demonization and violence. Take your pick of recent examples.

Tesla cars and dealerships have been vandalized and set on fire amid accusations of Elon Musk being a danger to the republic.

Nine Democratic lawmakers said that they received bomb threats on around last Thanksgiving.

Jewish Columbia University students were attacked and physically blocked from going to class and a janitor was held against his will during the occupation of Hamilton Hall, amid anti-Israel protests at Columbia that saw calls to kill Zionists and ‘crush Zionism’ ‘by any means necessary.’

The alleged assassin of a United Healthcare executive was celebrated as a hero standing up against the supposed injustices of private health insurance.

An assassination plot against a Supreme Court justice was foiled two years after a United States Senator stood on the court’s steps claiming justices had ‘unleashed the whirlwind.’ The list goes on.

I am sure there will be those who overlook the demonization when it’s their ‘side’ doing it. But the truth is that no side has a monopoly on violence and the rhetoric that can incite it. Partisans may wave away my examples on the left or the right in favor of their own examples. But the pattern is right in front of us. Some call it incitement, and others, stochastic terrorism. Whatever the name, we must call out the radical rhetoric and political violence that we have all witnessed over the course of this decade. I am doing so now, specifically at this moment, when the violence is directed at my governor, not in spite of the fact that he and I disagree on many things, but because we do…”

There is more. But concluding with candor, let us simply acknowledge that the demonization, violence and rhetoric are wrong.

Respectfully…

AR