Should U.S. Soldiers Disobey Illegal Orders? Yes and No

Yes, I strongly believe U S. soldiers should disobey illegal orders. But, no, soldiers can not arbitrarily decide which orders are illegal.

If every soldier made his or her own decision on which orders are illegal, chaos could erupt.

In emergency situations, success often depends on quick obedience to orders.

My Personal Perspective

I am basically a pacifist. I support the right of persons to refuse to serve in the military. I believe reasonable alternatives to military service need to be available even when a military draft is in place.

However, since I've never served in any type of military service, I'm not qualified to give an insider's perspective.

War Is Illegal

The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Act made war illegal. Most world nations agreed to it. However, that did not prevent World War II or the numerous others that have occurred since 1928.

Can a soldier refuse an order to fight in a war, because war is illegal? I would argue yes. But most  U.S. government leaders and military leaders would disagree with me.

Perhaps a solution would be to require all persons enlisting in the military to sign a statement agreeing that war is legal, and it is legal to order soldiers to fight in one.

That would certainly disqualify conscientious objectors. Furthermore, if we all became conscientious objectors, there would be no wars.

If War Is Legal

Though I consider war itself illegal, what if war is legal? Under what grounds would soldiers disobey orders?

I hope everyone would agree ordering soldiers to kill unarmed civilian children and elderly persons who offer no threat to them is incorrect.

One example of U.S. soldiers obeying orders to do this took place during the Vietnam War in what became known as the My Lai Massacre. A  PBS article [*] is one of a huge number of articles that discuss the atrocities of this event.

We may almost unanimously agree soldiers had the right to refuse the orders given during the My Lai Massacre. But what about obeying the order to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II? Scholars today still debate whether the deaths of so many people (possibly over 200,000?), including a lot of children, was justified.

Once a decision is made to go to war, it's not easy to decide which orders are legal and which are illegal.

We have federal laws, the U.S. Constitution, and common-sense moral codes. We have the U.S. Supreme Court and the President.

But when faced with the horrors of war, it's not always easy to decide which order is best for a situation, what the highest righteous authority (which I call God) desires. And I would argue obeying any order contrary to God's perfect will is immoral, wrong, and should be illegal. 

Furthermore, while Congress has the authority to declare war, often Presidents seem to usurp that authority by ordering military actions.

Does the White House, the President, have authority to decide what is legal or illegal? Are all White House orders to the military legal by virtue of the power and authority of the office?

I hope we all agree no. Definitely no. Below is a photo of the White House I took in June 2025.

If war is legal, it ought to be limited and avoided whenever possible.

Closing Thoughts

Even if we all agreed that soldiers should disobey illegal orders, we likely could not agree on which orders are illegal.

However, government orders to fire on unarmed peaceful protesters certainly seem to warrant disobedience.

Coups can occur when soldiers disobey government authorities ordering them to fire on unarmed peaceful demonstrators and instead stand up to corrupt officials.

When soldiers obey the righteous authority instead of an unrighteous government, it's a blessing.

In my opinion, if President Trump gave an order to the United States military under present circumstances to attack Greenland that would be an illegal order.

It would be immoral, unconstitutional, and grounds for Trump's impeachment in the House, conviction in the Senate, and his removal from office. It would be an order that I hope our military leaders would refuse to obey.

However, I hope and pray that such an order never comes. I further hope than our nation never repeats some of the atrocities committed in the past against Native American Indians, blacks, and many others in various places around the world, such as My Lai.

We the people, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the President, the CIA, and the military need to seek to refuse to allow such things.

Yes, soldiers and the rest of us enjoy an obligation to disobey orders that are clearly illegal.

NOTE:

This article was last revised on January 16, 2026.

ENDNOTE:

[*] "The My Lai Massacre"; PBS; webpage accessed January 14, 2026; https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/vietnam-my-lai-massacre/

Why Are Average Bank CD Rates Under 2% When Inflation Is 2.7%?

Persons seeking to avoid the risk of stocks, bonds, and many other investment options frequently put their money in banks, purchasing bank certificates of deposit (CDs).

However, they often earn less on their CD than the rate of inflation. They lose purchasing power over time.   

Average CD Rates Compared to the Inflation Rate

The average annual interest rate on CDs is currently less than 2% according to a January 12, 2026 Forbes article[1],  a NerdWallet  article [2] updated December 15, 2025, and a Bankrate article [3] dated December 23, 2025.

That’s less than the 2.7% rate of inflation. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [4] reported that in December 2025 prices were 2.7% higher than a year ago. That means for all items in the Consumer Price Index, the overall price was 2.7% higher in December than for the same items a year ago.

Some banks apparently pay less than 1% annual interest on CDs. At a 1% rate, a $1,000 CD would only pay $10 per year. That would be equivalent to getting only a dime per $10. The picture below I took of a dime and a $10 bill illustrates this.

Reasons CDs Pay Less Than Stocks and Bonds

One reason CDs over the long term typically pay much less than stocks and bonds is because the CDs are less risky.

One reason CDs are less risky is that the federal government’s Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insures such deposits. According to the FDIC website [5] “Deposits are insured up to at least $250,000 per depositor, per FDIC-insured bank, per ownership category.”

In contrast, a corporation may lose money, or it may go bankrupt. Stock and bond holders could lose all their money in case of bankruptcy.   

Another reason CDs are less risky is that the CD interest rate is usually fixed for the period of the CD. Stocks and bonds change value, although if you keep a bond for its entire term the rate is typically fixed.

Since CDs are a safer investment than corporation stocks or bonds, they pay less interest.

But that doesn’t seem to me to fully explain things. Supply and demand likely factor in. When banks need more money, they pay more to get it. When banks don’t need much money, perhaps due to fewer persons seeking or qualifying for loans, banks may pay less.

Also, banks can borrow from the federal government in addition to taking deposits from customers. As the federal government lowers its rates, banks typically lower theirs.  

The Best CD Rates

While the average CD rate is less than 2 percent, numerous websites that claim to list the best current rates as of January 2026 show higher rates. They list typical annual rates of 3% or 4% at banks.

But rates vary depending on how much one deposits, how long the CD time frame is, and which bank money is deposited in. The same bank may even offer different rates to customers living in different zip codes. Furthermore, online banks often offer higher rates than those with bricks and mortar locations.

However, at best CDs typically pay only 2-3 percent above the CPI. In order to earn 3% above the 2.7% inflation rate, a person would need to earn 5.7% annually on a CD. The highest CD rates I saw on various websites were all less than 5.7% annually.

Closing Thoughts

The full story of why banks often pay less than the rate of inflation on CDs is not known to me. Maybe even the banks don’t know all the reasons for their actions.

But if banks can get investors to deposit money in CDs at less than the rate of inflation, it’s common sense and good business sense for them to keep rates at less than the rate of inflation.

Consumers who compare rates and invest at FDIC-insured institutions paying the higher rates can help force other institutions to raise rates too. Persons may prefer a local bricks and mortar bank that pays a lower rate to an online bank though. Seek to invest wisely.     

ENDNOTES:

[1] Benninger, Michael (reviewed by Cetera, Mike); “CD Rates Today: January 12, 2026—Rates As High As 4.94%; Forbes; January 12, 2026, 4:40 a.m.; webpage accessed January 13, 2026; https://www.forbes.com/advisor/banking/cds/cd-rates-today-01-12-26/

[2] Burnette, Margarette (edited by Sara Clarke, co-written by Spencer Tierney, Chanelle Bessette, and Ruth Sarreal); “Average Bank Interest Rates for Savings Accounts, CDs and More”; NerdWallet; updated December 15, 2025; webpage accessed January 13, 2026; https://www.nerdwallet.com/banking/learn/average-rates-for-deposit-accounts

[3] Bennett, Karen (edited by Pippin Wilbers, reviewed by Greg McBride); “Current CD rates for January 2026”; BankRate; December 23, 2025; webpage accessed January 13, 2026; https://www.bankrate.com/banking/cds/current-cd-interest-rates/

[4] “12-month percentage change, Consumer Price Index, selected categories, not seasonally adjusted”; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; webpage accessed January 13, 2026; https://www.bls.gov/charts/consumer-price-index/consumer-price-index-by-category-line-chart.htm

[5] “Deposit Insurance FAQs”; Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; last updated April 1, 2024; webpage accessed January 13, 2026; https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit-insurance/faq 

Lexington, KY, Most Tourist-Friendly U.S. City, Conde Nast Traveler Reader Survey States

Lexington, Kentucky, where I live, is the most friendly city in the U.S., according to a survey by Conde Nast Traveler [1] of its readers.

As a Lexington resident, I consider it a friendly place to live, not just a friendly city for tourists to visit.

Lexington is blessed to receive numerous visitors, as well as lots of outsiders moving into the city.

Lexington is home to Kentucky's top public university, the University of Kentucky. The city is located at the intersection of two major interstates (I-75 and I-64). Furthermore, Lexington attracts large numbers of visitors for its world-famous horse industry.

Horse Capital of the World

Lexington offers much. It calls itself the Horse Capital of the World. Indeed, the city contains several beautiful horse farms, the Keeneland thoroughbred race course, the Red Mile trotter race course, and the Kentucky Horse Park.

However, persons like myself who lack much interest in horse racing or horse farms find many other appealing things here.

My Love for Lexington

I was born and raised in small towns in southeastern Kentucky.  But I came to Lexington in 1976 for college at the University of Kentucky and fell in love with the city.

Parks, libraries, museums, and the numerous events one expects in a college town are part of the appeal.

The Tripadvisor website  [2] lists hundreds of things to do in Lexington. I wrote a few reviews on that website myself. I'm confident you'll find things listed that appeal to you.

With over 300,000 people, Lexington is large enough to offer much, but small enough to avoid the anonymity of most big cities 

Below is a photo of the Lexington city Christmas tree. You're welcome to call it either a Christmas tree or a holiday tree, but most of us seem to choose the former. A tree-lighting ceremony and Christmas parade are among the city's numerous annual events.

I do like the Lexington friendliness that doesn't seem to be as common in most larger cities and is probably lacking in many smaller ones.

This makes it a special place. However, I haven't traveled enough to judge how Lexington's friendliness ranks compared to other cities in the country.

Indeed, folks are probably friendlier in some small towns I grew up in. But  life and friendliness in small towns are different than in cities.

I do definitely consider folks in Lexington friendly. Residents and the city government both do much to help the homeless, to support charities, and to help visitors and newcomers feel welcome.

Indeed, many Lexington residents came from small towns. We seem to have brought our friendly, small-town atmosphere with us to some extent.

More About Lexington

The city is home to a diverse group of places of worship for various religions. But Lexington is welcoming to those who are not into traditional faiths. The city is blessed with diversity and tolerance.

Due to its history of having horse farms, tobacco farms, and other farms,  Lexington contains much greenspace. Few cities contain as much farmland and other preserved greenspace as Lexington.

I enjoy bicycling the scenic multi-use Legacy Trail, which is several miles long and includes areas near some farms.

Lexington is in Fayette County, Kentucky. Actually the city and county are merged together as one governing entity.

All of Fayette County is part of Lexington, including some beautiful rural farmland. This merger of city and county  is one reason for the city containing so much beautiful, scenic land that lacks  city-style structures on it.

The city of over 300,000 people is still small enough that the county sheriff's office provides escorts for funeral processions that stop traffic at intersections.

Final Thoughts

I'm happy and honored that my city earned the friendliest U.S. city title from Conde Nast Traveler.

The magazine's readers each enjoy their own reason(s) for their votes. And the Conde Nast Traveler survey is not a scientific study. But I'm hoping its results are reasonably accurate, not due to some form of ballot stuffing or other bias.

In my possibly biased opinion, Lexington is a great city to visit and to live.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Morton, Caitlin; "The 10 Most Tourist-Friendly Cities in the U.S. According to Our Readers"; Conde Nast Traveler; posted November 20, 2025, with the gallery updated later; webpage accessed January 12, 2026; https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/2015-08-11the-2015-friendliest-and-unfriendliest-cities-in-the-us

[2] "Top Things to Do in Lexington"; Tripadvisor; webpage accessed January 12, 2026; https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g39588-Activities-Lexington_Kentucky.html

Trump Seeks to Cap Credit Card Interest Rates at 10%: Not the Correct Approach

Credit card rates in the United States are too high overall. With inflation currently about 3%, it seems outrageous that credit card interest rates are often 20% or more.

Trump's Plan

I hope Trump’s proposal to cap credit card rates at a maximum of 10% annually for a year is aimed at getting card issuers to voluntarily take steps to lower the usurious rates. An Associated Press article [1] is one of many that discuss Trump’s plan.

I feel it is a mistake if Trump plans to issue an executive order (or ask Congress to pass a law) literally requiring credit card issuers to have a maximum 10% annual interest rate.

That's the wrong approach.

Problems With Trump's Plan

A basic principle of economics is that higher risk investments pay a higher rate on average.

Many credit card holders are good credit risks. A company could issue them a card with a 10% interest rate or less and make a nice profit.

However, other credit card holders are high risk for various reasons. If credit card companies were forced to charge them a maximum of only 10% interest annually, the card issuers would likely either cancel the cards or institute some other charge to compensate for the loss of interest income. Otherwise, the cards would be too risky, likely unprofitable.

If banks lose money, they can't stay in business. That's basic economics. Below is a photo of three economics textbooks I own.

In some case lenders refuse cards to persons who are poor credit risks. In other cases they compensate for the greater risk by offering cards with higher interest rates.

Unfortunately, those least able to pay the high interest are those most likely to be stuck with it.

And if their credit card is cancelled, they may be seeking payday loans or other methods of borrowing that contain higher costs than their current credit card interest rates that may be 18% to 30% or perhaps even more.

Credit Cards Are Profitable for Banks

Statistics can be interpreted different ways. Furthermore, it often takes a long time for the federal government to process and report data. Accurate current information is not available.

However, a November 2025 Federal Reserve report [1] indicated that credit card banks were more profitable in 2024 than in 2023. 

Furthermore, it noted that credit card issuing banks are generally more profitable than other banks, because credit cards are relatively profitable for banks compared to other things.

I'm confident banks can cut rates and be profitable. But requiring a maximum rate of 10% for everyone isn't realistic.

Alternatives to High-Interest Credit Cards

Persons holding credit cards with high interest rates can seek out another card if they are a good credit risk. Search online or make phone calls to find the best deals.

But read the fine print on any card application about charges for transferring balances, interest rates increasing after an introductory period, annual fees, etc.

Persons with poor credit can seek to avoid adding new charges by cutting costs using food stamps and local food pantries, downsizing to a smaller house or apartment, getting help with medical bills, doing better preventive care, etc.

Taking on an additional part-time job to help pay down debt, doing day labor or odd jobs, and getting a debt consolidation loan are all possibilities.

Unfortunately though, those with much high-interest debt and low income often face tough choices. In many cases they also have poor health, with medical bills being a large part of their credit card debt.

Seeking help from friends, relatives, neighbors, and government benefits are some possibilities if they can't find lower interest rates or jobs to increase income.

Avoid Credit Card Interest If Reasonable

The Federal Reserve report cited earlier states that surveys indicate over 60% of credit card holders "report they nearly always" pay their balance in time to avoid paying any monthly interest charge.

Even without interest charges, banks make money on some cards by charging cardholders an annual fee.

Also, each time a credit card is used, the retailer who accepts it as payment pays the credit card company a service charge too.

I've been blessed to pay my credit card bill in full each month for many years. I'd love it if everyone could.

But I sympathize with those who can't. I remember years ago when I couldn't. Maybe this article helps in some way those facing that situation now.

ENDNOTES:

[1]  Sweet, Ken and Seung Min Kim;  “Trump pushes a 1-year, 10% cap on credit card interest rates and banks balk”; Associated Press; Updated 3:22 PM EST, January 10, 2026; webpage accessed January 11, 2026; https://apnews.com/article/trump-credit-cards-interest-rates-savings-banks-dba221f122789427c1c625ba873c9b71

[2] “Report to Congress: Profitability of Credit Card Operations of Depository Institutions”; Federal Reserve; November 2025; webpage accessed January 11, 2026; https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/ccprofit2025.pdf

 

Is the Bible Literally the Word of God?

If you're an atheist, you definitely feel the Bible is not literally the word of God and don't believe in God.

If you're a devout conservative Christian, there's a high probability that you do consider the Bible to literally be God's word.

But many others are uncertain about the truth. And for some, the answer depends on what one means by literally the word of God.

However, a 2022 Gallup poll [1] found "20% of Americans now say the Bible is the literal word of God."

Common Ground

There's some common ground even between atheists and the Christians who believe the Bible is literally the word of God.

For example, atheists acknowledge that many of the people named in the Bible actually existed. Archaeologists have confirmed the existence of many places described in the Bible. Independent historical records concur with the Bible in various ways.

There are even some sources outside the Bible that discuss Jesus, as noted by a History article [2], among many others. It seems reasonably well supported that Jesus existed and was memorable for what he accomplished.

Even among those who  claim the Bible is literally God's word, many state that parts of the Bible are told as parables, stories not to be taken as literally the truth.

Of course, there are also some atheists who claim to somehow know Jesus never existed, and some conservative Christians who take everything in the Bible to be literally true, including all of Jesus' parables.

Apparent Contradictions in the Bible

Numerous books discuss apparent contradictions contained in the Bible. They state that these contradictions prove that the Bible is not God's word.

However, numerous other books explain that these apparent contradictions are not really contradictions. They offer explanations to reconcile the apparent contradictions.

My View

Personally, I am a Christian. But I only read and write English. I've never read any of the Bible in Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic, which are apparently the original languages it was written in.

Furthermore, there are numerous English translations of the Bible. Also, the Catholic Bible contains certain books and parts of books that are not in the Protestant versions.

Even among my friends who consider the Bible to be 100% literally the word of God, there is disagreement about what it literally means. No two of them agree completely.

Personally, I don't call the Bible literally the word of God. After all, I know that the English translations we have today were translated by imperfect humans, and those who wrote the first written copies in other languages were imperfect humans.

Furthermore, the individuals who decided which particular writings would go into the Bible and which would be left out were fallible humans.

However, I am confident that on several occasions, when I've read the Bible prayerfully, that I've gained true insights from the highest righteous authority available to me, which I call God.

Below is a photo of several of the Bibles I own, including a book that reprints the Apocrypha in the King James Version (KJV). The earliest copies of the KJV contained the Apocrypha, but the Apocrypha was together in one place rather than in the particular books and locations it was in the Catholic Bible.

I've read the Bible three or four times, including once in the KJV and once in the New International Version. However, I am not a Bible scholar.

Closing Thoughts

There may be no way for humans to know for sure if the original Bible in its original languages was literally the word of God, since no original copies exist. If an original copy did exist, would we humans be able to understand it completely? I don't think so.

I do feel that when read prayerfully and interpreted properly, one can obtain blessings and insights from current translations.

Finally, I feel that those insights come from a power so much better than me that I choose to call that power God and those insights God's word.

ENDNOTES:

[1] Newport, Frank; "Fewer in U.S. Now See Bible as Literal Word of God"; Gallup; July 6, 2022; webpage accessed January 10, 2022; https://news.gallup.com/poll/394262/fewer-bible-literal-word-god.aspx

[2] Klein, Christopher; "The Bible Says Jesus Was Real. What Other Proof Exists?"; History; February 26, 2019, last updated December 15, 2025; webpage accessed January 10, 2026; https://www.history.com/articles/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

SNAP Food Benefits for Nutritious Items: Not Junk

SNAP food benefits are a blessing for the needy. I strongly support continuing SNAP.

However, I also agree with those who want to limit the benefit coverage to nutritious foods and drinks.

Far too much SNAP money is spent on carbonated soft drinks. These flavored, sweetened, carbonated sodas typically  offer few nutrients and lots of added sugars. They are not a healthy choice.

Similarly, a lot of SNAP money is expended on candy that typically has lots of added sugar, lots of calories, and few nutrients.

It's better if persons buy items like the bananas pictured below than processed junk foods and drinks.

Bananas purchased at a supermarket are even cheaper than much of the junk food and drinks people buy. At 60 cents per pound, a typical banana would cost less than 30 cents.

Suggested Food Stamp Restrictions

I support eliminating energy drinks, carbonated soft drinks, and other sweetened drinks with limited nutritional value from eligibility for buying with food stamps. I'll leave it up to the experts to decide on the specifics.

I also support eliminating most candies from eligibility for food stamps. I'd make an exception for dark chocolate with limited added sugar. And I'd urge food stamp recipients to consume that dark chocolate in moderation.

I'd also eliminate most store-bought cookies, cakes, and pies from food stamp eligibility.

United States Government Dietary Guidelines

I'm neither a dietician nor a medical professional, so I can't give dietary or medical advice. But the United States government's recently published Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2025-2030 provides useful advice.

Among other things, those guidelines encourage the consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, protein sources, dairy products, and whole grains.

The guidelines urge consumers to limit the intake of added sugars, highly processed foods, and saturated fats.

My Personal Perspective on the Guidelines

I basically agree with the federal government guidelines.

But I'm trying to adhere to a vegan diet. I use enriched, unsweetened soy milk in place of dairy products. I also eat lots of beans, nuts, and seeds, rather than consuming fish, poultry, or red meat.

And I confess I do indulge in buying and eating some things like potato chips and sweetened dark chocolate. But I aim at moderation.

I'm not on food stamps. But I'd support food stamps covering dark chocolate and potato chips. They are not as devoid of nutrients as carbonated soft drinks or candy that is almost all sugar.

Home Cooked Meals

We all have limited time.  Preparing nutritious, meals at home using whole wheat flour, whole grain corn meal, and dry beans soaked for several hours then cooked a couple of hours takes much time and effort. But it's worth it when time permits.

Cooking big batches of beans, vegetable soup, etc., then refrigerating (or freezing) leftovers to prepare later is a nice time saver.

Furthermore, though I support eliminating most store-bought cookies from food stamp eligibility, home-made cookies are different.

For example, home-made oatmeal-raisin cookies prepared with whole wheat flour and sweetened with applesauce can be a tasty, somewhat nutritious snack.

I sometimes sweeten my home-made cookies and home-made banana-walnut bread with 100% stevia which I order online. In my personal opinion 100% stevia is the best of the sugar substitutes. But I seek to limit my use of it too. I don't think it is nutritious. 

I'd allow 100% stevia to be purchased with food stamps. It may be better for our teeth and for diabetics than sugar, however, as noted earlier, I'm not a dietician or a medical professional and can't give dietary or medical advice. Also, note that most stevia products sold in supermarkets are not 100% stevia.

In general I think preparing beans, vegetables, and breads at home is better than buying them ready-to-eat. And I limit my bread baking to things like biscuits, corn bread, and other quick breads that don't require the time-consuming process of using yeast. But I commend those of you with the time and skill to successfully bake yeast breads from scratch.

U.S. Government Regulations on Food Stamp Junk Food Purchases

At the national level, purchase of junk food and drinks with food stamps is not limited.

However, federal officials have approved restrictions for 18 states that took effect earlier this year or will take effect later this year, according to a United States Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service webpage titled "SNAP Food Restriction Waivers that was last updated on January 2, 2026.

The specific limitations vary by state, as noted in the article linked to in the last paragraph.

I think it would be great if all states passed some type of similar restrictions, assuming the federal government doesn't make it mandatory for all states.

What do you think?

Disclosure: I work part-time as a store clerk in a retail store that sells candy and carbonated soft drinks, among many other things.

Is President Trump Abusing His Authority? Yes, In My Opinion

Yes, I firmly believe President Trump is abusing his authority. Please don't misunderstand me. I am not a Trump hater. I admire and respect him for his accomplishments as President--and there are many. I discuss some of them later in this article.

However, my emphasis in this blog post is on Trump's flagrant abuses of his power as President.

Greenland Is a Key Example

Trump's determination to acquire Greenland even if it takes military force is outrageous.

I concede that Greenland would be a nice addition to the United States. Greenland has much to offer.

But when and if Greenland ever becomes part of the U.S., it needs to happen only if the people of Greenland want it. If the people of Denmark also want Greenland to join the U.S., that's even better. Currently, neither Greenland nor Denmark seem to like the idea of Greenland joining the U.S. 

The U.S. cannot buy Greenland if it is not for sale. And the U.S. has no legal right to attack Greenland militarily to take it by force. Such an attack would violate international law, the United States Constitution, and common sense moral values.

An NBC News article and a Guardian article are two of the numerous ones online discussing Trump considering using military force to take Greenland. 

Any effort by Trump to take Greenland by force constitutes grounds for President Trump's impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives, then Trump's conviction by the Senate and his removal from office.

A Few More Cases of Trump Abusing His Authority: What To Do

Trump's abuse of power in enacting tariffs, stopping Venezuelan oil tankers, and using his power to get even with enemies are a few other examples of his numerous abuses. The list is long.

Trump needs to be controlled by his staff, Congress, and the Court system. Since he seems to emphasize hiring and retaining staff that will do as he desires, Congress and the Courts seem left primarily to take action.

Congressional Action

Democrats have taken less action than one would expect. Furthermore, some (many?) of their actions can be considered to be politically motivated. They are the opposition party.

Most Republicans in Congress seem unwilling to challenge Trump. The few that do often incur his wrath.

I'm proud to write that my home state of Kentucky's two Republican U.S. Senators are among  those most willing to oppose Trump. Rand Paul has a well-deserved reputation for being a maverick Republican willing to vote his personal views. Kentucky's Mitch McConnell also has prominently opposed Trump multiple times.

I urge readers to contact their U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives urging them to stand firm against Trump's excesses.

For Congress to pass laws against Trump's wishes requires a veto proof 2/3 majority in both chambers of Congress. Surely, we can get 2/3 of our Congressional members to pass legislation overturning some of Trump's ridiculous executive orders and reigning in his powers 

Furthermore, though the House can impeach Trump with just a majority vote, it requires a 2/3 majority in the Senate to convict him and remove him from office.

Still, I would hope that any effort by Trump to take Greenland involuntarily would constitute grounds for that removal.

Court Action

The Court system has taken action against Trump in some ways. But Trump seems to prevail surprisingly often in the United States Supreme Court.

Furthermore, a court typically only acts after a suit is filed. Then there is often a lengthy appeals process before a case gets to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Some of Trump's Accomplishments

I support many of Trump's actions during his two terms as President, though I sometimes disliked his method even in those cases.

Trump appointed pro-life Supreme Court justices that led to the overturning of Roe versus Wade. I'm pro-life.

During Trump's first term, the minimum age for purchasing tobacco products went up to age 21 from age 18. Many consider tobacco to be the #1 preventable cause of death. Raising the minimum age may help stop young people from adopting the tobacco habit.

Trump has sought to cut government spending and government waste, though the results are mixed.

He's tried to reduce healthcare costs by cutting abuses by large pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies. I'd like it if he also stopped cutting taxes for the rich to help reduce the federal debt, but at least he's doing something.

Trump's sought to end wars and conflicts in many places. Additionally, so far his military initiatives have not mired large quantities of U.S. soldiers in wars on foreign soil.

Even the removal of Venezuela's Maduro was a quick action that apparently cost no U.S. lives.  Though most probably disapprove of Trump's actions against Maduro, Maduro was widely viewed as an illegitimate leader.

I remain hopeful Trump will help Venezuela transition to a legitimate government that is good for Venezuela and the whole situation. And it would be great for Congress and the President to approve making payments to innocent civilian Venezuelans who suffered losses in the capture of Maduro.

Below is a photo of Trump on the White House lawn that I obtained from the White House website.  The date of the photo is unknown.

Final Thoughts

Trump cannot be called a do-nothing President. He has accomplished much. But he has also done much harm.

We the people, the Congress, the Court system, and his staff share a responsibility to correct Trump's excesses and errors, holding him accountable when necessary.

Trump enjoys many nice visions, dreams, and plans. But he is not God. He is not perfect. He is not a dictator.

His executive power needs to be properly controlled. Under God, let's all seek to control Trump.

Is a Weekly Sabbath Day of Rest Good? Do We Need That Day?

Is a weekly day of rest good for us? Do we need that?

Yes. Various studies indicate that we humans function better if there is at least one day a week that we rest, do things differently than we do on the other days.

Furthermore, studies indicate it is better if we take the same day each week for that day of rest.

You can read about these studies online if you choose to.

The Bible Commandment to Keep the Sabbath

The original concept of virtually everyone  taking the same day each week for rest from work probably comes from Judaism. Taking a weekly day for rest is also one of the Ten Commandments many Christians seek to keep.

I remember reading the commandment in the Bible. Keeping the Sabbath is discussed in multiple places in the Bible, but Exodus 20:8-11 is the passage that seems to me to discuss it best. The Bible Gateway website is one of many places you can read those verses.

That Exodus passage instructs the Jews to rest on the last day of the week, the seventh day, just as God rested on the seventh day after six days of creation.

Since this article focuses on taking a weekly day of rest, I won't get into Creationism, how the Earth and life on it formed and how long it took.

However, it's reasonable to consider the Bible commandment as the root of the Sabbath Day of rest as we know it.

Below is a photo of a King James Version Bible my dad and mom gave me when I was a boy, probably in the late 1960s. It was my first  Bible. I've acquired several others of different versions since.

United States Blue Laws Regarding Sunday

Many places in the United States used to have what were called blue laws requiring most businesses to be closed on Sunday, the day of rest for most Christians who practice a weekly day of rest. When I started college here  in Lexington, Kentucky, the city had a blue law.

The Lexington law that kept most stores closed on Sundays has been done away with. Blue laws in other cities have largely been abolished over the years too.

Perhaps it's interesting to keep in mind that though the Sabbath Day of Judaism and the Old Testament of the Bible is Saturday, the seventh day of the week, the blue laws considered Sunday to be the day for rest from work.

Closing Thoughts

Regardless of your religious faith or lack of religious faith, it seems advisable to get at least one day of rest weekly. And it's preferable that it be the same day for persons every week.

Furthermore, when all or most persons enjoy the same day(s) off weekly, it facilitates fellowship and various activities together with one another.

Obviously hospitals, police forces, fire departments, and some other organizations must operate 24 hours a day every day.

But it might be nice if more of us did enjoy at least one day off in common with others each week, and it was the same day every week.

NOTE: This article was last revised on January 8, 2026.

Why Do People Use Earbuds So Much? What Do They Listen To?

During my childhood and early adult years in the 1970s and 1980s, transistor radios with wired earphones were popular.

I used one sometimes to listen to University of Kentucky sports events,  occasionally the news, and perhaps some music and other things.

But I don't think they were ever as common or popular as wireless earbuds are currently.

Now it seems that a large percentage, perhaps the majority in some cases, of persons I see  walking, jogging, and working are wearing wireless earbuds.

Many  earbuds even come with microphones.

What Do Folks Listen To?

Some individuals engage in lengthy phone conversations wearing earbuds. That's a key reason for microphones with them.

Others listen to music. Lots of people are big music lovers.

Some listen to sports events.

Others listen to podcasts.

Another use is to listen to material related to school or work. But I think that's a small percentage of usage.

Overall, there's much available to listen to. It’s amazing how much the Internet offers to listen to and to watch. 

Why Do Persons Use Earbuds So Much?

Some people feel the need for phone conversations with relatives, friends, coworkers, classmates, etc.  These conversations may be important. They also may not be, in many cases.

Others seem to dislike silence. They enjoy music as background noise to alleviate boredom doing routine tasks, to drown out other noises, or for some other reason. Perhaps they're big music lovers.

Others listen to podcasts that are educational, entertaining, or both.  In addition, many books are available in audio format.

Some persons may find earbuds a convenient way to listen to materials related to work and/or school.

Safety Issues With Listening to Earbuds

Hearing loss is one safety risk of using earbuds. A HealthPartners article [1] offers suggestions for using earphones safely to avoid harming your ears.

However, hearing loss is just one of the health risks of using earbuds and other types of earphones. Other harmful effects are potentially worse.

People are missing out on interpersonal conversations with companions or people they pass during their travels. They also miss the chance to enjoy quietly meditating, thinking about various things, and the joy of listening to the sounds of nature. In addition, they risk an accident by not being alert to dangers near them, such as traffic.

A 2022 Psychology Today article [2] states that listening to earbuds “is causing potentially irreparable damage to ourselves psychologically, emotionally, and socially.”

As for Myself   

I own a wireless Bluetooth earbud. I’ve had it for years. I’ve only worn it two or three times. My total time wearing it is probably less than one hour. It’s not my style.

Below is a photo I took of my Bluetooth earbud and its charging cable.

I also have multiple pairs of wired ear phones. I use them occasionally to listen to news or something else. But I don't use them often either.

Even when using my cellphone, I prefer reading news articles, etc., to listening to something.

Furthermore, I enjoy quietly meditating and thinking. The relative silence without earbuds or any other type of earphone or headphone allows me to plan, reflect, and when hiking or bicycling to experience the joys of the sounds of nature.

Furthermore, I consider it important to be alert to the sounds of traffic for safety purposes.

Closing Thoughts

I respect the right of persons to enjoy listening with earbuds, wired earphones, and/or headphones.

However, I think a lot of folks are missing out on a lot of opportunities to think, read, converse with others in person, and to enjoy the marvelous sounds of nature around them. Endangering their hearing is another problem, as is risking their safety by not being aware of nearby dangers.

I think the biggest risk is missing out on what I call the happiness or joy of "real" life by being attentive to sounds from an artificial ear piece instead. Please, let's seek to enjoy the real world around us.

DISCLOSURE: My second job is as a part-time retail store clerk. Some of the other employees, as well as some vendors to the store, use earbuds regularly.

NOTE:

This article was last revised on January 7, 2026.

ENDNOTES:

1 “How to Use Earbuds Without Damaging Your Ears”; HealthPartners; webpage accessed January 6, 2026; https://www.healthpartners.com/blog/how-to-use-earbuds-safely/

2 Taylor, Jim (reviewed by Michelle Quirk); “Listen Up: Why Earbuds Are a Threat to Ourselves and Society”; Psychology Today; August 30, 2022; webpage accessed January 6, 2026; https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-power-prime/202208/listen-why-earbuds-are-threat-ourselves-and-society/amp

Is Creating a Common International Language Feasible and Beneficial?

Creating an international language that enables almost everyone on Earth to communicate verbally and in writing with one another, without the need for a translator, seems like a marvelous idea.

But words in one language are often difficult to translate literally into another one. Translating all the words in all the languages on Earth into one may be virtually impossible.

Some Past Efforts at an International Language

At the time the United States was founded, French was arguably the closest thing to an international language. Invitations to events involving persons whose native tongues varied were often printed in French.

The common current practice of including the abbreviation RSVP (for a French phrase meaning "please respond" in English) on formal invitations in the United States likely goes back to that time when French played a leading role in international communication.

Currently English is arguably the closest thing to an international language. Many government and business functions are conducted in English in nations where various other languages are the countries' main languages.

Sign languages can also be considered a form of international communication among persons living in various nations who use the same sign language.

However, several different sign languages exist. An article on Avantpage 1 discusses various sign languages used in the United States.

Google Translate and cell phones with language translation capabilities are marvelous for helping persons with different languages communicate with one another. Such translation methods are not perfect, but they do pretty well.

Perhaps the best known constructed international language is Esperanto. It was created "in 1887 by Dr. L. L. Zamenhof" according to the Esperanto-USA website. 2 Various other sources cite the same year of creation and creator.

While many still hold high hopes for Esperanto, it has never attracted as many speakers as any of the numerous major world languages.

So far, efforts to create a common international language on Earth among humans seem to be unsuccessful.

My Efforts at Learning Other Languages

I only speak and write English. I respect persons who are fluent in multiple languages.

I took one year of Spanish in high school, but I know few Spanish words. I took one class in German for reading knowledge in college, and think I remember no German.

When I seek to understand words in another language, I turn to Google Translate on my cell phone or something else, such as a dictionary.

Below is a photo of some foreign language textbooks and dictionaries for translating between English and other languages that I own.

Could a Common Language Create Problems?

The Bible  (Genesis 11:1-9) tells of all persons on Earth sharing the same language and God altering their language to limit human potential. I don't claim to know if that account is literally true.

But what if modern-day people all used one language and united for some selfish, harmful purpose? The combined evil efforts of persons from different nations and cultures could indeed be horrendous, perhaps to places in the universe far beyond the Earth as well as to our planet.

Closing Thoughts

Maybe we ought to focus on creating universal morals and implementing them, rather than on creating an international language.

Attaining ethical behavior worldwide is preferable to attaining a common language worldwide. Could both be achieved together? I don't know.

As I see it, both are worthy goals. But both will remain out of reach in the near future, unless God intervenes on our behalf in some miraculous way. However, I do believe in God and in miracles.

NOTE:

This article was last revised on January 6, 2026.

ENDNOTES:

1 "Types of Sign Language Used in the United States"; Avantpage; 

2 "Esperanto-USA"; Esperanto-USA website; webpage accessed January 5, 2026; https://esperanto-usa.org/

Public Libraries Contain Much: Let's Use Them More

Public libraries in the United States contain a wide variety of resources, as I discuss in the next section, using my local library as an example. Furthermore, data on the American Library Association * website states that there are over 16,000 public library buildings in the United States, including both branches and main libraries.

My Local Public Library

My local Lexington, Kentucky, public library has multiple branches. The library holds books, magazines, newspapers, DVDs, public computers with Internet access, photocopying machines, fax machines, meeting rooms, and more.

It even has a theater that occasionally shows free movies, hosts political debates, author talks, etc.

The main library includes one room used as a small art gallery. Its contents change periodically.

The library even hosts some music performances in its public areas, which I confess appeal less to me than to others.

The library offers laptop computers that can be checked out for use all day in the library.

My point is that Lexington's Public Library offers a lot of resources. Most of us could use more of those offerings more often. But we don't, often because we aren't aware of them.

Numerous activities for children and adults take place at the library each year.

The free Wi-Fi is a blessing. The availability of a scanner and a fax machine for public use come in handy for some too.

I probably use my local public library more than most people. But even I fail to come close to benefitting from all it offers.

Although the library contains several branches, I most often use the main location. It even includes a bookstore in its basement operated by the Friends of the Lexington Public Library. The bookstore contains thousands of used books in nice condition on various topics.

Below is a March 8, 2021, photo I took of one of the libraries I've used, the Northside Branch of the Lexington Public Library. The library is on the right in the background behind the colorful sign.

Other Public Libraries

Libraries in major cities like New York City and Chicago can offer even more things than the Lexington Public Library. I've enjoyed visiting the main libraries in both those cities, as well as some in other cities.

Below is a June 20, 2022, photo I took of the entrance to Chicago's main public library.

Even many relatively small public libraries are nice. For example, the public library in the southeastern Kentucky town of Jenkins where I graduated high school includes a nice selection of books, some magazines and newspapers, public computers with Internet access, a photocopier, a meeting room, and probably other things that I lack knowledge of.

Below is a September 4, 2011, photo I took of the Jenkins Public Library.

Also, interlibrary loans permit persons to obtain materials from other libraries that one's local library doesn't stock. Libraries also often subscribe to online databases that can provide resources not available at that particular facility.

If  you talk to your local library's staff, you may be amazed at what they can do for you. Please do try to not abuse their time and resources though.

Other Libraries

In addition to public libraries, college research libraries and other specialized libraries exist that can meet needs that public libraries are not designed for.

The massive Library of Congress in Washington, DC, contains an almost unimaginable wealth of materials.

I enjoy at least occasionally visiting the University of Kentucky main library here in Lexington to do reading and research. On a Washington, DC, visit I got to take a public tour of the Library of Congress. I saw an original copy of the Gutenberg Bible, among many other things.

Closing Thoughts

If you haven't recently visited your local public library, please consider doing so soon. If you already visit regularly, please consider using additional resources at the library and visiting more often.

ENDNOTE:

* "Library Statistics and Figures: Number of Libraries in the United States; last updated February 21, 2025, 2:26 p.m.; American Library Association; webpage accessed January 4, 2026; https://libguides.ala.org/c.php?g=751692&p=9132142

Removal of Venezuela's Maduro: Correct Decision But Incorrect Way?

Today, Saturday, January 3, 2026, the United States removed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro Moros from power, as reported by numerous news sources, including an article on The Hill. 1

Below is a photo of Maduro from a U.S. State Department August 7, 2025, online Wanted Poster.

More information about Maduro is on the U.S. Department of State webpage 2 with the Wanted Poster.

My View

As I see it, Maduro was an illegitimate ruler and removing him was appropriate. He apparently lost the 2018 election, and numerous countries refused to recognize him as Venezuela's president.

It would have been great if he'd voluntarily stepped down or been removed in some manner by a massive international force.

However, it is at best questionable whether United States President Donald John Trump had the authority to order unilateral U.S. action to remove Maduro.

Closing Thoughts

For better or worse, the United Nations lacks its own military force. Furthermore, any one of the five nations that are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council can veto a proposed action.

Since the UN lacks its own military, it's common practice, for better or worse, for nations with powerful militaries like the United States and Russia to take unilateral action.

Many in many countries called for Maduro's ouster. President Trump took action.

Whether in violation of the U.S. Constitution and international law or not, Trump ordered it, and it was done.

Let's hope the U.S. will now seek to help establish a quality legitimate government in Venezuela to run the country. Time will tell how it works out.

ENDNOTES:

1 Timotija, Filip; "Trump Says Maduro Captured, Flown Out As U.S. Military Conducts 'Large Scale' Strike"; The Hill; 5:12 a.m. ET, January 3, 2026; webpage accessed January 3, 2026; https://thehill.com/homenews/5670708-trump-captures-maduro-us-venezuela-strikes/

2 "Nicolas Maduro Moros"; U.S. Department of State; August 7, 2025; webpage accessed January 3, 2026; https://www.state.gov/nicolas-maduro-moros

Radio Is Flourishing: But Its Heyday Was Decades Ago

An Elon University article [1] and one on Radio King [2] are two of numerous pieces online that discuss the history of radio.

Though a form of radio developed in the 1800s, radio first became popular during the 1920s. The first public radio station, KDKA in Pittsburgh, began broadcasting in 1920. Others soon followed. Economic prosperity made radios affordable in the 1920s for the general public.

Radio’s use continued to expand in the 1930s and 1940s, as persons used it as a major source for news and entertainment.

Radio’s Golden Age occurred from the 1920s to the 1950s. Some sources narrow that range to the 1930s and 1940s. Radio’s heyday was in the 1940s according to various sources, including Britannica.[3]

Most Popular Radio Comedy

My dad told me that during his childhood Amos 'n' Andy was an enormously popular radio show. The show broadcast from the 1920s to 1960 according to History. [4] Various sources report it to be radio’s most popular comedy of all time.

The show’s racial stereotypes and use of two white persons to portray two black leading characters likely would not pass muster now. But this comedy was a hit. Many episodes of it are available online for viewing or can be purchased.

News and Entertainment

From the 1920s until television became popular in the 1950s, radio was perhaps the main form of household entertainment.

My mom told of her enjoyment listening on the radio to the show Beulah and to Christmas carols during her childhood. She mentioned her dad enjoying the evening news on the same radio. She said she’d get upset when her dad would sometimes switch the station to the one carrying the newscast before the end of Beulah.

A Couple of Memorable Radio Moments

Those who grew up listening to radio experienced memorable moments like the scare created by the fictional radio broadcast The War of the Worlds on October 30, 1938. The program created panic as many listeners thought a real Martian invasion was occurring, despite announcements during the program about it being fiction.

The announcement of the December 7, 1941, Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor is another of the many memorable moments. I cannot imagine what it must have been like listening to that news being  broadcast on radio.

My Childhood in the 1960s and 1970s

My childhood in the 1960s and 1970s included more television watching than radio listening. And I probably devoted more time to reading than to either.

We only got three major television networks, and typically only three different programs were on at a time.

However, after dark I could pick up a huge variety of radio stations in southeastern Kentucky where I lived, stations from New York City, Chicago, New Orleans, and many other cities.

I especially enjoyed listening to WHAS in Louisville in the early 1970s. The radio call-in show Metz Here, hosted by Milton Metz, facilitated discussion of a nice variety of topics. Metz allowed persons of different views to speak respectfully, without injecting his own viewpoint. I still think he’s the best talk radio show host I’ve ever heard. His show was entertaining and educational.

WHAS also broadcast University of Kentucky basketball and football games, as well as Kentucky Colonels ABA professional basketball games. Back in those early 1970s few games were broadcast on television. I was (and remain) a Kentucky sports fan.  

During the 1970s WHAS even began broadcasting a suspense radio drama, The CBS Radio Mystery Theater, a new broadcast, which gave me an idea of what my mom and dad listened to during their childhoods. In some cases I actually enjoyed being able to visualize scenes from the radio description and my imagination more than seeing similar programs on television.

I also occasionally listened to music on the radio, as well as news. Car radios were popular, and mom often listened to music on a radio station while doing housework.

Below is a photo of two of the AM-FM radios I own. Both are clock radios. The one on the bottom is one I received as a gift from dad and mom in the early 1970s. It’s over 50 years old. Its clock no longer works. But I still listen to the radio regularly.

    

Now

Despite the Internet, television, and video games, radio remains popular today.

I still listen to radio newscasts daily. I often listen to three different ones (NPR, ABC, and Fox) via three local radio stations here in Lexington, Kentucky.

I also sometimes listen to talk radio shows, Christmas music in season, and other things on the radio. A nice thing about radio is that I can be looking at something else while I'm listening, instead of focusing my eyes on a video screen.

But there is a decline in local news reporting on radio. Furthermore, large companies own huge numbers of radio stations, eliminating local ownership of many stations.

However, radio remains popular. Radio talk shows, music, news, sports, etc., attract significant audiences.

Millions of persons drive with car radios on and/or listen to the radio while doing things in their home. A 2023 Pew Research Center article [5] is one of many that discuss radio’s continuing popularity.   

ENDNOTES:

---

[1] “1890s-1930s: Radio”; Elon University; webpage accessed January 2, 2026; https://www.elon.edu/u/imagining/time-capsule/150-years/back-1890-1930/

[2] “Radio History: What You Need to Know”; Radio King; April 7, 2025; webpage accessed January 2, 2026; https://www.radioking.com/blog/radio-history/

[3] Skretvedt, Randy; “The Golden Age of American Radio”; webpage accessed January 2, 2026; https://www.britannica.com/topic/radio/Variety-shows

[4] “Original ‘Amos “n” Andy’ Debuts on Chicago Radio”; History; published November 24, 2009; last updated May 27, 2025; webpage accessed January 2, 2026; https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/january-12/original-amos-n-andy-debuts-on-chicago-radio

[5] Forman-Katz, Naomi; “For National Radio Day, key facts about radio listeners and the radio industry in the U.S.”; Pew Research Center; February 13, 2023; updated August 17, 2023; webpage accessed January 2, 2026; https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/17/for-national-radio-day-key-facts-about-radio-listeners-and-the-radio-industry-in-the-us/