A Depressing Read

Are you still defending him?  Then you didn’t read the Mueller Report.  Don’t protest.  Don’t argue.  You didn’t read it.  Period.  Forget William Barr’s preemptive strike on the truth.  That doesn’t change the written report.  And don’t tell me that you believe the serial liar in the White House.  You really don’t.  You don’t want to know what is actually in the Mueller Report.  You are happy with the packing of the courts.  You may be thrilled that abortion may one day be illegal.  You’ve made that deal – Ignore the means because the ends are what you really want.  But don’t tell anyone that you’ve read the Mueller Report.  You haven’t.

I have been reading the Mueller Report.  It is a long slog.  It is not an easy read.  It is meticulously footnoted.  It is heavily redacted.  Even the footnotes have a lot of redactions.  But the most difficult part of the book is that it is about OUR country.  This would be a lot easier, and far more believable, if it was about some South American country that I had never visited.  Heck, I spent nine days in Australia in 2006 and I’d have a hard time believing this took place there.  It is painful, physically, mentally, emotionally painful, to realize that this happened on our soil.

The AMS Panel used control X-Agent during the DCCC and DNC intrusions was housed on a leased computer located near REDACTED Arizona.

This was a military operation.  The players, on the Russian side, were “Two military units of the GRU” (page 75).  The Facebook and Twitter posts, many of which some of you reposted, were created by a special Russian disinformation team, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), funded by Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin, a Russian oligarch with ties to Vladimir Putin.  This wasn’t some 400 pound guy sitting on a bed as the beneficiary of these efforts postulated.  The IRA created posts, organized rallies, and were in contact with the Trump inner circle (page after page after page).

Page 3 of the Introduction to Volume 1 states:

“In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.”  In doing so, the Office recognize that the word “(collude)” was used in communications with the Acting Attorney General confirming certain aspects of the investigation’s scope and that the term has frequently been invoked in public reporting about the investigation.  But collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law.  For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law. In connection with that analysis, we addressed the factual question whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” – a term that appears in the appointment order, with Russian election interference activities.  Like collusion, “coordination” does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law.  We understood coordination to require an agreement – tacit or express – between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.  That requires more than the two parties taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other’s actions or interests.  We applied the term coordination in that sense when stating in the report that the investigation did not establish that the Trump Campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

That is one dense paragraph but it clearly states that the Mueller Report never said “No Collusion” as Donald Trump brays daily.

Page after page the Mueller Report details the concerted efforts of the Russian government’s successful efforts to promote one candidate and defame his opponent.  This is just Volume 1.  Volume 2 focuses on Obstruction of Justice.  I will eventually get through this.  It would just be so much easier if it was about someplace else.



Picture – The Mueller Report Sees The Light Of Day – David L Cunix




I Barely Tolerated His Post

Is tolerance a good thing? Some people believe that the answer is YES. There are even organizations dedicated to the promotion of tolerance. I have been asked to join Americans for Peace and Tolerance and similar groups. I have always declined.

The Merriam-Webster definition of tolerance:
a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one’s own
b : the act of allowing something : toleration

My issue with tolerance is that it too often refers to people, not ideas. Tolerance is something someone does for someone else. We judge that the other person is less than us – less smart, less moral, less successful – but we tolerate them. The starting point of tolerating someone is acknowledging that we are superior. I believe that we may/can tolerate a person’s actions, but not people. We should accept people and understand that we are equal even if they may have different beliefs, religions, or politics.

I saw a post on Facebook recently. It was from a friend who often shares posts from questionable sources. He is my friend. I accept him and our considerable differences without judgement. I ignore most of his political posts since they reflect views that are very different than mine. When he recycles memes that have already been debunked, often annually, I let him know in a private message so that I don’t publicly embarrass him. I accept him / I tolerate his posts. We disagree on both politics and religion. My ideas and beliefs are correct to the best of my knowledge, but that doesn’t make me superior to him or his.

My friend’s post was a quote about tolerance from D. James Kennedy.

Tolerance is the last virtue of a depraved society. When you have an immoral society that has blatantly, proudly, violated all of the commandments of God, there is one last virtue they insist upon: tolerance for their immorality.

The quote appeared in AZ Quotes in the funny quotes section. I find nothing amusing about this judgmental balderdash. You may recall that Kennedy (1930-2007) and his Coral Ridge Ministries were early leaders in the Moral Majority and organizations that attempted to force the US into becoming a Christian country. Kennedy was behind the notorious documentary that linked Hitler and the Holocaust to evolution.

I vehemently disagree with the tone of my friend’s post. Hell, I barely tolerated it. But I don’t tolerate my friend. I accept him.



Picture – A Few Other Options – David L Cunix

Low Carb Cheesecake

I posted a picture of a cheesecake the other day. Several people asked for the recipe.


2 cups of walnut pieces
2 tbsp. sweetener (I prefer Joseph’s liquid malitol)
1 egg
6 tbsp. melted butter (3/4 of one stick)
1 tbsp. vanilla
1 tbsp. cocoa (optional)


20 ounces softened cream cheese (2 ½ blocks)
2 eggs
2 tbsp. sweetener
8 ounces sour cream
1 tsp. vanilla


8 ounces sour cream
1 tsp. vanilla
1 1/2 tbsp. sweetener

Step One
• Butter a springform pan
• Preheat the oven to 350
• Mix the dry ingredients of the crust
• Stir in the egg and melted butter
• Press the crust into the springform pan. Make sure the bottom is well covered and push some up the sides.
• Bake for 11 minutes

Step Two
• Mix all of the filling ingredients into a large bowl. Using a portable electric mixer, make sure that all of the ingredients are well mixed and smooth.
• Take the crust out of the oven and increase the temperature to 400
• Pour the filling into the crust
• Bake for 21 minutes. The cake should be stable but not starting to brown. Know your oven! Take a quick look at 19 minutes in case yours runs a little hotter than mine.

Step Three
• Take the springform pan out of the oven and turn the temperature up to 500
• Mix the topping ingredients
• Pour the topping on to the cake and bake for another five minutes
• Take the cake out of the oven and cool on the counter for a couple of hours.
• When possible, I then place the cake, still in the springform pan, into the refrigerator to be served the next day.

Please don’t treat the above as the only way to make this cake. My recipes come from a variety of sources. I try to read a number of cookbooks, take some ingredients and techniques from each of them, and then create my own version. The above recipe is my sixth version since December. I’ve tried almonds, pecans, and walnuts. I like the walnut version the best for cheesecake. By the way, the sour cream is my best guess! I buy a 16 ounce sour cream, use half for the filling and the rest for the topping.

It is my hope that you will try this recipe and then change it, improve it to your taste, and love it. Because that it was cooking should really be, an expression of your creativity and the joy of feeding your friends and family.



Picture – Cheesecake 6.0 – David L Cunix

Yesterday – Part 2


Can I trust my memory? Just to be safe, I asked Sally. “Do you recall any active shooter drills when we were on the beach?” She shook her head and said “No”. “Do you recall any alarms or even well-armed patrols in the resort?” Again, her answer was “No”.

I laugh when people express shock or fear when we tell them that we spend a week in Mexico each year. They wonder if we are afraid. They feel compelled to tell us that they have heard stories.

You may be forgiven if you aren’t aware of the latest shooting. From this morning’s Washington Post:

“Two people were killed and four others were injured after a shooter entered a campus building Tuesday at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and opened fire.”

School shootingsSynagogue shootingsConcert shootingsChurch shootings. There is no doubt about it. You are probably safer on a beach in Mexico!



Picture – A Safe Place – David L Cunix


It had been 48 years since I had earned a certificate from my synagogue.  48 years since my last days of Sunday school.  But the world is changing and I, and close to 50 others, gave up our time to take another class.  A life or death class.  The certificate above is from the STOP THE BLEED training we took to be prepared for the unthinkable, a shooter invading our place of worship.

Yesterday a shooter invaded the Chabad of Poway, California, a synagogue just like mine.  It was Saturday morning and the last day of Passover.  I had been in services at 11:30.  The terrorist attacked at the same time.  The initial reports are that one congregant was murdered and several others injured.  As terrible as that is, it could have been a lot worse.  The congregation, like mine and so many others, had taken active shooter training.

President Trump went before the microphones on his way to a campaign rally.  “Looks like a hate crime.  Hard to believe.”  NO IT ISN’T.  There isn’t anything surprising about another disaffected white guy, trapped in his insignificance, looking for someone to blame.  The terrorists that burned down the Black Churches in Louisiana, raided the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, or the Chabad in Poway weren’t Radical Islamic Terrorist.  They weren’t members of MS 13, Mexicans, or even Hondurans.  They were white supremacists, the fine people who were yelling “Jew will not replace us” in Charlottesville not so long ago.

Yesterday’s white supremacist admitted that he was responsible for last month’s fire at the Islamic Center of Escondido, too.  There is a fear and hatred of the other.  If only the U.S. could get rid of the Jews, the Muslims, the Hispanics, or anyone else that doesn’t fit their particular vision of who is really American.  And if they were able to cleanse America, who would they then blame when they are still irrelevant?

The Rabbi reflexively raised his hands as the gunman shot him and had a finger blown off from each hand.  He was released from the hospital this afternoon and addressed the media.  He spoke eloquently of his friend, Lori Kaye, who was murdered by the terrorist.  He talked about the 33 years of community that he had helped to establish with his wife.  He asked how this could happen and why would a 19 year old believe that he had the right to invade a house of worship.   And then he asked, damn near demanded, that we do something – that we bring light into the world.  The Rabbi’s answer to darkness is light.  Not just Jews, but everyone of good will who could hear his message was charged to combat the darkness by bringing light into the world, to perform random acts of kindness.

I will heed the Rabbi’s call and I will donate money in memory of Mrs. Kaye.  But while we are waiting for his message to take hold, I’ll continue to participate in my synagogue’s security and hope to never need my training.



Say Hi To Mitch

Your house is being robbed.  You can

  1. Do nothing. Appreciate that the thief is only taking the stuff you don’t like.
  2. Do nothing since the thief is entertaining and his comments are hilarious.
  3. Do nothing. This same thief broke into your neighbor’s home and took all the good stuff.  No sense in stopping him since he isn’t taking anything you value.  As a bonus, he promises to go back to your neighbor’s house and take more of their stuff.
  4. Stop the thief.

It would appear that the Republicans have chosen option #3.  They don’t want to do anything as long as the thief only takes the stuff that someone else values.  And if you look out in the driveway, that’s Mitch McConnell driving the getaway car.



Picture – Not Enough Locks – David L Cunix

There’s Never Enough Room

Some of the Jews living in Germany, Poland, and other European countries were in denial. They couldn’t believe that Germany, and in many cases their own non-Jewish neighbors, could be so inhumane. The evil was beyond their grasp. But others were well aware of the danger they faced by staying in Germany. President Roosevelt was also aware that many Jews were trying to escape. An effort was made, in 1939, to relocate 5000 Jewish settlers over a five year period to Alaska. The full program would be part of an economic development program designed to bring up to 50,000 settlers to the territory. No one was fooled.

“The proposal won few fans in the far north. Widow Emma de la Vergne in Fairbanks was one of those who thought it was a good idea. “Let the German-Jews come to Alaska if they want to. Alaska is a big country. Give them a chance,” she said when interviewed by the city’s Daily News-Miner. But most of her fellow Alaskans disagreed. “German Jews Unsuited for Alaska Settlers Is Prevailing View Here,” read the paper’s headline on November 21, 1938. A few days later, an editorial declared: “Alaska wants no misfits and none who are unprepared to make their way without becoming a burden upon the territory.” The mayor of Fairbanks compared the proposal to one that advocated turning Alaska into a penal colony.”*

Let’s be clear, nothing has changed. There will always be people fleeing violence and oppression. And there will always be people prepared to barricade the doors. President Donald Trump recently declared that “our country is full”. Editorial writers and economists from around the country presented logical reasons for welcoming immigrants. Logic is irrelevant. There is never enough room for those who look or pray differently. We were full when the Irish were coming. We were full when the Italians were coming. Hell, there wasn’t room in Alaska for a couple thousand Jews. And now, there is no room for women and children fleeing Honduras.

I see my grandparents when I see these families huddled on our border. Yes, we came in legally, like the displaced families who waited in Europe for years to get to the U.S. after World War II. Success, LIFE, was dependent upon being someplace where you could wait. Not everyone was so lucky.



Picture – No Place To Go – David L Cunix

*Quote – Anchorage Daily News

Selective Outrage In The Time Of Trump


            “Can I ask you a question?”

I was distracted. Agitated.  My guard was down.  “Sure. What?”

           “Do you identify as a Democrat or a Republican?”

“I’m a Democrat.”

          “I’m a Libertarian. I just want to know how a Jew can be a Democrat.”

“I don’t know how a Jew can be a Republican.”

He was surprised. “No, I mean”

“I know what you mean. You still have Steve King.”


“Kingmaker in Iowa. Every four years the entire Republican field goes to Iowa to kiss his ring.”

         “I wasn’t trying to start an argument. I was just trying to”

“You were just trying to get me to agree with you. I don’t.”

Let’s be clear. Two freshmen Congresswomen do not represent our entire party.  And no matter how badly Donald Trump and his media outlet, FOX News, wish to make Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) the faces of the Democratic Party, they are not.  The most recent election, the Blue Tsunami, was a victory for the party’s moderates and suburbanites of both parties from around the country.

It is easy to understand why this acquaintance was surprised by my push back.  First, I not only didn’t know his politics, I had no interest in that or any other opinions he might have. More importantly, his limited world consists of people who either agree with him or ignore him.  This is not uncommon.  So many of my liberal friends isolate themselves from conservatives.  Defriending people on Facebook is easier than guessing which right-wing memes were funnier in the original Russian.  And many of my conservative friends have found peace by surrounding themselves with like-thinkers.  Railing against the mainstream media only works in certain circles.

FOX, Limbaugh, and some of the other stars of right-wing media do a great job of creating villains. You can watch CNN for weeks and never hear a mention of George Soros.  Our soldiers are still dying in war zones around the world, but there is no time to discuss them or even the men who died in Nigeria in 2017.  That time is still reserved for Benghazi.  And now, now the focus will be A.O.C., a Hispanic, and OMG! a real live Muslim, Ilhan Omar.  These two young women could have spent their first term hiding in the cloak room and they still would have been the focus of intense scrutiny.  Instead, they decided to make the job easy for FOX.

Republican friends have been wielding Omar like a blunt instrument. Is she an ignorant, dangerous anti-Semite?  I can’t say for sure that she is anti-Semitic.  But she has managed to find and use age-old tropes, derogatory words and images, which have been targeting Jews for centuries.  Is this an accident or on purpose?  I can’t say.  Can one be anti-Israel without being anti-Jew?  Yes, that would seem possible. Her most recent remarks, covered in a more balanced fashion by NPR, show her to be both naïve and inartful. But she certainly isn’t dangerous.  It seems that she is immature and drunk on her new-found power and platform.  FOX is happy to highlight her latest kerfuffle, an attack on former President Obama.  Nancy Pelosi is giving Omar the opportunity to clean up the messes she’s made and learn to be a member of Congress.

The selective outrage of our friends on the right is tiresome. The guy who saw “very fine people” wearing khaki’s, carrying Tiki torches, and shouting “Jews will not replace us” in Charlotte is in no position to point out the bigotry in others.  Prejudice and intolerance, even when directed at others, should still be fought by Jews.  Hate refugees?  That was us not so long ago.  Claim that Muslims shouldn’t be allowed into the country and couldn’t possibly serve in Congress?  Is that so different than those who question whether a Jew, a Catholic, or a Mormon is fit to be president?

The Republican Party has long harbored an interesting collection of anti-Semites. This past November, the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, ran a post-election article detailing the successes and failures of Republican candidates who had campaigned with anti-Semitic tropes.  Even House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca) makes an appearance in the report.  Does my acquaintance know or care about any of this?  Does he even know that McCarthy is the Minority Leader?  Probably not.

My ignorant acquaintance reminded me of Roger, the proselytizer who wouldn’t take no for an answer.  There are Jewish Republicans, Jewish Democrats, and Jews who may not even vote.  Our religion may inform our decisions, but it can’t make a definitive choice of American political parties.  This selective outrage in the time of Trump isn’t really outrage at all.  It is just another example of inartful political speech.  And I’m also sure that my acquaintance isn’t dangerous.



Picture – Cooking American – David L Cunix



It Is Time For Howard Schultz To Meet Jimmy Dimora

The New Democratic Leadership Council (NDPC) was the Ohio version of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in the mid-1990’s, the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. It had been formed, in large part, after the humiliating defeats of our candidates in the 1984 and 1988 elections.  Al From and others attempted to move the gravitational center of the party back to a more electable middle.  And an insurance agent living in South Euclid, ME, became the chairman of the Greater Cleveland chapter.

In the fall of 1995 I attended a political event and was introduced to Jimmy Dimora, the recently elected chair of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party.  He said that he was aware of the NDPC and asked me how many votes we controlled in the party.  That hadn’t been our focus.  We were issue driven.  We were working across the state to develop a platform that could attract a cross-section of Ohioans. I answered him honestly, “a few”, and he quickly moved on to people who were more important to him.  The individual who had taken the time to introduce Jimmy to me, an elected official, was surprised and apologetic.  I wasn’t offended.  I had just been taught an important lesson.  Ideas are important, but you must be able to count and control your votes.

Howard Schultz would like to be your next president.  He is not alone.  The election of Donald Trump has caused any number of Americans to scream at their TV’s, “WTF?”  Real billionaires and successful businessmen know that he isn’t in their league.  Policy experts from the Left and the Right gasp at this ignorance.  Lots of elected Democrats believe that he can be beaten.  And over a dozen Republican Senators and Governors must live with the constant reminder that the Republican electorate viewed Donald Trump as a better choice than any of them.  So it is no surprise that Mr. Schultz would like to do what Mike Bloomberg should have done a few years ago, run for the highest elected office in the land.

Mr. Schultz, a lifelong Democrat, won’t compete for the party’s nomination. He has decided to run as an Independent.  Unencumbered by party rules, primaries, or any other part of the vetting process, Mr. Schultz can self-fund his way onto the ballots of all 50 states.  The other reason, the official reason, he has chosen to explore the Independent route is because he sees himself as uniquely alone as a presidential hopeful.  He believes that he is the only candidate who is socially liberal and fiscally conservative.  That may, or may not, be true. There may be even be an unquenchable thirst for this particular mix.  I hope we don’t find out.

Much has already been written about the possibility of a Schultz candidacy pulling anti-Trump votes away from the Democratic Party standard bearer and inadvertently reelecting Trump. Dems seem to be hoping that this is all a vanity project and that his attention will be drawn elsewhere.  Republicans are cheering him on.  This post isn’t about that.  This post is about an unlikely Schultz victory.

Just to be clear, if I was describing my own politics it would be socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I would have welcomed Mike Bloomberg into the 2016 race since he had real experience in both business and government.  My objection to a Schultz victory would be the legislative outcome or lack thereof.

The last ten years have shown how our system can be manipulated. The villain, the most cynical man in Washington, is Mitch McConnell.  It is only within the last ten years that nearly every piece of legislation needed 60 votes to pass the Senate.  Mitch has yielded the filibuster in ways previously unimagined.  And when Senator McConnell would ask President Schultz on the first day of his presidency, “How many votes do you control”, the Schultz presidency would be over before it got started.  A President Schultz would enter the legislative battle alone, friendless, and with limited influence.  The current president wields his twitter feed and Fox News at his opponents, in and out of his current political party.  He can threaten to support a primary challenger if a member of Congress doesn’t fall in line.  President Schultz wouldn’t have any loyalty or clout with either side of the aisle.

2020 is still a way away. I welcome Howard Schultz into the race as a Democrat.  Let’s vet his ideas.  Let’s see if he is willing to do the hard work of campaigning in the snow of New Hampshire and the county fairs of Iowa.  Let’s see if this is more than a vanity project and that he has the fire in his belly.  Let’s see if he can count and control his votes.



Picture – A Cup of Joe – David L Cunix