Triad Today

My dad was active in the Republican Party for most of his life, and counted Richard Nixon among his friends. When I was born in 1954, then-Vice President Nixon sent Dad a hand-written note, congratulating him on, “bringing another Republican into the world.” Ten years later Dad took me to meet Mr. Nixon. I told the famed politician that I had been his 1960 campaign manager at Moore elementary school, and that, thanks to me, he defeated JFK in our straw vote.

Nixon grinned, then placed his finger on my chin and said, “One day YOU’LL be president.” I never did become president. Nixon had lied. No big shock there.

Twenty-three years later in 1987, though, he made a similar promise to a young entrepreneur named Donald Trump. In that instance, Nixon’s prediction came true. I’m not bitter that Trump made it to the White House instead of me, but I am a bit confused about why.

As a politically astute ten-year-old, I knew that I was not qualified to be president because I was just a child. I was also pretty sure that you had to be an adult to get elected president. Yet Trump ended up in the White House by acting like a child, and now he’s governing in the same way. His behavior must send a confusing message to today’s children, many of whom get punished for name-calling, acting out, or for being rude, petulant and nasty. But it’s not just kids. A lot of adults are also confused by how a grown man can act and speak childishly, yet still be rewarded with the most powerful job in the world.

Last month Ross Douthat, a conservative columnist for the New York Times suggested that, based on his behavior, President Trump could be removed from office under the 25th Amendment, which elevates the vice president if the president is “incapacitated.” The columnist bases his opinion on a broad interpretation of the Amendment, by including mental or emotional incapacitation as a justification for removal. The fact is, talk of Trump’s instability has been escalating lately, and with good reason.

Throughout the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump displayed narcissistic and childish behavior that was unprecedented in American presidential politics. He mocked a disabled reporter. He suggested that a female debate moderator was mean to him because she was on her menstrual cycle. He called United States senators childish names like “Lyin’ Ted” and “Little Marco”, and referred to his opponent, a former secretary of State, as “Crooked Hillary.” And when Senator Elizabeth Warren was critical of his policies, he called her “Pocahontas”, and still does. Since taking office his Twitter storms have also been childish. He accused former President Brack Obama of wiretapping him. He questioned the ability of a judge just for having an Hispanic last name. And he declared that the news media is the enemy of the people, giving political cover to men like Congressman Greg Gianforte who recently body-slammed a reporter for asking a question about the healthcare bill.

In addition to displaying childish anger, Trump also has a child’s level of understanding for nearly every facet of government. And, just like the little boy bursting to tell a secret, Trump has, on at least two occasions, spilled classified information to our adversaries, first by revealing Middle East intel to the Russians, and more recently telling Philippine strongman Rodrigo Duterte where our nuclear subs were located.

President Trump also has trouble telling the truth. Last month he told a reporter that Trump University had an “A” rating from the Better Business Bureau, when in fact it had a “D” rating. Those kinds of statements go hand-in-hand with another childish trait. Little boys love to brag, and Trump is no exception. He talks about having the smartest Cabinet ever, the best people on staff, and the biggest crowd in the history of inaugurations. He also once said, “I know more about ISIS than the Generals.”

Beyond bragging, his unscripted remarks in general demonstrate definable immaturity. A recent report from the healthcare website STAT revealed that Trump’s language and cognitive abilities are at 3rd and 4th grade levels. The report also looked at data from the Flesch-Kincaid grade level test which documented Trump’s frequent use of derogatory words, like “idiots” and “losers”. His ability to read scripted texts aloud is also child-like. Just watch when he tries to read from notes or a TelePrompTer, as he struggles to properly speak or emphasize even the simplest words. Trump also lacks an ability to memorize and assimilate basic facts. For example, every time he emerges from a private meeting into a photo op session, he has to rely on note cards when summarizing what he just heard only moments before.

It is important to note that the STAT study observed a sharp decline in Trump’s cognition over the years, saying that in the 1980s and ’90s, he “demonstrated a more polished style of speech and extensive vocabulary.” Back then he also didn’t lash out with cruel insults at people he didn’t like, nor did he seem paranoid about everyone and everything. And that brings us back to whether our president is mentally, clinically, or emotionally incapacitated.

Last year I wrote a column about Narcissistic Personality Disorder as defined by the Mayo Clinic. According to that definition, Donald Trump displays every major symptom of NPD. Former FOX News chief Roger Ailes, a Trump supporter, told the National Review that Trump just needs to “grow up.” But that’s easier said than done, and may not be possible, especially if Trump’s capacities keep declining. Meanwhile, congressman Ted Lieu has proposed legislation which would require a psychiatrist to be attached to the White House, and free to monitor the mental health of the president. It’s probably a good idea.

Clearly Donald Trump has a problem, and so do we. The man who currently occupies the Oval Office and who has control of our nuclear arsenal:

• angers easily,
• is petulant and cruel,
• is insensitive,
• is detached from facts and reality,
• is paranoid, narcissistic, and
• has diminishing cognitive skills.

In other words, he is a man-child whose only qualifications for being president are that he’s over the age of 35, and he’s an American citizen.

Richard Nixon could not have known back in 1987 that Donald Trump would turn out this way, but in 2016, 63 million voters knew and didn’t seem to care. Nixon can be forgiven for his oversight. The 63 million voters cannot.

Last week, a group of community leaders from Forsyth County came together for a roundtable session with State Attorney General Josh Stein to discuss the problem of opioid deaths. The meeting was triggered by the release of a report from the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, which showed a rise in opioid deaths throughout much of the Piedmont, between the years 2005 and 2015. During that time, deaths resulting from opioid overdoses rose from 13 to 53 in Forsyth, and from 27 to 47 in Guilford.

Meanwhile, Governor Cooper announced he was “committed to combatting opioid abuse”, and that includes passing HB 243. Known as “The STOP Act”, the bill will put new restrictions on doctors who prescribe and dispense opioid drugs, and will also limit public supply. The North Carolina Hospital Association must believe HB 243 will pass, because it just recommended that all emergency departments start using non-opioids to treat pain.

If all this sounds familiar, that’s because when he was Attorney General, Roy Cooper waged war on decongestants, saying that criminals were extracting ingredients in Sudafed and using them in the manufacture of meth. Cooper’s grandstanding has resulted in innocent citizens being treated like terrorists every time we try to purchase meds for a sinus headache.

Just as with the war on decongestants, the war on opioids is an example of what I like to call cosmetic or deflection politics. It makes for good headlines and generates lots of goodwill, but it mainly serves to deflect public attention away from the fact that our elected officials aren’t doing much of anything to address more widespread problems. Childhood hunger, unchecked healthcare premiums, corporate pollution, and the flow of illegal drugs into our state, are all complex problems that are not easily solved, and sometimes never addressed. On the other hand, a war on legal painkillers can be superficially waged by quickly enacting a few laws and guidelines, so that the public believes something has been accomplished.

The sad truth is that restricting or prohibiting the use of legal painkillers will do nothing to prevent either access or abuse. The 18th Amendment should have taught us that. When alcohol was banned during Prohibition, the flow of spirits never abated, it just flowed under the radar at speakeasies and in back alleys. Likewise today, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and meth are all illegal, yet Americans are still using and abusing them in record numbers.

Is it tragic that some people die from abusing painkillers? Absolutely. Should we step up our efforts to educate the public about the dangers of such abuse? Absolutely. But you can’t legislate abuse any more than you can legislate morals. Passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act did not end racism, and passage of new restrictions on legal painkillers will not end opioid abuse. If we ignore that fact, then we might as well ban all products or substances which can cause death when misused. One example is caffeine.

Last week while Stein and Cooper were grandstanding, a 16-year-old South Carolina boy died after drinking too much caffeine. In the course of two hours, the youth had consumed a large Mountain Dew, a cafe latte from McDonald’s, and an energy drink. The combination caused him to have a fatal heart attack. The incident was unfortunate, but the young man chose to drink large quantities of caffeine, and we are not our brother’s keeper. Still, I suppose Mr. Stein’s solution would be to make all soft drinks and coffee illegal.

Each year, over 200 people die from food allergies. Perhaps, then, Mr. Cooper will put restrictions on the use of peanuts, milk, and shellfish.

And let’s not forget demon rum. According to the CDC, approximately 90,000 people die each year because of alcohol. Some of those deaths are from binge drinking, and some from liver damage. But many alcohol related deaths are the result of a drunk driving incident. If the Governor wants to wage war on something, why not start by making cars and whiskey illegal?

Or perhaps we should begin our Prohibition with handguns. According to the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, each year nearly 20,000 people commit suicide with a gun. That compares to 11,000 people who are killed by others with a gun. In other words, people take their own life with a gun more often than they get murdered with a gun. No problem, we’ll just make all guns illegal.

And how about passing a law to protect us from eating donuts? Each year over 75,000 people die from diabetes, and many more than that are killed by heart attack and stroke due to clogged arteries. Abusing donuts, therefore, can lead to an early death. So can using tobacco products. Each year over 200,000 people die from COPD alone, a disease caused by smoking. But alas, I haven’t heard any Forsyth County officials declare war on Winston cigarettes or Krispy Kreme donuts. I wonder why that is?

The fact is that selective prohibition is inconsistent, hypocritical, and rarely successful. The war on illegal drugs has failed, so why should we expect a different outcome from a war on legal drugs? Just make something hard to get, and watch how fast consumers will still manage to get it anyway. Again, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t allocate funds for prevention, education, and treatment. It just means we have to stop kidding ourselves by waging politically cosmetic wars that only serve to punish innocent people who legitimately need or want the product that is being restricted.

Otherwise, let’s just go ahead and make EVERYTHING illegal. I miss my donuts already.

It seems like hardly a week goes by that we don’t hear about another town hall meeting gone wild. City Councilmen are shouted at over zoning laws. County Commissioners are shouted at over budget cuts. School Boards are shouted at over lack of classroom discipline. And Congressmen are shouted at over just about everything. Civil discourse between voters and elected officials is a thing of the past because most folks can’t check their emotions at the door. It is a sad state of affairs, and one that has been building to a boil over the last few years.

Certainly our nation has experienced raucous public meetings before, some of which date back to colonial days when we protested English controls. But, over time, we learned how to embrace a sense of decorum, even in the face of political upheaval. In other words, we knew how to act in public. With the dawn of television, our approach for how to hold civil discussions and meetings was formed by watching the likes of Jack Paar, David Frost, Tom Snyder, and William F. Buckley. These hosts conducted their programs with humor and respect. They asked intelligent questions and expected to receive thoughtful, intelligent answers in return, with neither party shouting over the other. Unfortunately, that era was replaced by the age of Jerry Springer, which then spawned the age of Reality TV (where Donald Trump once thrived). The lynchpin of those two more recent eras was dysfunction and disrespect. They lowered the bar of decency for viewers, and gave us a whole new template for how to communicate.

Perhaps I wouldn’t care so much how people treat each other on exploitive television programs, but now, legitimate news programs have sunk to their same level. Today’s news anchors and cable hosts routinely interrupt, talk over, and chastise their own guests, and encourage their panel of experts to do the same with each other. The result is that the audience can’t hear what anyone is saying. Moreover, when we emulate that same kind of bad behavior at town halls, the media then enables, encourages, and rewards us by televising and streaming our actions for all to see. Let’s face it. Flying off the handle has become the new norm.

The modern era of dysfunctional town halls began in 2009 when conservative Tea Party groups lambasted their Congressional representatives during meetings about Obamacare. Things got so bad that Rep. Brian Baird cancelled his town hall meetings because he was receiving death threats. That same year, violence broke out at town hall meetings in Florida, Colorado, Missouri, and Michigan. Now, 2017 is shaping up to be a repeat of eight years ago. Republicans put forth a horrendous healthcare package, not once but twice, and in the second incarnation, they all but eliminated coverage for pre-existing conditions, while allowing insurance companies to charge older people five times the premium rate as everyone else. The audacity and insensitivity of Republican Congressmen in shaping their healthcare bill, set in motion a series of town hall meetings across the country in which constituents acted like angry villagers seeking to destroy Frankenstein’s monster. Voters shouted down their elected officials at every venue, and in some cases, violence erupted, such as during a recent town hall in Utah. Finally, GOP Conference Chair Cathy Rodgers called her troops together for a sit-down with a former Sheriff, who, according to Politico.com, advised the Congressmen on how to protect themselves during volatile town hall situations. Other Representatives didn’t need the security briefing, though. That’s because some decided to hold their meetings via teleconference, while others cancelled their events altogether.

Rep. Mark Walker (NC-6th) told me, “I love to have dialogue. I love to talk about the issues. I want to have a chance to share my beliefs, and then listen to those who may have an opposing view. But if you’re not even able to share, it makes things very difficult in these town hall formats.”

The thing is, we have the right to disagree with public policy and public policy makers, and we have the right to vote them out of office every two years. But yelling, screaming, interrupting, and making threats at a town hall meeting accomplishes nothing. Jerry Springer, Reality TV, and caustic news anchors have made it acceptable to be disrespectful, but by following their example, we’re not just the angry villagers anymore. We’ve also become the monster.
 
 

Increasingly, national holidays seem to be more about buying candy, jewelry, cards, and turkey, than they are about honoring the spirit of the holiday itself. Mention Memorial Day, and most people will only talk about their trip to the beach. Mention Christmas, and Jesus takes a back seat to Santa. Mention Mother’s Day, and the floral industry starts to salivate. Speaking of which, the internet has been inundated lately with advertisements for this Sunday’s big holiday. Not only are we encouraged to buy presents, we’re even coerced into thinking that by doing so, we can elevate our status within the family. I cite as an example, the company who promises that their product is “The Mother’s Day gift to make you the favorite child.” It’s enough to make Anna Jarvis spin in her grave.

Jarvis, a native of West Virginia, was widely credited with having created Mother’s Day. Her mother (also named Anna) had opposed the Civil War, during which time she cared for wounded soldiers from both armies. In honor of her mom who passed away in 1905, Anna launched a campaign to make Mother’s Day a national holiday. Then, while Congress dragged its feet, Anna staged a Mother’s Day celebration of her own in 1910. A year later, every state in the Union recognized moms on a special day, and in 1914, President Wilson officially declared the second Sunday in May as Mother’s Day.

It didn’t take long for merchants to capitalize on and profit from what was supposed to have been a loving and solemn day of tribute. By the early 1920’s, Hallmark was churning out Mother’s Day cards, while confectioners and nurseries were making a killing from sales of candy and flowers respectively. Ms. Jarvis did everything she could to curtail the commercialization of Mother’s Day, including litigation and boycotts, but to no avail. Now, as a result, Mother’s Day isn’t so much a holiday as it is a cottage industry.

Don’t misunderstand me. There’s nothing wrong with giving your mom a gift on Mother’s Day. When I was a kid, I made special gifts for her in school, like the wooden decoupage jewelry box, which she pretended was the finest such repository ever crafted. Later, as an adult living far from home, I routinely had roses delivered to her house for Mother’s Day, but I should have done more. Mom passed away in 2014, and I still miss her very much. I also carry a tremendous amount of guilt for failing to give her the one gift that would have meant more to her than all the flowers in the world. The gift she deserved was having the family together on Mother’s Day, but I lived in a different city and was consumed with work, so I sent flowers instead of myself. Those are visits I can never get back.

The other day I read an ad whose headline was, “Give Mom the perfect Mother’s Day gift”. The advertiser was offering a spa day, or a dinner for two. I can’t recall which. But what I do know is that it took me six decades to realize what the perfect Mother’s Day gift really is. It’s not the money you spend on Mom that matters, it’s the time you spend with Mom that matters.

This Sunday, don’t just have flowers delivered to your mother. Deliver yourself too.
 
 

Sometimes the irony and hypocrisy of two seemingly unrelated news items is inescapable. Such was the case last week when General Mike Flynn and former President Barack Obama both made headlines because of payments they had received or were about to receive from unethical sources. The concurrent controversies led to heightened investigations of one man, and damage to the credibility of the other.

Flynn served as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency under Obama from July 2012 until August 2014. Depending upon which account or leaked email you read, he was forced out of the DIA for not playing well with others, for being fast and loose with the truth, and for taking too hard a line against Islamic terrorism. Upon his retirement from active military, Flynn was in demand as a speaker and appeared frequently on cable news shows. Meanwhile his company thrived by providing intelligence for public and private sector clients. In December of 2015, Flynn and other notables (including Green Party candidate Jill Stein) attended a dinner to honor the Russian-owned news outlet, RT. The General also made a speech that night, for which RT reportedly paid him $45,000.

In 2016, Flynn began advising the Trump campaign on military and security matters, and, in the course of his duties, met with numerous world leaders, including Russian Ambassador Sergey Kisyak. In January of 2017, he was named National Security Advisor to President Trump, but was fired a month later for lying to Vice President Pence about the nature of his discussions with Kisyak. The news media and Democrats on the Hill were convinced that Flynn (and others in the Trump campaign) had made secret deals with Putin, which included Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election in return for Trump lifting sanctions against Russia if he won the White House. Now Congress and the Pentagon are stepping up efforts to investigate if and how General Flynn (who could still be recalled to active military duty) might have broken the law by accepting money from a foreign government without prior authorization. Flynn claims he gave proper notification of his RT speech, but the Pentagon says there’s no indication of that. But Flynn isn’t the only former high level federal employee who’s taking heat for being a paid speaker, he’s just the only one being investigated, and that brings us to our 44th President.

Last week it was disclosed that Barack Obama is scheduled to deliver the key note speech at a supposed health care conference this Fall, and will be paid $400,000 by none other than Cantor Fitzgerald, a major player on Wall Street. That’s about twice what either of the Clinton’s receive for making a speech, and it’s ten times more that what Flynn received for speaking at the RT event. Yet the mainstream media doesn’t seem to think this is a big deal. Only Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have voiced their concern and displeasure at Obama’s decision to accept money from Wall Street. After all, it was President Obama who constantly railed against Wall Street fat cats for their role in causing the 2008 recession, then accepting taxpayer bail outs that were rarely used to make affordable home loans.

In March of 2009, Obama said, “Bankers and executives on Wall Street need to realize that enriching themselves on the taxpayer’s dime is inexcusable…We can’t go back to a culture on Wall Street that says it’s OK to bend or break the rules.”

In September of 2009, he said, “Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences.” And In December of 2009, the President said, “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street.”

But the minute Obama leaves office, HE’s the one being helped out by those same fat cats. Aside from the bad optics and hypocrisy, Obama’s new coziness with Wall Street also begs the question, “Is there a reason why the Obama administration never put a single Wall Street executive in jail?” We have no proof that Obama made a quid pro quo deal with Cantor Fitzgerald, just as we have no proof that Mike Flynn made a quid pro quo deal with Putin. Yet it’s Flynn, not Obama, who is under investigation. Somehow the news media has decided that Russia’s alleged leaking of DNC emails is much more important to the American people than Obama accepting money from an industry that he refused to prosecute. But the fact is that Putin had nothing to do with Hillary’s loss, while Wall Street had everything to do with costing millions of people their jobs, homes, and savings.

The one thing that both Flynn and Obama have in common is they will take money from dubious clients, but we can help prevent future bad optics and conflicts of interest by revamping the White House lobbying law. Simply extend the ban on lobbying by former staff to include the President himself, and expand the ban to include acceptance of speaking fees for a period of five years. Of course, any regulation can be circumvented. If the expanded ban were already in place, Cantor Fitzgerald could hire Obama as head of international affairs, and pay him $400,000, and RT could hire Flynn as head of security and pay him $45,000. Still, we should at least make an effort to curtail the obscene fortunes collected by revolving door White House staffers. Otherwise, taxpayers will continue to foot the bill for endless political investigations, while worrying about what deals our President might be making with greedy industrialists that could bring about our next economic crisis.
 
 

Politics has become a dirty business. Campaigns are laced with mudslinging, and once in office, candidates spend most of their time harvesting money and votes for the next election. Mark Walker has proven to be a refreshing exception to the rule. A former minister from Greensboro, and now second-term Congressman for the 6th district, Walker has never run a negative ad, never spoken an unkind word about an opponent, and has never compromised his principals in order to stay in office. And, while many of his colleagues in Washington are avoiding town hall meetings, Mark meets regularly with constituents, and listens to their concerns. Moreover, his thirst for knowledge extends far beyond the borders of his district. An experienced missionary from his days as a minister, Walker now travels to global hotspots to observe first-hand, the kinds of human suffering and political tensions which can have a direct effect on American foreign policy. His dedication to the job is a big reason why Mark was recently elected to chair the powerful Republican Study Committee, and though he now enjoys direct access to the White House, Walker is anything but a yes man for the party or the president. Mark has appeared on my Triad Today television program numerous times, and last week he stopped by the studio during a break from Congress, to discuss a wide range of issues. Here are some highlights from our conversation.

JL: A new poll shows that 6 out of 10 Americans are fearful of a conflict with North Korea. Are their fears justified?

MW: I believe that some of that fear is legitimate. Just last year I was there at the DMZ, and it’s interesting as you look across the border and go right up to it, the posture of the North Korean soldiers each day is basically a stare-down, so it’s very tense. And you have to understand that we have Americans as well as American interests literally 20 kilometers away in Seoul, so there are some concerns when you’re dealing with somebody who is so irrational as Kim Jong Un.

JL: The President bombed a Syrian airfield recently in retaliation for Assad dropping deadly gas on innocent women, children, and babies. Most people agree it was the right action for us to take, but should the President have first sought the permission of Congress?

MW: I’m OK with the way he handled it. I felt like there was an immediate response that was needed. You can draw a direct line from that to our war against ISIS, and the President has promised to take them out. Having spent some time over there in refugee camps, I can tell you that these people have been begging for help for years. So I think it was legitimate to send a message that we’re watching what’s going on.

JL: But as a result of that bombing, tensions between the United States and Russia have increased. Are you concerned that we can’t do whatever we need to do to depose Assad because of what Russia might do?

MW: I think we always have to be concerned with Russia because what they say versus what they do, sometimes is not very congruent. I think we need to continue to monitor Russia’s actions, because they create an additional dynamic between them and Syria.

JL: The Guardian recently reported that there is “concrete evidence” that there was collusion between someone in the Trump campaign and the Russians in trying to affect the outcome of our 2016 election. Are you buying that?

MW: I don’t know if I’m buying the collusion, but do I believe that contact was made successfully? Potentially so. I’m confident that Mike Conaway and my friend Trey Gowdy are going to look at it very thoroughly from the House side, and that Senator Richard Burr will do a good job investigating the process on the Senate side.

JL: Let’s talk about healthcare reform. You and I spoke several times during the negotiations over AHCA, and I expressed concerns about what the Republican package was going to do to seniors, specifically imposing a rate hike in premiums five times greater for older folks than those for younger folks. Ultimately the package didn’t pass, so are we going to get some kind of healthcare reform in this calendar year?

MW: I believe that we are. And let me throw out a quick compliment. You were the first person who contacted me specifically with concerns about that 50 to 64 age demographic. We went back and looked at that, and there were some additional tax credits added for that particular age group, so I think we’re doing a lot better there. I’m hoping that we’ll get together this spring, but we’ve got some issues with the Freedom Caucus wanting to take away coverage for pre-existing conditions. The President and I feel that is a bit of an overreach at this point, but I’m hoping that we can repeal these trillion dollars worth of Obamacare taxes, and take out all of the mandates from individuals as well as employers. This is a huge thing, and the final thing it does is, it reforms Medicaid for the first time in 52 years, something we’ve been needing to do for awhile.

JL: You and I have always liked town hall meetings, but recently many of them have really gotten out of hand, and have been full of vitriol. I know that some of it is orchestrated by one political party or another. Regardless, I am reminded of what Captain Call said in Lonesome Dove, “I hate rude behavior in a man., I won’t tolerate it.” A lot of these folks in town halls now are just plain rude. What’s your take?

MW: My job is to remember that I don’t just represent Republicans or conservatives. I also represent Democrats, Libertarians, and Independents. So whatever their party may be, I love to have dialogue. I love to talk about the issues. I want to have a chance to share my beliefs, and then listen to those who may have an opposing view. But if you’re not able to even share, it makes it very difficult in these town hall formats.

JL: Are you going to do less town halls because of the increasing vitriol?

MW: We did a couple of them this year already, and we’re looking at ways to add some additional ones next month.

JL: Well, if it will make you feel more comfortable, I’ll be happy to interrupt everything you say for the rest of this interview.

MW: [laughs] It’ll be good practice.

JL: Are we going to get a tax reform bill this year?

MW: I think so. We are concerned about the delay in passing the AHCA. The reason why that has slowed down the tax reform is because there are a trillion dollars worth of Obamacare taxes that need to factor into this tax reform. Rep. Kevin Brady, the Ways and Means chairman, has promised that he will get it in this year. As of last week, I’m hearing August.

JL: But many Democrats say that unless Trump releases his tax returns, they won’t support any kind of tax reform. Isn’t that sort of cutting off their noses to spite their faces?

MW: It can be, and we’re asked about that a lot. As Congressmen, we have to reveal our taxes, so my personal opinion is I would prefer that he release his returns. However, it’s not illegal if he chooses not to do so, and it shouldn’t prevent us from passing legislation that benefits the American people.

JL: The President just signed an Executive Order, asking companies to “Hire American and Buy American”, yet his and Ivanka’s products are made mostly overseas. Does the hypocrisy of that bother you at all?

MW: It does a little bit. I get it, though. Our corporate tax rate is one of the highest in the world, and it’s driven a lot of manufacturing jobs overseas, But if we’re bringing the corporate tax rate down 15 to 20%, then I want to make sure they’re leading by example, and bringing those products back to America.

JL: Are you concerned that the President’s repeal of many EPA regulations will leave our air and water unprotected?

MW: Not at this point. When you talk about draining the swamp, I think you have to start with some of these federal agencies, like the EPA. Our farmers have been damaged by these regulations, like when a puddle is considered a lake. We want to make sure that kind of overreach is pushed back.

JL:You have indicated strong support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Exactly how do you intend to support their mission?

MW: We’re already starting to support it, by becoming the first Congressional office to offer paid internships for HBCU students, who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford to come and live in Washington for four to eight weeks. We also brought in 88 HBCU chancellors, and one of the things that came out of that meeting was a proposal to have year-round Pell grants, which, for many students, will provide a quicker opportunity to reach graduation. For me it’s personal because my wife did her undergraduate and graduate work at Winston-Salem State University. Since then she’s gone on to manage a Level I trauma unit, so it’s a great education, and we want to support it.

JL: Mr. Trump wants to allow churches to support political candidates. Are you OK with that?

MW: It depends on the definition. I think the focus of his plan is to roll back the Johnson amendment, where the senior pastor can’t talk about anything political. However, there are issues that sometimes cross over, like pro-life, so I believe the pastor should have an opportunity to speak. But if it gets to the point where entire churches are endorsing candidates, then that is a problem.

Upon his return to Washington later this week, Rep. Walker, now head of the 155-member RSC, will be faced with reforming healthcare and tax codes, and the prospect of a government shutdown if upcoming budget negotiations should fail. They are just several of the many challenges he must deal with on our behalf, and thus far, Walker has proven that he’s up for the challenge.
 
 

Once upon a time there was a six-year-old Louisiana Cajun who landed a job playing the son of a Cuban bandleader, and ended up running a ballet company.

Along the way, he was the sage of Mayberry, the most visible member of a Christian rock band, almost joined the Von Trapp family, and after struggling with substance abuse and depression, became a dedicated witness to God. Lucille Ball called him Keith. Ron Howard called him Johnny Paul. TV producers called him Richard, and millions of little girls just wanted to call him. But for the past 60 years, succeeding generations in nearly every nation have called him “Little Ricky”.

Keith Thibodeaux was born December 1, 1950 in Lafayette Louisiana where he displayed a proclivity for drumming while still in diapers. By age three he won a talent contest which landed him a job playing drums with the Horace Heidt orchestra for $500 per week. Three years later he joined the cast of I Love Lucy, playing Ricky Ricardo, Jr., then stayed with the show until it wrapped in 1960. From 1962 to 1966 he played Opie’s pal Johnny Paul Jason on The Andy Griffith Show, then left Hollywood and started touring with David and the Giants, one of the country’s first Christian rock groups. He met and married Kathy Denton, an accomplished ballerina, in 1976, and ten years later they founded Ballet Magnificat, an acclaimed dance company based in Jackson, Mississippi, which tours all over the world. I first met Keith in 1979 when he stopped by my morning television show in Richmond, Virginia. We reconnected recently, and spoke at length about his life and career.

JL: Is it fair to say that drums and music have been the common thread to everything in your life?

KT: Yeah, but another important thread was my faith in God. Even when I was younger I had a sense of God. I asked my Dad, “Why do you think God picked me to be Little Ricky?” because it was such a famous television show. And Dad said, “Well, God has a purpose for you, Keith.”

JL: But how many kids auditioned for that role?

KT: I think there were about 200 until they got to me, and then they said, “We’ve found Little Ricky”.

JL: But with all due respect, God had a purpose for those other kids too, so what gave you the edge?

KT: There were a couple of factors. I looked like Desi Arnaz and I looked like their child. And also I played the drums, which was a gift that the other kids maybe didn’t possess.

JL: How did Lucy and Desi treat you on and off set?

KT: I was treated like part of their family. On set I conducted myself as part of the cast, but then off set I was a trusted member of their real family who could come over and play with their kids on weekends, so in that regard, I was pretty much treated like one of their own children.

JL: Does that close relationship perhaps explain why you never received screen credit, in other words, they wanted viewers to think that you WERE Little Ricky?

KT: Yeah, back in those days it was a big story when Lucy was pregnant with Desi Jr., and so they wrote that into the show. It was such a big deal that when they had the baby and Little Ricky was introduced on the show, and Desi Jr. was born at the same time, they just created a story within a story and that became the fabric of Little Ricky with ties to Desi Arnaz Jr.

JL: I know you played the drums on the show, but you also sang quite a bit. Was that your own voice or was it dubbed?

KT: Nope, that was all my voice. Even on Babaloo when I tried to hit a high note, it was me, for better or worse (laughs).

JL: All kids get upset when their parents fight, but I heard that the strife between Lucy and Desi got so bad that you started to stutter and forget your lines, so Lucy arranged for a counselor to visit with you.

KT: I would see the strife at their home and was sensitive to it, so I started to stutter as a result of that stress, and being in that environment with them. So they brought in a hypnotist to see if he could create some therapy for me. I remember he used the classic watch and chain hypnosis. It was old school and kind of odd.

JL: Did it work?

KT: Well I continued to do the show, so yeah, I guess it did (laughs).

JL: I also heard that you had a lot of female fans who had a crush on you.

KT: They did, and I actually did a tour across the eastern seaboard to promote the show and my own clothing line, called “Little Ricky’s Chips and Twigs” (laughs). I was too young to sign my autograph, so I would give out photos with my thumb print on it for the little girls.

JL: You also had an impact on a lot of fans who were aspiring drummers.

KT: Oh yeah. One of them was the drummer from REO Speedwagon who credits me as one of his influences from when he watched me on I Love Lucy

JL: I know you kept in touch with Lucy and the kids over the years, but tell me about the last time you saw her.

KT: It was about 1985. My wife and her sister wanted to meet Lucy, so we drove up to her house and the maid came to the door and said there was nobody home. We were getting ready to pull out of the driveway and all of a sudden Lucy comes running out of the house, waving her hands, yelling “Keith!” All the tour buses stopped when they saw her, and fans ran up to my car and wanted to know who I was. I said, “I’m Little Ricky”, and they went crazy. We went into the house and spent about an hour talking with Lucy. It also happened to be her birthday, so it was very special.

JL: What was it like playing Opie’s pal on The Andy Griffith Show?

KT: It was a very easy going show to be a part of. It was fun hanging out with Ron on the set, he was one of the nicest kids in Hollywood.

JL: And he sort of looked up to you, didn’t he?

KT: He did because I was about four years older, and he always asked the writers to write me a part so I could be on the show.

But Keith was on the show even when he WASN’T on the show, because Opie would frequently quote one of Johnny Paul’s philosophies to his Dad.

Opie: Johnny Paul says tar is real good for your teeth.
Andy: That’s just an old wives tale.
Opie: Johnny Paul ain’t married.

But Johnny Paul DID get married eventually. After hitting a bad patch following his departure from Hollywood, Keith re-dedicated his life to the Lord and started touring with David and the Giants, then, in 1976 married Kathy Denton, an accomplished ballerina. Their two worlds of music and dance came together professionally in 1986 when they founded Ballet Magnificat, a Jackson, Mississippi-based company that tours throughout the United States and abroad. Today Keith serves as executive director for the company, and still tours with the band. But his days as Little Ricky and Johnny Paul are always with him.

JL: Do you still watch re-runs of Lucy and Andy?

KT: I occasionally watch Andy, and a little less occasionally I watch Lucy, but I still enjoy them. I appreciate them more now than I did when I was on them.

JL: Do any of the same girls from 60 years ago still write you fan letters?

KT: I still get a steady stream of fan mail and people who want photos, but you’d be surprised at how many little kids come up to me. Their moms have shown them DVDs, and tell them, “That’s Little Ricky”. And the kids look at this old man and go, “Really?” (laughs).

And with new fans getting born every day, I asked Keith what he meant when he once commented that HE had been born three times himself.

KT: Well I was born into the world when my mother had me. And then the Little Ricky character was born, and then I was born again in Jesus.

Having experienced multiple births, and taken on multiple personas, Keith Thibodeaux will always be part of the fabric of American pop culture. Episodes of Lucy and Andy are readily available on DVD and accessible via youtube. Meanwhile, CD’s of David and the Giants, and his autobiography, Life After Lucy can still be purchased from Amazon. Not a bad legacy for a little drummer boy from the Bayou, and the most famous philosopher in the history of Mayberry.
 
 

Like many folks in our subdivision, my wife and I proudly display a “welcome” mat on our front porch. That welcome extends to family, friends, neighbors, girl scouts, and authorized contractors. The welcome does NOT extend to people who break the law. It also does not prohibit, discourage, or hinder police from carrying out their sworn duty to protect my family and our neighborhood. Late last month, Winston-Salem councilman Dan Besse proposed that the City roll out a new welcome mat. It was designed to make legal residents more politically correct, but, in truth, it would have made them much less safe in the process.

Besse, like many ultra-liberals, sees nothing wrong with the concept of a Sanctuary City, a designation that protects illegal immigrants from being turned over to ICE for deportation. But Mr. Besse is also a political realist who knows that this region would never endorse a systematic obstruction of law enforcement. And so he offered up “Welcoming City” as a watered-down, less controversial version of Sanctuary City. His resolution stated that Winston-Salem would welcome “immigrants and refugees”. The proposal sailed through the City’s General Government Committee by a 3-to-1 margin (Robert Clark was the sole “No” vote). But it has since met with criticism and resistance from citizens, legislators, and public officials. According to the Winston-Salem Journal, Police Chief Barry Rountree said that his department will “cooperate with federal immigration officials when required.” And the Twin City’s delegation to Raleigh has made it clear that Besse’s proposal is in violation of state law. Said Senator Joyce Krawiec, “My colleagues are going to see this as a Sanctuary bill.” I asked Mayor Allen Joines if Besse’s resolution might be acceptable with a few word changes, such as requiring immigrants to be legal, and refugees to be properly vetted. “I don’t believe any type of re-wording will help address concerns brought up by the legislators. Therefore, it is my hope that we cannot pass this resolution,” said Joines.

Regardless of what becomes of Besse’s “Welcoming City” proposal, the fact remains that a growing number of cities and states are openly defying Attorney General Jeff Session’s demand for cooperation between local and federal authorities. A Massachusetts lawmaker recently admitted to tipping-off illegal immigrants to impending ICE raids. Meanwhile, Maryland is seeking to become a Sanctuary State. And just last week, Washington Governor Jay Inslee issued an order forbidding state police from turning illegals over to ICE. But nowhere has the Sanctuary City debate been more heated than in Montgomery County, Maryland, where, last month, a 14-year-old girl was allegedly raped in the school bathroom by two illegal male immigrants.

One of the suspects is an adult who came here illegally from Guatemala. He had been stopped at the Mexican border three months ago, then released to appear before an immigration judge. But the wheels of justice turn slowly. Unfortunately, bathroom rapes happen swiftly. Since the Montgomery County incident, information has been released which suggests that the adult male student and the girl had a prior relationship. But emails between the two men prove that they conspired with pre-meditation, to assault the girl in tandem.

Parents whose children attend Montgomery County schools are outraged that illegal adult immigrants are allowed to attend classes with under-aged female students. But supporters of Sanctuary Cities, say that men like the alleged rapists, are merely victims of a broken system. Speaking with FOX news, New York Times columnist Mark Steyn said, “This rape is a failure of public policy.” I agree with Mr. Steyn, but for different reasons. He believes that our government has failed to protect illegal immigrants. I believe that our government has failed to protect legal citizens, like the 14-year-old girl in Montgomery County.

We cannot be certain that Councilman Besse’s “Welcoming City” designation would result in rapes, robberies and murders by illegal immigrants, but it stands to reason that if we don’t cooperate with federal immigration officials, the chances of such crimes occurring would increase dramatically. That’s why I agree with Mayor Joines, who expressed hope that Besse’s resolution would never become law. I’m all for putting out the welcome mat, so long as I don’t become a victim of my own hospitality.
 
 

It’s a crime to yell “FIRE” in a crowded theatre when there is no fire. That’s because a prank like that can make people think there’s a crisis, and that can lead to panic and all kinds of collateral damage. Last year, Attorney General Roy Cooper, Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts, and the inappropriately named Human Rights Campaign, sounded a false alarm when they created a transgender bathroom crisis that didn’t exist. One of their objectives was to put Cooper in the Governor’s Mansion, and to that extent, the prank paid off. But the collateral damage it caused was enormous. North Carolina became the butt of jokes and the object of national derision. We lost scores of high-profile sporting events and concerts. We also lost out on attracting prospective industries which would have created thousands of jobs. And former Governor Pat McCrory was thrown under the bus for a mess he didn’t create.

Prior to last year, North Carolina had an unwritten “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy regarding the use of public bathrooms by transgender adults. There was no crisis, and no need for legislative action. But thanks to a handful of crusading parents in several other states, the rights of allegedly transgender children began to attract media attention. The epicenter was in Colorado where, in 2013, the parents of an eight-year-old boy said their child identified as a girl, and therefore, demanded that he be allowed to use the girls’ restrooms, showers, and locker rooms. Similar cases popped up in Illinois and Massachusetts, and, over time, the high court would have ruled on the issue of gender identity. But 2016 was an election year, so transgender rights made for good political theatre.

Here in North Carolina, first-term governor Pat McCrory, a moderate Republican and former coalition-building, seven-term mayor of Charlotte, had been busy resurrecting our state’s lagging economy. Under his administration, unemployment went down, federal debts were paid, and we outpaced the national average in economic growth. He also led a bi-partisan coalition to pass a $2 billion dollar bond for modernizing college campus facilities, and, in the weeks prior to election day, he helped thousands of homeowners in Eastern North Carolina recover from a devastating flood. Along the way there were bumps in the road, like criticism from the Left over a voter ID bill, and from the Right when McCrory said that magistrates should be made to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. Nevertheless, he was expected to win re-election over Democrat Roy Cooper, an Attorney General whose only claim to fame was waging war on people who needed sinus medicine. Cooper was in desperate need of a signature issue, and in March of 2016, Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts handed it to him, gift wrapped.

Roberts, supported by the HRC, was poised to pass an ordinance that would have required private businesses to make bathroom accommodations in accordance with gender identity, or else face jail time and a stiff fine. Coincidentally, the day after Roberts held a fundraiser for Cooper, she called for a vote on the bathroom ordinance, and it passed. And, just to make sure that Cooper’s opponent would get pushed into a full blown controversy, Roberts designated the ordinance to take effect on April 1, giving McCrory just over a week to diffuse a politically charged bombshell. Last October, appearing on “Triad Today”, Governor McCrory told me what transpired when he first learned of the Mayor’s plans to order a vote.

“I begged Mayor Roberts not to pass the ordinance. I wrote her a letter saying, ‘You’re trying to find a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.’ “

McCrory’s pleas to Roberts fell on deaf ears, while Cooper turned a deaf ear to the impending debacle.

“The Attorney General should have declared the ordinance unconstitutional, and intervened immediately, but he refused to do it because he was in the pocket, doing fundraisers with Mayor Roberts.”

Conservatives in the General Assembly were incensed by the Queen City ordinance, but McCrory tried to discourage any legislative action, instead hoping that the matter would be settled in court. Nevertheless, legislators called a special session, and drafted what became known as HB2. It was filled with extraneous language that dealt with everything from minimum wage to denying state employees redress in state courts. But at the heart of HB2 was a requirement that people must use government owned restrooms that correspond to their biological sex. Overall, it was a poorly written bill which seemed to leave minorities and gays unprotected against discrimination, so I asked McCrory why he signed it.

“Because the Charlotte ordinance was going to go into effect within eight days if I didn’t sign our bill. I wasn’t going to allow an ordinance threatening a jail sentence to someone who doesn’t recognize gender identity, which is a whole new definition of man and woman, and of a boy and girl in our schools. But I did issue an executive order prohibiting any types of discrimination based on sexual orientation.”

Once HB2 became law, North Carolina faced a flood of boycotts and millions of dollars in lost revenue. Mayors and governors from other states even barred their employees from attending functions in North Carolina. The NBA moved its All-Star game from Charlotte, and major film companies refused to shoot here. McCrory was excoriated daily for signing a law that he didn’t seek, didn’t write, and tried to prevent. Even so, the gubernatorial race was still tight, but only because of HB2 and the perception that Cooper was a champion of transgender rights.

In July, a bipartisan deal was in the works that would have removed enough controversial language from HB2 to end some of the boycotts. It was endorsed by almost every House Republican and ten House Democrats, and was on the way to being passed. But according to a report by WBTV’s Nick Ochsner, one man torpedoed the erstwhile repeal of HB2. A source involved with the negotiations told Ochsner, “We started losing Democrats. We were told Cooper was making personal phone calls to the ten Democratic members, saying if they wanted to be on the team in November, they needed to vote against the bill.” Reacting to Ochsner’s story, state GOP Executive Director Dallas Woodhouse said, “This report raises serious questions about the ethics and motivation of Attorney General Roy Cooper.”

The WBTV report should have ended Cooper’s bid for governor. Instead, he ran hundreds of disingenuous TV ads in which he promised to repeal HB2. The scam worked. Cooper defeated McCrory by about 10,000 votes, and HB2 was cited as the reason for his narrow victory.

Fast forward to last week when Governor Cooper signed HB 142 into law. The so-called repeal of HB2 was rushed through the General Assembly in response to a threat by the NCAA to boycott North Carolina for the next two decades. The hypocritical sports body had given us until April 1 to act, or else. The problem is that HB 142 is not a repeal of HB2. Instead, it only restores the status quo, and prohibits localities from enacting their own bathroom ordinances until the year 2020, by which time, the Courts will have ruled on the legal standing of gender identity as an orientation equal to that of biological gender. In other words, Cooper’s HB2 replacement bill is exactly what McCrory had advocated. Not surprisingly, Cooper is now coming under fire from the same groups who once excoriated McCrory. They mistakenly thought McCrory created HB2, and they mistakenly thought Cooper would thoroughly repeal it.

Four years from now I hope voters will remember what really happened with HB2, and who was really responsible for stirring up a faux crisis that did a lot of damage. I also hope they’ll remember who could have prevented HB2, and then deliberately blocked an effort to repeal it, just so he could get elected. By supporting the Charlotte bathroom ordinance and helping to keep HB2 alive for political purposes, Roy Cooper is like a man who yelled “FIRE”, then refused to help extinguish the flames with one hand, while fanning them with the other. Pat McCrory deserved another term as governor, and because of HB 142, he might still get it.
 
 

Every day, newspapers, television, and the internet are awash with bad news. Even worse, there seems to be nothing we can do to make the bad news go away.

We can’t stop terrorism, we can’t escape racism, and we don’t have a cure for cancer. But if you look beyond the headlines, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that one person really can make a difference in preventing or solving some of our most serious problems. While hosting “Triad Today” over the past fourteen years, I’ve come to know some of those special people who make a difference every single day, and I’m particularly proud of three individuals who have dedicated their time and considerable energies to prevent drunk driving. They are Guilford County sheriff BJ Barnes, and attorneys David Daggett and Griff Shuler.

According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving, each year over 10 million people drive while under the influence, and almost half of all drivers who are killed in crashes had alcohol in their system. Moreover, one third of people convicted of drunk driving are repeat offenders. Shockingly, over 300,000 incidents of drunk driving occur each and every day, and every 51 minutes, someone dies in a drunk driving-related car crash.

Five years ago, sheriff BJ Barnes created a task force to reduce drunk driving in Guilford County. Cooperating agencies included the Greensboro police department, High Point police department, UNCG police, and the Guilford sheriff’s department. Late last month, M.A.D.D. presented Barnes with the “Heart of M.A.D.D.” award, accompanied by a glowing citation which stated, “He teamed up with sheriffs across the State and local police departments to continue his education efforts, focusing on the dangers of underage drinking.”

According to M.A.D.D., the award is given to individuals who, “embody our mission to eliminate drunk driving, support the victims of violent crime, and prevent underage drinking.” Certainly BJ meets and exceeds those criteria. For example, as the Greensboro News and Record’s Kate Elizabeth Queram reported, Barnes has also been working closely with the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission
and its “Talk it Out” campaign, which encourages parents to talk with their kids about alcohol and drug use.

Too often our law enforcement officers only get to respond to crimes after they’ve been committed, but M.A.D.D.’s recognition of my friend BJ Barnes should serve as an inspiration to public servants and private citizens, to be pro-active in preventing drunk driving, and the fatalities they can cause.

About twenty miles up the road from the Guilford County Sheriff’s headquarters, are the offices of Daggett Shuler, attorneys at law. David Daggett and Griff Shuler have seen the tragic effects of car crashes involving alcohol, so it’s not surprising that they decided to sponsor an area wide campaign designed to prevent young people from drinking and driving.

David and Griff recently appeared on Triad Today to taIk about “Safe Sober Prom Night”.

David: This is the 27th year of the Safe Sober Prom Night program, and it has become the largest and longest running privately funded initiative of its type in the United States. What it is, is students sign a pledge card not to drink or use drugs on prom night.

Jim: How much of a problem is teenage drinking and driving?

Griff: Car crashes are the number one cause of death among teenagers, and of those car crashes, one quarter are directly related to underage drinking. That’s how bad the problem is.

Jim: What area do you cover?

Griff: We visit 47 high schools in nine counties, and get students to sign the pledge, then we give them a free t-shirt.

David: But it’s more than just “don’t drink or use drugs on prom night.” It has become a program of leadership, guidance, and direction for young people.

One student who took the pledge this year is 17-year-old Nestor Gutierrez Flores, a senior at West Forsyth high school. Nestor also designed this year’s commemorative “Safe Sober Prom Night” t-shirt.

Jim: Nestor, why did you want to take the pledge?

Nestor: The media promotes that alcoholis a way to have fun. Well, my design breaks free from that. We don’t need alcohol to have fun. Teenagers can have fun without drinking.

Over the years, David and Griff have made it possible for over a half million teenagers to take the pledge, and they have awarded nearly $50,000 to schools with the highest percentage of participation.

Griff: It’s unbelievable. We go out to schools to set up and give out t-shirts, and when the bell rings you better watch out because all of the students are going to run out and sign the pledge, and want the t-shirts.

David: Proms will be going on from now through the middle of May, so students can still take the pledge. We’re coming to a high school near you!

Griff: The reaction every year at every school is one of excitement, and we just love being a part of it.

Anyone interested in the “Safe, Sober Prom Night” program can visit www.safesober.com.

For more information about the Guilford County Sheriff’s department, visit www.gcsonc.com.
 
 

In a recent commercial for Geico, noted angler Bill Dance offers up a valuable tip for careless fishermen who break off the end of their rod in the car door.

Says Dance dryly, “Don’t do that.” Bill’s simple advice is priceless, more importantly it can apply to a myriad of situations.

If you don’t want your embarrassing emails to get hacked, don’t send embarrassing emails. If you don’t want to cause a wreck on the highway, don’t text while driving. If you don’t want to accidentally fall off a cliff, don’t play Pokeman while you’re walking. If you don’t want to pay higher taxes and healthcare premiums, don’t keep sending the same people back to Congress. If you don’t want your house broken into, don’t tell everyone on social media what day you’re leaving for vacation. If you don’t want to have a baby out of wedlock, don’t have unprotected sex. And PLEASE, for the love of Pete, if you don’t want nude photos of yourself showing up all over the internet, don’t take nude photos of yourself, or let anyone else take them.

Hardly a week goes by that we don’t hear about someone complaining that a nude photo of her has gone viral. In some cases, a girl lets her boyfriend snap a nude photo of her with his phone, and he sends that photo back to her phone. In other instances, a girl snaps a nude selfie and sends it to her boyfriend. Either way, when the girl breaks up with her boyfriend, he sometimes gets revenge by posting the nude photos all over the internet. But this so-called revenge porn isn’t always to blame for embarrassing posts. Sometimes girls take nude selfies and share them with their closest girlfriends. Then, either the girl or one of her friends accidentally hits “send” and voila! Instant viral nudity. And some teens take nude selfies for profit, then develop seller’s remorse after the fact.

Regardless of how nude photos originate, however, the posting of them has grown to almost epidemic proportions. Some teenage girls whose naked image has gone viral are forced to change schools, and others even contemplate suicide. And then there are the angry parents. Earlier this year, a father in New York was arrested for choking his daughter when he discovered that she had posted naked pictures of herself on Snapchat. But even when parents are understanding, the so-called victim can find herself in hot water. Here in North Carolina, posting of private nude photos is a class H felony under general statute section 14-190.5. In fact, posting of nude photos is illegal in all but 17 states. And in California, if a boyfriend posts revenge porn, he can go to jail for six months.

Dr. Brenda Murphy, an instructor in Gender Studies at the University of Malta, says posting of nude selfies without the consent of the nude person is a form of abuse, and borders on violence. But what about when a teenager gives her consent or posts the explicit images herself? Speaking with the Times of Malta, Murphy said, “I’m not blaming the girls. We are all subject to society’s current pressures. The message young girls are getting from the media is one of hyper-sexualization. Young girls are being told the only way to behave is in a sexual way.”

Personally I don’t buy some of Professor Murhpy’s bilge, but even if I did, how then does she explain grown women taking nude selfies? What should we do to punish those adult females, or the men who share their selfies? And what if more than one man is engaged in exposing private photos? Or what if those men did so institutionally? Such a scenario has recently come to light, and has gained national attention, not just because of what they’re doing, but because of who they represent.

According to CNN, a group known as Marines United operates a secret chatroom and facebook network with more than 30,000 members nationwide, who routinely post and share nude photos of female Marines. Marine Corps Commandant General Robert Neller has admonished his troops, and lectured them about honor and commitment. Meanwhile NCIS is looking into the matter. Again, though, the problem is that most of the so-called victims were not snapped without their knowledge. James LaPorta, a Marine vet has investigated Marines United, and he told CNN that most of the nude photos are “posed”, meaning that the female Marines either took and distributed nude selfies, or they gave some form of consent to the person who snapped the photos.

Can girls or women be considered victims if they take nude selfies or allow themselves to be photographed nude? Yes, but in most cases they are complicit victims, because if they had kept their clothes on and their iPhones turned off, then neither pimply faced boys or enterprising young Marines could do anything to embarrass them.

Don’t misunderstand. I’m not excusing men who post nude photos of any woman for any purpose. But ladies, if you don’t want your naked body to show up on the internet, then don’t get naked when there’s a camera around. That’s because today, nothing is private anymore, not even our privates. So next time you feel like showing off your birthday suit, remember what Bill Dance said. “Don’t do that.”
 
 

On the day my father died, a friend of mine 2,500 miles away stopped filming his TV show, and sent me a personal message: “Jim, I’m sorry about your Dad. I’m sure he must have been quite proud of you. Someone once wrote, ‘Flowers will wilt and tears will dry, but love lives on in reverent memory.’ My sympathy.”

That friend was Bill Paxton, a versatile, multi-talented everyman-turned-actor, -musician, -director, and -documentarian, who never lost sight of his Texas roots or core values, and always seemed to put the needs of others before his own. Billy had the biggest heart of just about anyone I ever met, and in a cruel twist of fate, it was his heart that failed him in the end. He went in for surgery on February 14 to repair a valve, then suffered a stroke eleven days later. He died on February 25. Bill was just 61 years old. He was survived by his wife Louise, and his children James and Lydia.

I first met Billy when he agreed to participate in “A Father’s Day Salute to TV Dads” which I produced and moderated for the Television Academy in June of 2009. He had already appeared in a slew of blockbuster films by then, (Aliens, Terminator, Predator 2, Twister, Apollo 13, Titanic, et al), and now, he was filming the groundbreaking HBO series Big Love in which he played a Mormon with three sister wives and a passel of kids. Joining Bill on stage were eight other iconic TV Dads: Dick Van Dyke, Bryan Cranston, Dick Van Patten, Jon Cryer, Patrick Duffy, Reggie VelJohnson, Stephen Collins, and Michael Gross.

It was a good natured group of guys, among whom there was great chemistry and mutual respect, so I knew I was on safe ground to poke fun at them during my introductory remarks. Of Billy I said, “As an actor his credits are impressive, and at the same time, pitiful. In Tombstone he failed to serve out his term as sheriff. In Apollo 13 he failed to reach the moon. In Titanic he failed to recover a prized jewel. And in one season of Big Love he failed to perform in bed with two of his three wives.” Billy entered the stage laughing, and underneath the thunderous applause he received from the capacity crowd, he said to me, “Thanks Jim. What a great introduction!” In my 45 years of hosting shows and events, no one had ever thanked me for poking fun at them. But that was Bill Paxton. He was not only a great performer, he was also a great audience, and the boy loved to laugh. Strike that. You can’t really call what Billy did, a “laugh”. It was more like a cackle, followed by a big Texas style “Woooo!”.

That night, the Academy audience also discovered that Billy was a master storyteller who could talk about poignant childhood memories or hilariously bawdy incidents with equal aplomb. For example, when asked to recall his favorite TV Dad, Billy went on an hysterical rant about unwed fathers.

Paxton: All the TV Dads I grew up with, something happened to the mother. The wife was out of the picture. The Rifleman. What was the deal there? Did he shoot her by accident? [laughter] And what was the deal with Andy Griffith and Opie? I mean was he a bastard kid? And there was the Courtship of Eddie’s Father. And Uncle Bill on Family Affair. Was he really their uncle or their father? What the hell happened to Aunt Dorothy?

Longworth: You’re really wound up about this.

Paxton: And you’ve got My 3 Sons and William Demarest as Uncle Charlie. What did he do? Knock off the mom to get on the payroll? I mean, you could keep going with this stuff. Ben Cartwright. What was the deal with the cook? [more sustained laughter as Bill’s story built to a crescendo]

And then there was his show-stopping answer to my question about sex ed.

Longworth: Who talked to you about the birds and the bees?

Paxton: I remember I was about 16 years old and I wanted to talk to my dad because I had heard this term, “premature ejaculation”, and I thought I was the only guy on earth who had this problem. (laughter from the audience). So one Saturday morning I rode downtown with my dad who went to pick up his mail at the office. Now I could talk to my dad about anything, so I said, “Dad I think I’ve got this problem.” He said, “What’s the problem son?” And I said, “I think I’ve got premature ejaculation.” Well my dad liked to describe things very graphically, and he said, “Oh son, you don’t have to worry about that. Hell, I used to go off on the nest all the time.”

Academy members were nearly falling out of their seats laughing, while Patrick Duffy, who sat next to Billy, feigned a comic look of shock at what he had just heard. “Woooo! That’s a hard one to follow!” said Billy. And so it was.

The event was a celebration of fathers, both on screen and off, so each TV Dad got to tell something serious about his own real-life father. For Billy that meant talking about his hero and best friend, John Paxton.

Paxton: My dad is the person I measure everyone by. And I’m one of the luckiest guys I know because my dad is still my closest confidant. He was a lumber salesman, always traveling, and one thing he taught me was, “take time to talk to somebody”. He was a social man with great humanity.

The same could be said about John’s son Bill.

In the years following the TV Dads event, Billy and I stayed in touch regularly. Sometimes we saw each other, sometimes we talked by phone, and most times we emailed each other. Sometimes we talked about people we admired, or old TV shows we used to watch. On one occasion, I wrote Bill and told him that Pam and I were spending the evening with Shirley Jones. “I’m so envious,” he said. That scene in the cat house in Elmer Gantry is unforgettable. Talk about sex appeal!” And there was the time I told him that the game show Password had just been released on home video, and our buddy Dick Van Dyke was in one of the episodes. “The Password DVD sounds great. I watched a lot of hours of that as a kid,” he wrote. Billy often talked with me about his work, but never about his individual performances. He always hoped that the Big Love team would win an EMMY, and when the show was cancelled, he wrote, “Jim, we went down swinging for the back fence.” He was also proud of his kids, and gave me a heads-up when James was about to show up in an episode of Billy’s Alamo opus, Texas Rising.

And then there was the formal interview I did with him to promote his Hatfields and McCoys mini-series. For Billy it was a bittersweet experience because mid-way through filming in Romania, he was called back home to attend his father’s funeral. He was back on a plane the next day to continue working. Seems like Billy was always going somewhere or coming back from somewhere. His emails read like a travel log: “I’m on my way to Toronto”, “Jim, I’m in London”, “We just wrapped in Romania”. He was a perpetual motion machine when it came to work.

Billy’s last email to me was on February 11. He told me how much he liked the memorial tribute I wrote about our hero Mike Connors (Mannix). And he talked about his new series Training Day. “I’d like to think I’m carrying on what Mike started as a TV Crimefighter”, he said. And in his last sentence he wrote, “Hope you’re watching Training Day!” I told him that Pam and I loved his new show, and that Mike would have loved it too. He didn’t say anything about feeling bad. He didn’t mention being scheduled for surgery on February 14. Eleven days later he was gone.

I couldn’t get my head wrapped around the fact that my friend had died. I put off writing this column because I couldn’t find the words. I turned to some of the folks that Billy and I knew, and they also found it difficult to talk through the shock.

Bruce Dern: Bill was a prince of a guy.

Patrick Duffy: Too good, and way too soon.

Bryan Cranston: Just devastating. He was such a great guy, and a talented actor. Huge loss. Rest well my friend.

Stephen Collins: Such a terrific guy, and incredibly humble about all his success.

Michael Gross: He was indeed a lovely man.

Mary Kay Place: Bill was such a down to earth guy, so kind to everyone. A great human being, no Hollywood BS about him.

Kurt Russell: I don’t know anyone who didn’t love being with Billy. He was flat out one of the good guys. I sure hope it’s in the cards for us to get together again. ‘Till then, I’ll miss him.

Fact is, anyone who knew Billy or watched him perform, will miss him too. Cowboy or cop. Soldier or scamp. William “Bill” Paxton could play them all. But as great as he was an actor, he was an even better person. He was the kind of person who once comforted me by writing, “Flowers will wilt and tears will dry, but love lives on in reverent memory.” Now, I hear Billy speaking those words to me again, only this time, the tears are for him. And when they dry, my memories of Bill Paxton will be of his smile, his compassion, his talent, and that distinctive Texas laugh. “Woooo, Billy!”…you’re a hard act to follow.