Earlier this year, I tried to minimize my social media posts on political topics. I also worked hard to scroll past others’ posts that contained opposing political views. I, however, was far from perfect. Even though I understood that my writing was not going to change the views of diehard MAGA supporters—and that political debate was likely to end in the loss of some friendships—I still failed occasionally and let political commentary slip through the cracks.

The good news from this practice of avoidance was that my stress level went down, my blood pressure decreased, and I don’t think I really missed the “friends” who felt offended and chose a different path. The bad news is that many people view silence as agreement or consent. So, as part of my closure to 2025, I’m going to make my position on several political topics clear. These are not in any particular order—just a stream of thought.

1. The President should not call a reporter a “pig.” If your granddaughter grows up to be a reporter, how would you react to someone in a position of power calling her names? If your son, after a great high school sporting event, used degrading language during an interview, would you tolerate it? We should expect more from our leaders.
2. I don’t mind the President selling red MAGA hats and T-shirts at campaign events. I do, however, find it tacky—and question the ethics—of the President selling Bibles, tennis shoes, watches, and cell phones. I’m just not sure whether President Trump is the leader of the free world or the host of the Home Shopping Network. Do you really want to buy an outdated Chinese cell phone just because the President endorses it? I’m not sure that qualifies as “America First.”
3. Does anyone find it odd how many places and things are now named after President Trump? There is the Donald Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts, the Air Force F-47, the new “Trump-class battleship,” and the commemorative $1 Trump coin. His face is even on National Park passes, which seems especially odd given that DOGE fired more than a thousand park rangers and even more employees from the Forest Service.
4. Avoiding the debate over the rules and precedent for making changes to historic buildings in Washington, D.C., I will say that it is fairly common for Presidents to make changes to the White House according to their style. Can anyone really say, however, that they liked when President Trump paved over the Rose Garden? I’m not an architect, but does anyone think a ballroom of roughly 90,000 square feet sitting next to the existing White House (about 55,000 square feet) wouldn’t look out of place? Do you think it is appropriate to put plaques with false or unflattering quotes under the photos of previous Presidents inside the White House? How about replacing the photo of President Biden with a picture of a pen? That might be funny for a reality show, but is this really the image we want representing our country?
5. This is my “I told you so” moment. For everyone who said it was okay for Secretary of War Hegseth to send operational messages over an unclassified messaging app, please read this paragraph from the Inspector General’s report:

“(U) The Secretary sent nonpublic DoD information identifying the quantity and strike times of manned U.S. aircraft over hostile territory over an unapproved, unsecure network approximately 2 to 4 hours before the execution of those strikes. Using a personal cell phone to conduct official business and send nonpublic DoD information through Signal risks potential compromise of sensitive DoD information, which could cause harm to DoD personnel and mission objectives.”

If you were flying those jets, I’m sure you wouldn’t want your boss giving the bad guys a heads-up that you were coming.

6. As a former unhappy colony of Britain, I never thought America would look to colonize other independent countries. Once again, I am amazed that the U.S. has a Special Envoy focused on annexing Greenland. And by the way, Canada does not want to become the 51st state either.
7. Democrats may disown me for saying this, but I would be okay with a “worst of the worst” immigration policy. I think Congress could sit down, define what qualifies as “worst of the worst,” update immigration law, and then allow ICE to focus on those individuals. Offenders could be given due process, and if the evidence supports it, they could be deported. The current administration, however, continues to use “worst of the worst” for headlines while their actions do not match the rhetoric.

• The ICE database shows—and the most recent leaked 60 Minutes episode on CECOT confirms—that a majority of people that ICE is deporting have no criminal record. Their only crime is crossing the border illegally. That does not sound like the “worst of the worst” to me.
• So what seems to be the plan for sorting out the “worst of the worst”? The administration revoked visas for people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. More recently, President Trump said he doesn’t want “Somali trash” in the U.S. either.
• If simply being Haitian or Somali makes someone the “worst of the worst,” who does President Trump see as the “best of the best” and worthy of U.S. citizenship? He increased numbers for the asylum program for white South Africans. At a rally, he asked why the U.S. couldn’t get “nice immigrants from places like Norway or Sweden.” He now offers a Gold Card so wealthy people can enter.

Just my opinion, but I don’t think nationality, skin color, or wealth is the correct metric if you truly are executing a “worst of the worst” policy.

8. This is for everyone—Republicans and Democrats alike—and here is an ugly truth neither side likes to admit because it doesn’t win elections.

• As a country, we are terrible at economics. We continue to spend more than we earn.
• There are two simple solutions:
  A. Earn more. Someone would have to pay higher taxes or tariffs, which might mean reconsidering full deductions for private jets or ending tax breaks on tips or overtime.
  B. Spend less. The government would have to decide what to cut.

DOGE was popular with many people because it promised to cut government waste and solve the $2 trillion shortfall, but it fell short and found only about 10% ($200 billion). To be fair, it was bound to fail. The entire discretionary portion of the U.S. budget is about $1.7 trillion. Roughly half goes to the Department of Defense, and the other half covers everything else—education, transportation, health, and more. The current administration has focused on the non-military portion, which, even if completely dismantled (an unrealistic scenario), would save slightly less than $1 trillion.

The budget fights will continue, but more likely than not, neither party will balance the budget. At some point, there will be hard decisions about whether the U.S. needs more Golden Domes, F-47s, and battleships—or whether healthcare and education should take priority.

(Just so you know, this will never happen until the country fully collapses. Economists understand the drastic measures needed, but none of these solutions can be executed by a politician—not even one as abrasive as President Trump.)

9. Here is my next prediction—and someday it will be my next “I told you so” moment. We put Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services. He is a lawyer who made his money on anti-vaccination cases and has a long history as an anti-vaxxer. As Director of HHS, he removed all 17 doctors from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. While downplaying the importance of vaccines, the U.S. now has more than 1,800 measles cases. His organization removed the recommendation that newborns receive hepatitis vaccines. My prediction is that the distrust in medicine fostered by this administration will lead to increases in diseases that were nearly wiped out, such as whooping cough, measles, and influenza. There’s nothing quite like returning to the 1800s, when life expectancy was under 40 and many children died before the age of five.
10. I’ll keep this one short. Historically, under the “code of the West,” it was unacceptable to shoot an unarmed man or to shoot someone in the back. America should never be seen as the country that shoots people clinging to a crippled boat. We should be wearing the white hats.

I’m sure I could vent about more, but I’m comfortable now with the stand I’ve taken. Hopefully, I’ll have one more blog post before the end of the year—one that is more upbeat and focused on gratitude for my many blessings (and less complaining).