society cannot
help the many poor, cannot
save few who are rich

To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required–not because the communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

John F. Kennedy Inaugural Address, January 20, 1961.

Let’s rephrase that for today.

President Kennedy was looking around the world because in 1961, the status of the United States wasn’t questioned and he could confidently say, To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves.

Today, this nation has turned its back on those people in the huts and villages of half the globe.

But those people shouldn’t feel left out.

As this nation has turned it back on it’s own people.

For today we can say, To those people here at home, struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required–not because it’s woke (whatever that means) to be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right.

You might ask, why should we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves?

Mr. Kennedy had it right and that message doesn’t change.

Because it is right.

Geez oh Pete and BOY HOWDY.

So simple.

Because it is right.

On this nations moral compass with what is right pointing in one direction, we sure seem to be locked in to 180 degrees the other way.

That assumes, of course, anyone of those folks working so hard to take care for the few who are rich havn’t tossed their moral compass away.

And don’t forget the warning.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

I admit, that man currently in office and his administration seem to be doing okay for themselves right now as the work to save the few who are rich and turn their back on the many poor.

But as Dr. King said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”

And deep down, I have to believe, them folks working so hard to save the few who are rich, they know it too.

Mr. Milton did say , “To reign is worth ambition though in Hell: Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav’n,” and maybe thinking that is what gets those folks working so hard to save the few who are rich, and maybe the rich themselves, thinking that, thinking that Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav’n is what gets them through their day.

Thinking that Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav’n lets them look at themselves in the mirror when they get up.

No disrespect to Mr. Milton but in response I point out something Garrison Keillor said when he talked about those folks who don’t learn anything new until the day they die.

Those folks?

They learn a whole lot of the stuff the next day.

date when high court of
history sits in judgment
on each one of us

On January 10, 1961, John F. Kennedy was invited to address the Massachusetts State Legislature. The next speech he would give would be in 10 days in Washington, DC when he was sworn in as President of the United States.

President Elect Kennedy, looking ahead to the next four years, saying ” … our success or failure, in whatever office we may hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions …”

Here is what he said.

History will not judge our endeavors–and a government cannot be selected–merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these.

For of those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each one of us–recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state–our success or failure, in whatever office we may hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we truly men of courage–with the courage to stand up to one’s enemies–and the courage to stand up, when necessary, to one’s associates–the courage to resist public pressure, as well as private greed?

Secondly, were we truly men of judgment–with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past–of our own mistakes as well as the mistakes of others–with enough wisdom to know that we did not know, and enough candor to admit it?

Third, were we truly men of integrity–men who never ran out on either the principles in which they believed or the people who believed in them–men who believed in us–men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfillment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly men of dedication–with an honor mortgaged to no single individual or group, and compromised by no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest.

Courage–judgment–integrity–dedication–these are the historic qualities of the Bay Colony and the Bay State–the qualities which this state has consistently sent to this chamber on Beacon Hill here in Boston and to Capitol Hill back in Washington.

For a historical exercise, shall we ask these four questions of the current administration?

Well, why not?

First, are they truly people of courage?

No, not as I understand the word courage.

Secondly, are they truly people of judgment?

No, not as I understand the word judgment.

Third, are they truly people of integrity?

HA!

No.

Just recently, I can give you 1.776 billion reasons and earlier, I had another 11,000 reasons to say NO to integrity. It is to laugh just to ask this question.

This last question is tricky.

If we ask, are they truly people of dedication?

They people of this current administration are certainly dedicated to the cult of following, blindly, that man currently in office.

But if we ask the complete question, are they truly people of dedication–with an honor mortgaged to no single individual or group, and compromised by no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest?

I think that once again, the answer is no.

An honor mortgaged to no single individual or group?

HA!

Compromised by no private obligation or aim?

HA!

Devoted solely to serving the public good and the national interest?

DOUBLE HA!

Courage–judgment–integrity–dedication.

It’s like sadly remembering the life and times of our childhood when the everyday things of our lives, a long summer break in summertime, the sound of Ernie Harwell’s voice in summertime, the excitement of summertime in summertime are gone forever.

Here is the twist.

Somewhere deep inside myself, I cannot write these people off.

I feel that deep in their hearts, they know what they are doing and what they are giving up and what they are throwing away.

I feel sorry for them.

I feel sorry because at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each one of us–recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state–their success or failure, in whatever office we may hold.

For of those to whom much is given, much is required

They will not be able to say, we didn’t know.

They know.

And they know they know it.

And I feel worse for all us.