The Dialogue, Part 3

 I live in a reality based world.

In this reality, September 2, 1945 marked the official end of WWII, Harry Truman was President. Neil Armstrong walked onto the moon on July 21, 1969 when Richard Nixon was President.

Mabel McFiggin of Rochester New York received the first food stamps in 1939, which she redeemed at Joseph Mutolo's grocery store; Franklin Roosevelt was the President.

The Holocaust happened, as did Little Boy and Fat Man, all three in WWII. The United States Presidents were Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, respectively.

What do all of these statements have in common? They are FACTS. One of Webster's definitions of fact is: the quality of being actual. That's right, they all happened, regardless of the naysayers of any or all of the above. It doesn't matter who said it, or why it happened, or even if it should have happened, the fact is, all of the above happened. All the denial in the world cannot change reality.

Which brings us to the present day. More people were present at Barack Obama's inauguration than at Donald Trump's. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016, and Donald Trump won the Electoral College vote, which made him President. Donald Trump lost both the popular and Electoral College votes in 2020, which made Joe Biden President. Despite the counterclaims, lawsuits and recounts, the results still stand. There have been less the 50 proven cases of voter fraud relative to the 2020 election, and they are split about evenly.

I weigh more now than I did when I was 20. My car consumes gasoline; my truck loves diesel, and you cannot cross-fuel them.

Currently, it's raining right at my house, the leaves are green and the grass is growing.

All are FACTS: the quality of being actual.

It's reality.

Thank you for reading; as always, your thoughts, comments, and opinions are welcome. Please click on the pencil below and let me know what you think!

R.M. "Bob" Hartman

"STD's and the US Government", or "The Dangers of Unprotected Sex"

You’re kidding me, right? Under President Harry Truman, the United States Government knowingly infected citizens of a foreign nation with STD’s? And we are just now getting around to apologizing for it? Oh, I can hardly wait; Limbaugh and Hannity will have a field day with this, after all, it was a Democratic President. They, however, miss the balance of the story; we also infected citizens of the United States; Negro males in Tuskegee, Alabama were the target group of a similar study from 1946 through 1972! One wonders if the right wing hate groups will remember that! It was started by Herbert Hoover’s administration, and backed by administrations of both parties until stopped by the Nixon administration. (I have a hard time putting that in print, but unlike Limbaugh and Co., I do believe in full disclosure.)

The larger point is again the great amount of arrogance shown by our government; both Republican and Democratic administrations have shown a complete lack of concern for the people that are affected by the “studies” undertaken in the name of science or National Defense. This particular study (U.S. Public Health Service Sexually Transmitted Disease Inoculation Study of 1946-1948) was cancelled by the Nixon administration. Sadly, this is just one of many projects that cast a great deal of shame on American government. The above-ground nuclear testing programs of the 1950’s subjected an unknown number of U.S. soldiers to the full effects of a nuclear blast. How close can they be to a nuclear bomb explosion and still be well enough to fight? Again, sadly, the vast majority of these “volunteers” were Negro. What about Project MKULTRA (1950-late 1970s), using both US and Canadian individuals; when a number of again “volunteers” from both the armed services and civilian life were injected with mind-altering drugs to examine the effects of drugs on mental telepathic abilities, again in the name of National Defense? When will it stop?

Some will claim the greater evil is the disclosure of these studies, they will claim it lays a groundwork for civil unrest and undermines the “right” of the government to use every means of defense against possible actions against our country.

I will take a side for the full disclosure of all of our nasty tricks and inhuman studies, past and current. The lives of people are more valuable than the rights of governments to conduct inhuman studies on unsuspecting persons, or persons who have little or no means of resisting participation. This type of behavior, while perhaps perfectly acceptable in some foreign countries, runs counter to the publicly-held belief in American values. Studies of this nature are perhaps “legal” but certainly violate moral values held by most American citizens. Would you vote for a president who said, well, we are going to infect some of our citizens with incurable diseases to see if new drugs can cure them? We are going to see how being up close and personable with a nuclear blast will affect a soldiers ability to fight? Think about it, this could be your son, daughter, sister or brother being affected, or being exposed to mortally high levels of radiation. Perhaps one of your parents was a “volunteer” for a government study? How would the long-term effects of the study affect your life, or your children’s lifes? Would you vote for this president or the members of Congress that endorse this behavior? I certainly would not, and I would hope you also would not.