Thoughts for the Day, July 21, 2025: See my first installment of Project 2026/2028
Death at Aid Distribution Sites
In the middle east, respect for the life of others who are different doesn’t seem to matter. I will never understand.
Per the NY Times, Palestinians trying to secure food were shot and killed in the Gaza Strip in two separate episodes over the weekend when Israeli forces opened fire on crowds.
On Saturday, the soldiers shot Palestinians near a food distribution site in Rafah, in southern Gaza. A day later, they fired at crowds who had gathered near a border crossing used by aid trucks to enter the enclave.
Palestinian health officials said that more than 60 people were killed in the episode on Sunday. On Saturday, near an aid distribution site run by American contractors and backed by Israel and the United States, at least 32 people were killed, according to local health officials.
Per the Wall Street Journal, this is the explanation as to why the shootings occurred. Israeli soldiers interviewed by the Journal said they have fired rifles, machine guns and even artillery when crowds veered off approved routes to GHF sites or took short cuts. Soldiers said shots are fired around crowds to ward them off, but also at times directly at people who move in their direction.
Israel’s military said it tries to avoid using gunfire and reviews each incident to learn from them to reduce harm.
One Israeli reservist said in an interview he saw soldiers firing toward Gazans carrying white flags who veered off an approved route in mid-June. “We have an unwritten rule that if you are worried and they get too close and you see that it could be something that puts you and your team at risk, you don’t take that risk,” he said.
He said soldiers warned people not to come closer, but they continued. Once the crowds passed what the soldiers considered a red line, the soldiers opened fire. They are told to fire warning shots in the air or to shoot at people’s knees, but mistakes happen, he said.
****************************************************************************************************
A diversion?
Per the NY Times, President Trump urged the Washington Commanders on Sunday to revert to their former name and threatened to derail a deal for the N.F.L. team to build a new stadium in Washington, D.C., if it didn’t submit to his demand.
On Sunday morning, as he played golf at his club in Washington, Mr. Trump posted a message on Truth Social pushing the team to reverse course.
“The Washington ‘Whatever’s’ should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team,” Mr. Trump wrote. In his posts, Mr. Trump also urged the Cleveland Guardians baseball team, which changed its name from the Cleveland Indians in 2021, to follow suit.
In one post, Mr. Trump claimed, without evidence, that there was “a big clamoring for this” and that “our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen.”
Trump is a master at creating a crisis that doesn’t exist in order to deflect attention from his problems, such as the Epstein files. See my Question of the Day
Who do you believe?
Per the Wall Street Journal, In April, Amazon said it would hold the line on prices. The Journal’s analysis of prices from e-commerce data firm Traject Data found that Amazon’s price rose an average of 5% on 1,200 of its cheapest household goods. Target’s price increases were slightly above 3%, while Walmart reduced their prices 2%. The divergent strategies show how major retailers are reshaping prices on popular products as uncertainty about tariffs drags on.
Amazon said the products tracked by the Journal weren’t representative of the company’s prices overall. “We have not seen the average prices of products offered in our store change up or down appreciably,” the company said in a statement. “Our commitment to offering low prices—not relative percentage changes—is what delivers the most value to our customers.”
Manufacturers of several of the products that became more expensive on Amazon say they haven’t raised the prices they charge retailers. Even domestically made goods, such as the “Made in U.S.A” Campbell’s soup, saw increases.
I might be wrong, but it appears Amazon is using tariffs as an excuse to raise prices, even though prices on the goods have not increased.
**********************************************************************************************************
Project 2026/2028
As I indicated last week, I have started “Project 2026/2028”, my version of Project 2025. Project 2026/2028 is not directed to any party. It is my thoughts on what I am looking for in anyone looking to get my vote. It will appear on a weekly basis on Monday’s. I will be writing about the following subjects, plus others as the project evolves.
· Candidates.
· Deficit
· Budget
· Taxes
· Constitution
· Executive Branch
· Legislative Branch
· Judicial Branch
· Immigration
· Defense
· Environment
· DEI/Welcoming
· Healthcare
· Education
· Energy
· Foreign Policy
· Research
· Infrastructure
· 2nd Amendment
I look forward to your comments and feedback. Here is the first installment.
Introduction
Prior to the 2024 elections, a group of high level and strategic thinkers published the 900 plus pages, Mandate for Leadership-the Conservative Promise. This document, otherwise known as Project 2025, is the gameplan that President Trump is implementing during his second term. Project 2025 is very detailed and outlines specific actions in a multitude of subjects and issues. The unsaid goal of Project 2025 is to strengthen the executive branch, guarantee a conservative majority in both legislative chambers, and to stack the courts with conservative judges.
Project 2025 pushes legal boundaries, and it rewrites the intent of the Constitution as established by our founding fathers. It also blurs the lines that separate church and state in the constitution and endorses the beliefs of white evangelical Christians at the expense of all other religions. It plays on the fears of white Americans becoming the minority to people of color.
Like it or not, it is a roadmap that is working for Trump and his MAGA followers.
My intent is not to duplicate Project 2025, but to put in writing my thoughts on what I want from any future politician who expects to gain my vote. It is party neutral, and not a plan for any party.
I believe what I want from those who wish to receive my vote, is reflective of most voters who feel they are not represented by either the Democrats or the Republicans and are tired of the ever-widening divide that is occurring in the country we love. My views tend to be rational, practical, reasonable, and middle of the road.
Project 2026/2028 will contain subject matters and issues that are important to me. I will do my best to keep my comments to 1-2 pages on each topic. The topics are presented in no order of importance.
I encourage comments and feedback, as this document will be evolving over time. I have used Chat GPT as a resource in helping me draft the document.
Section 1: The Characteristics of Politicians who will be Getting my Vote
In a democratic society, politicians are entrusted with the profound responsibility of representing the people, shaping laws, and safeguarding the public interest. The best politicians are not defined by charisma or ideology, but by their character and commitment to service. At a time of deep polarization and public cynicism, these ideals are not just aspirational, they are essential to rebuilding trust in the government and creating a democracy that truly serves all its people. The ideal politician is a public servant guided by principle, humility, and purpose. To meet the challenges of public office and build trust, the politicians I will be voting for in the future will embody the following characteristics:
1. Integrity
Above all, a politician must be honest and ethical. Integrity means telling the truth even when it’s difficult, making decisions transparently, and honoring commitments. Integrity is the foundation of democracy. It builds public trust and reinforces the legitimacy of democratic institutions.
2. A Strong Moral Compass
I will be voting for candidates who have a strong moral compass. A moral compass that combines integrity, empathy, respect for the rule of law, respect for the Constitution, and knowing right from wrong. I want a politician who tells the truth all the time and does not hide behind lawyers, party spokespersons, and others. I want a politician who is transparent even when their party leaders are not. I want a politician who knows right from wrong and acts accordingly.
3. Empathy
An effective politician understands and respects the experiences of others, unconditionally. Different doesn’t mean wrong. Empathy allows leaders to connect with diverse communities, craft inclusive policies, and lead with compassion. Empathy creates better decisions and better policies. Empathy does not mean all inclusive. The politician I will be voting for understands that empathy is an important pillar of our democracy and should never be construed as a weakness. The politician I will be voting for will be willing to reach across the aisle and party lines to develop bi-partisan solutions.
4. Accountability
The politician who gets my vote will take responsibility for their actions, listen to constituents, and is willing to admit mistakes. They will be responsible and accountable to all their constituents, not just whose party they represent. They be accessible, open to feedback, and transparent in decision-making.
5. Courage
Leadership often requires standing up for what is right, even in the face of opposition. Whether challenging party lines or resisting special interests, a courageous politician acts in the long-term interest of the public, not short-term popularity. Courage means you are willing to be the best for the world even if it goes against the popular or party line.
6. Competence and Curiosity
I will be voting for someone who is informed, prepared, and committed to lifelong learning. They seek expert advice which represents all sides of an issue. They understand policy impacts overall and on subgroups. I want someone who adapts to changing circumstances with intellectual humility. I want someone who recognizes that they are not experts on everything, and their opinions are not always correct. I want someone who understands that not knowing is not a weakness.
7. Vision
Beyond solving today’s problems, great leaders offer a hopeful and strategic vision for the future. They inspire collaboration and build consensus around goals that uplift communities and advance the common good. Their vision is based on being the best for the common good and not for their own self-interests.
8. Respect for Democracy and Rule of Law
An ideal politician respects institutions, protects the Constitution, and upholds democratic norms. They support fair elections, civil liberties, and the peaceful transfer of power—regardless of personal or political outcome. They respect the law. They respect the Constitution. They respect the vision of the founding fathers. They respect those who are sworn to carry out the law. Most of all they honor their oath of office.
9. Loyal to the Constitution and Country
I will be voting for candidates who are loyal to the Constitution and the country above and beyond their party and party leadership. I am looking for candidates who will push back on party leaders who put partisan politics above the Constitution and the county. I am looking for candidates who will put the Constitution and the country above special interest groups and donors. I want a politician who will not be intimidated by party leadership and threats of funding withdrawal. I am looking for a politician who cannot be bought.
I will be using these nine points to evaluate candidates. These categories will be as important as a candidate’s stance on issues. I wish I had developed these categories much earlier in my life. As I look back now, there are some people that I voted for, who would not have received my vote had I been comparing them to the above nine characteristics.
Quote of the Day: “Were you recently electrocuted?” The pigeon to the squirrel in the Direct TV commercial. I can so relate.
Orchid of the Day: Tarik Skubal of the Detroit Tigers, Skubal did what an ace needs to do when his team is in the middle of a 6-game losing streak. He pitched a gem last night against the Texas Rangers, giving up four hits while striking out 11 and walking none over 6 and 2/3 innings while giving up only one run (which scored on a wild pitch by Tyler Holton who came in to relief Skubal) as the Tigers won 2-1. With the win the Tigers are the first team in the MLB with 60 wins as they still have the best record in baseball.
A second Orchid of the Day: Golfer Scottie Scheffler won The Open (British Open to us Americans) by four shots with a four-day total of 17 under par. At age 29, Scheffler has now won four majors. Scheffler showed once again why he has been the number one player in golf for the last three years. His ability to stay focused and eliminate distractions over a four-hour round of golf is above and beyond any of his competitors.
Onion of the Day: No onion on a day I give out two orchids.
Question of the Day: Did you wake up this morning thinking the Washington Commanders and the Cleveland Guardians should revert to their old names of the Redskins and Indians? It appears the president did.
Lyrics of the Day: You’re the cutest thing that I ever did see / I really love your peaches, wanna shake your tree / Lovey dovey, lovey dovey, lovey dovey all the time.
If you think you know the lyrics send me your answer in the comments section of the blog.
Answer to Lyrics of the Day for July 16: Love the One you are With, Stephen Stills
Video of the Day: These plays happened in the Tiger’s game on Friday on consecutive batters. Although both plays went against the Tigers, the Tigers were able to get out of the inning without Texas scoring. I don’t agree with either of the call, however, the catch/no catch by left fielder Riley Green is nearly impossible to get right in real time. Replay officials let the call stand because there was not enough evidence to overturn it, even though I think it was a clean catch because the majority of the ball was in the webbing even though a small portion touched the ground.
The second call of the runner being out of the base path is left to the interpretation of the umpire on what the basepath is and whether a tag attempt was made. Because the Tigers had used up their replay challenge on the previous play, there was no replay on this call. However, the umpire should have consulted the first base umpire or the home plate umpire to see if they had anything different. In my opinion, Baez made a tag attempt, and the runner adjusted his established basepath to avoid Baez tag. I would have called the runner out. To me it was an easy call.
Feel free to share my blog with others. To receive the blog in your email, please use the subscribe button or send an email to me at thomasdbiggs@gmail.com and I will start the process for you.
Chief Wahoo forever
I am surprised you did not list Transparrancy. I will never call either Washington nor Cleveland by those woke names. Always has,is and will be the Skins and Indians.