Farms Golf Club Handles "Lefty" Just Right

There was some very interesting news out of the world of sports yesterday, involving the very famous professional golfer Phil "Lefty" Mickelson. Even readers who are not interested in sports have probably heard of him. First of all, he's mega-MAGA, and has often played golf with Donald Trump. Second, until recently, Mickelson was the face of the Saudi-backed LIV golf (about which we will have an item next week, by the way). Third, he got busted for insider trading, a habit he might have developed because the hundreds of millions of dollars he made as a golfer were not enough to cover his gambling debts.

That said, this item is not about any of those things. No, it's about Mickelson's behavior at his home golf course, The Farms Golf Club in Rancho Santa Fe, CA. As you might imagine, for a golf club, it's a big feather in the cap to have one of the world's two or three most famous golfers as a member. So, The Farms Golf Club put Mickelson's name and picture on its website, and in its various promotional materials, and they had a large, framed image of him near the entrance to the Club.

The Club does not have any of those things anymore, however. A female staffer at the facility made a complaint of "inappropriate physical contact" on the part of the golfer. The management investigated, concluded that she was telling the truth, and immediately terminated Mickelson's membership. They removed his picture from the lobby and from the website, and told the golfer in no uncertain terms that if he ever set foot on the property again, he would be arrested. There were some stories yesterday that said Mickelson was in the middle of a round of golf when he was advised of the ruling, and that he was literally ejected mid-round. We cannot tell for sure if these stories are accurate, or are taking some dramatic liberties.

In any case, we pondered making this news into this week's "This Week in Freudenfreude," but then we decided to do something a bit more with it, based on two e-mails we got in the questions mailbag recently. The first of those comes from reader N.W. in Marietta, GA. We were going to answer this question on Saturday, but instead we will share, and answer, it now:

I've been fascinated about the Graham Platner scandals and how Mainers seem to not be fazed at all. Is this a sign that in a post-Trump world, political scandals are all but done being a big deal? Have Democrats decided that character doesn't matter anymore, either?

The second e-mail we got, we're not going to quote directly, because we're going to disagree with it, and we don't want to pick on anyone by name. But the thrust was that these sleazy male politicians, the ones who commit what might be called "penis offenses," are all the same.

Let us start by pushing back against that sentiment. We will do so by identifying three tiers of bad behavior, starting with the worst:

Swalwell Tier: Former representative Eric Swalwell is accused of actual acts of sexual violence, including rape. He is also accused of making inappropriate advances to female staffers, which is rape-adjacent behavior, as it's also a form of using power to gain sexual satisfaction (political/economic power, rather than physical power). All of these things are immoral and unethical, and most or all of them are illegal, due to the lack of consent. This is the tier that Phil Mickelson is apparently in, too.

Paxton Tier: Texas AG and wannabe U.S. Senator Ken Paxton's problematic behavior, at least in the sexual arena, is that he cheated on his wife, left, right and sideways. As we have written previously, this is largely between Mr. and (the-soon-to-be-former) Mrs. Paxton. There has been no suggestion that anyone involved did not give consent, and the main injured party here is the cheated-upon wife. It's even possible she's not really injured; if they had an open marriage or other such arrangement, then it's not really politically possible for them to reveal that openly.

The reason that Paxton's behavior is problematic is not the sexual part, per se. It's that he's held himself out to be some sort of model Christian, and the frequent and apparently unrepentant un-Biblical behavior lays bare the hypocrisy of that image. Further, even if we assume that Paxton believes he has been forgiven, by both his wife and his god, his lack of regard for the "rules" in his marriage also reminds us of his lack of regard for the "rules" in other areas of life, like say the rules about insider trading.

Platner Tier: This is a tricky one but, in the end, the only things that are pretty much confirmed are that Graham Platner was an emotionally unstable and sometimes unpleasant boyfriend, and that he was emotionally unfaithful by virtue of the sexual text messages he sent to women that were not his wife.

There are also a whole bunch of complicating factors here. It is true that Platner has been accused of physical abuse, but only by one woman, and that woman is a Republican operative who potentially has an agenda. Doesn't necessarily mean she's lying, but it might be instructive that all of the other women who have been involved with Platner, even the ones who said otherwise critical things about him, said he never laid a hand on them. On top of that, there are some potentially mitigating factors, most obviously that he was a combat veteran who was dealing with PTSD. It is also meaningful that Platner's wife, the one who was harmed by the sexting, has forgiven him. Finally, in contrast to Swalwell, Mickelson and Paxton, Platner has shown actual contrition, has promised to do better, and has taken steps to try to fix what was wrong with him.

Please do not read those last two paragraphs as a defense of Platner; readers can reach their own conclusions on how wicked he may, or may not, be. The point is that when it comes to "penis offenses," there are very different levels of guilt, and no one-size-fits-all basis for making assessments.

It is clear, at this point, that in American culture, for far, far too long, most sexual misdeeds by men were nearly all considered to be unworthy of attention, and were ignored or swept under the rug. Then, at the height of #MeToo, the pendulum swung aggressively in the other direction, and nearly any accusation of sexual misdeeds was career-ending. Some people were justly "canceled" during that time—e.g., Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and Bill Cosby. For others, and Al Franken leaps to mind here, the punishment probably did not fit the crime. And then, we got reminders that sometimes, a woman might use grandiose claims, poorly supported with evidence, to lash out at a man perceived as an enemy. Tara Reade's attacks on Joe Biden come to mind here.

What it amounts to is that the pendulum, if we may continue to use that metaphor, is now finding its level. It cannot go back to where it was, but if it swings too far in the other direction, that is not justice either. We do not know what will happen with Graham Platner, but we do think there's a compelling argument for looking at his history, and deciding that it's not disqualifying.

At the same time, it is clear that, no matter how much Trump has numbed our collective senses, we are not in the post-scandal era. There is no defense for Eric Swalwell, who very clearly crossed a bright-red line, several times. There is no defense of Phil Mickelson, who also very clearly crossed a bright-red line, even if we don't quite know which one. And what happened to them? They paid the price for their behavior, and with lightning speed.

Finally, some Republicans are already starting to make the argument "Well, if you're going to support Graham Platner, how can you criticize Donald Trump?" Please don't fall victim to such obvious gaslighting. Trump was found, in open court, to have committed sexual assault against E. Jean Carroll. The only reason that the word "rape" was not used in the actual ruling was because of the wonky way New York law is written. Trump is also an adulterer, one who sometimes behaved so under particularly egregious circumstances (e.g., while his wife was breastfeeding his child), and one who broke the law to try to cover up his behavior. And all of this is before we talk about the as-yet-unproven-in-court allegations that Trump raped his first wife, that he raped at least one underage girl, and that he was party to... who knows what, as regards Jeffrey Epstein. When it comes to sexual misconduct, Donald Trump and Graham Platner aren't in the same ZIP code. They aren't even in the same city, state, or country.

We'll have one last set of Platner letters from readers on Tuesday of next week. But we thought that for today, this is what we should do with our Platner coverage.

Oh, and there's been a new poll of the race, from The Public Sentiment Institute, and it has it as a statistical dead heat, with Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) at 43.7%, Platner at 43.1% and 13.2% undecided. Interestingly, and we have no idea what to do with this information, the pollster then asked this question:

Over the last week, rumors have surfaced that Graham Platner sexually assaulted multiple women in the past. Platner even sent one text to a former girlfriend reading 'I would rape them to show them that I'm dominant.' However, Planter's [sic] wife has defended him against these accusations. Knowing this, who would you vote for in the 2026 senate race?

Again, it's actually only one woman who has made that charge, not multiple. In any event, in the responses to that question, Platner's numbers... got better. Specifically, 48.2% of respondents said they would support him, 40.1% said they'd support Collins, and 11.7% were undecided. Again, hard to know what to make of that. But, in any case, it's clear that Maine voters are going to give him a chance to win them over, and that the recent revelations are not, by themselves, disqualifying. (Z)

In Congress: Johnson Can't Pull a Rabbit Out of His Hat

Let's start this item by taking a look at our list of Congressional retirements, and whittling that down to the Republican members who are trying for a promotion (or, at least, a different job than the one they already have). Here's that list:

Candidate	Running For	Result
Sen. Tommy Tuberville	Governor, Alabama	Advanced to general
Rep. David Schweikert	Governor, Arizona	Pending
Rep. Andy Biggs	Governor, Arizona	Pending
Rep. Byron Donalds	Governor, Florida	Pending
Rep. Randy Feenstra	Governor, Iowa	Defeated in primary
Rep. John James	Governor, Michigan	Pending
Rep. Ralph Norman	Governor, South Carolina	Defeated in primary
Rep. Nancy Mace	Governor, South Carolina	Defeated in primary
Rep. Dusty Johnson	Governor, South Dakota	Defeated in primary
Sen. Marsha Blackburn	Governor, Tennessee	Pending
Rep. John Rose	Governor, Tennessee	Pending
Rep. Tom Tiffany	Governor, Wisconsin	Pending
Rep. Mike Collins	U.S. Senator, Georgia	Advanced to runoff
Rep. Buddy Carter	U.S. Senator, Georgia	Advanced to runoff
Rep. Ashley Hinson	U.S. Senator, Iowa	Advanced to general
Rep. Andy Barr	U.S. Senator, Kentucky	Advanced to general
Rep. Julia Letlow	U.S. Senator, Louisiana	Advanced to runoff
Rep. Kevin Hern	U.S. Senator, Oklahoma	Pending
Rep. Barry Moore	U.S. Senator, Tennessee	Pending
Rep. Wesley Hunt	U.S. Senator, Texas	Defeated in primary
Rep. Harriet Hageman	U.S. Senator, Wyoming	Pending
Rep. Chip Roy	Attorney General, Texas	Defeated in primary

By and large, everyone here voted with Donald Trump on nearly every vote (though Mace, of course, voted against him on the fateful Epstein files vote.) And among the dozen of them who have already faced primary voters, three made it to the general, three more have a runoff coming up, and six have gone down to defeat. Put another way, fully half of them couldn't even make it past the primary stage.

Meanwhile, let us also consider the fates of some folks who tried to be Trump loyalists, and who wanted to keep their current jobs, but who were run out of town on a rail. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) retired "voluntarily." Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and John Cornyn (R-TX) retired un-voluntarily. Same for Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX).

The point here is that fealty to Donald Trump has not been great for members' career prospects. In some places, hugging Trump close and hoping there isn't a challenge from the right is probably the best and only strategy, but in swingier districts and states, Republican members are going to think long and hard about whether there might be some wisdom in putting some distance between them and a president who is very unpopular.

We write all of this as prelude to the news that there was something of a rebellion on the Hill yesterday. There are two, related, points of contention. The first is that the members overwhelmingly do not want Bill Pulte to serve as DNI, even on an interim basis. The second is that Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act expires tonight, and until it is renewed, then the U.S. government will be limited in the intelligence about foreigners that it can collect. Or, at least, it will be limited in the intelligence it can collect legally.

The White House gave the members some of what they want, nominating U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton to be the permanent DNI. Clayton is yet another former Trump lawyer, has no particular experience in intelligence, and has certainly played along with some of Trump's most conspiratorial thoughts. On the other hand, he's got an impressive résumé, he's done good work at SDNY, and members on both side of the aisle say they like his chances of confirmation.

The problem with the Clayton nomination is twofold. First, Trump made it after the House had recessed for the rest of the week, and through next week. This has some members suspecting he did that deliberately, so that the job would remain open for at least a couple of weeks. Second, Trump refuses to back off on Pulte serving as interim during that time. The general impression this all gives is that Trump wants to find a way to give Pulte time to wreak some havoc, with FISA still in place, before a permanent DNI takes over.

And so, as the White House was dragging its feet, the House took a vote on a temporary extension to FISA. And the measure failed, 198-218, with 7 Democrats voting for and 19 Republicans voting against. And that's actually a bigger fail than it seems, because Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) used the fast-track process that requires a two-thirds majority for passage. Johnson blamed the Democrats for playing partisan games and yadda, yadda, yadda, but again, 19 Republicans crossed the aisle. And now, the House won't be back in Washington until June 23.

There's no way to know, at the moment, if this is just an isolated incident, or if stormy weather is ahead when it comes to Trump and the Republicans on the Hill. What we can say, however, is that there are certainly a few clouds on the horizon. To start, given the various setbacks he's dealing with right now, Trump is reportedly furious with everyone right now, and is lashing out on a regular basis. Particularly in his doghouse: congressional Republicans, whom he blames for the Epstein files, the ballroom money, the Pulte rebellion, the pushback on the Iran War, and a host of other things.

Meanwhile, it was reported this week that Social Security is in critical condition, and that the trust fund is now expected to run out in 2032, if steps are not taken to shore it up. Many Republicans are scared witless of facing voters in November, and saying, "Sorry! Couldn't do anything." On the other hand, Johnson went on a radio talk show yesterday and said that this is a good opportunity to finally cut some of this wasteful social spending. That's an unpopular position, to say the least.

There's also the possibility of a third reconciliation bill, which Trump wants to use to lavish money on the troops. This week, Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made clear that it's not happening, as far as they are concerned. "I would just suggest that it is taking a terrible risk and creates instability when you're counting on a third reconciliation bill for the bulk of the money rather than doing base funding through the defense appropriations bill," said Collins, while McConnell added: "I think it's safe to conclude there will not be another reconciliation bill, so it's really not an option."

So, there are a few friction points between the White House and the Congress already cued up. Meanwhile, the Democrats are sitting back and licking their chops. They've already started work on H.R. 1, which is the symbolic "this is what we'll do if we get control of Congress" bill that serves as something of a party platform in midterm years. And the donkeys are getting bullish about the Senate; indeed, Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball just moved three races in the Democrats' direction: North Carolina is now "leans Democratic," while Alaska and Ohio are now both "toss up."

What it all means is that there could be some serious fireworks in D.C., well before the July 4 holiday in 3 weeks. It may make this weekend's White House cage match look like child's play. (Z)

Legal Bytes: You Can't Out Fox a Federal Judge, Especially if You Are a Moron

Again, we try to keep up with the huge volume of (usually adverse) court decisions involving the Trump administration.

Life Takes Visas: U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin has struck down Donald Trump's $100,000 fee for H1-B visa applicants. The judge labeled it a tax that violated the separation of powers and intruded on Congressional authority to levy taxes. The Supreme Court's recent decision blocking Trump's tariffs was part of the basis for the judge's ruling.

Our Take: A similar suit by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce failed in D.C., so it will be interesting to see how the courts of appeal handle this. But given how disruptive to business, particularly tech companies, this policy has been, this could also be an excuse for Trump to back down. He's already quietly reversed his proposal to require all green card applicants to wait out the process in their home countries, no matter how long they've lived in the U.S. Stephen Miller wants anyone with skin darker than his (which is pretty much everyone, other than his fellow vampires) to be deported, but big business also has Trump's ear and when his policies hurt their bottom line, he'll sometimes listen and change course.

---

Trans Fix: U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy in Rhode Island has referred Justice Department lawyers for possible discipline after blocking their attempts to serve subpoenas on local hospitals seeking minors' medical records who received transgender care. The judge, who was appointed by Trump in 2019, did not mince words in her order. She said the subpoena was issued "for an improper purpose and in bad faith." She also said the DoJ lawyers lied under oath and withheld information. She accused the lawyers of abusing their power and the public's trust and that the "DOJ has proven unworthy of this trust at every point in this case."

Our Take: Where have we heard this before? The Trump DoJ lawyers just can't seem to do anything in an honest and ethical manner, to the point that seemingly every federal court that has been assigned one of their cases has had to issue one of these scolding decisions. It's good to see at least one judge refer them to disciplinary proceedings. In fact, the Rhode Island federal judiciary has now taken up the matter and will determine the appropriate action. If sanctions or other discipline is imposed, it will be another black mark for this DoJ and could represent the next step in federal judges' escalating efforts to hold prosecutors accountable for their misdeeds.

---

Oathbound: And speaking of the loss of the trust in the DoJ, Judge Amit Mehta, the judge overseeing Stewart Rhodes' and the Oathkeepers' criminal cases, won't rubber stamp the Department's request to vacate their convictions. He has asked for more information from the DoJ. The judge said that the government offered only a conclusory statement, which is insufficient for him to determine if the dismissal is in the public interest and is not an abuse of prosecutorial discretion. The judge gave them a deadline of June 5, but the government has asked for more time to come up with some reasons for their request.

Our Take: One would think that they would know why they're asking the court to vacate convictions before they file the request, but in this DoJ, it's do the president's bidding first and ask questions later. This will not endear them to Mehta or help convince him that the request is in the public's best interest. It will be interesting to see what they come up with. "Trump told me to" is probably not going to cut it.

---

Boutros, Golly!: The U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, Andrew Boutros, continues to plumb new depths of incompetence. He revealed in a court filing that he, himself, had a talking to with the grand jury and tried to intimidate them "remind the grand jurors of their obligations under the law and the role they play in our constitutional form of government." This was after several members of the grand jury expressed some, shall we say, skepticism about the charges. According to the just-released transcripts, one grand juror asked if prosecutors had "unlimited tries" and said, "I heard this case like last week and I thought it was a crock of (expletive) then and I still think it is." Sheri Mecklenburg, the Assistant U.S. Attorney, improperly excused this grand juror and secured indictments on the third try.

Our Take: Yikes—these guys continue to find new ways to put themselves and their law licenses at risk. What are they possibly getting out of this that can make it worth it to sacrifice their reputations and their careers? The motivation escapes us. At the very least, the judge will hit these prosecutors with sanctions, including having to pay the defendants' legal fees. But she could go further and entertain a motion for vindictive and selective prosecution, which, if successful, could result in greater sanctions, including contempt of court or referral for disciplinary proceedings. But more importantly, as we've said before, putting politics first jeopardizes the entire system and puts legitimate criminal cases at risk (assuming they still prosecute those).

---

Oh, SNAP!: Last year, the Trump administration imposed draconian new requirements and red tape before states could access SNAP funding. As a result, millions of people have been cut off from the benefits. Twenty states sued, saying that the conditions, some of which related to "fair athletic opportunities," were unlawful and unconstitutional. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun in Boston issued a preliminary injunction blocking the new conditions.

Our Take: The big ugly tax break bill imposed new requirements as an offset to the billionaire tax cuts. Pushing people off SNAP or making it harder to receive benefits was one of the goals of this red tape. This court order is certainly good news for people who rely on these programs. But even though these conditions are on hold for now, it will be difficult to re-sign people who were kicked off and a lot of people will slip through the cracks. The consequences of Trump's tax cuts for rich folks are starting to be felt, which will only add to his unpopularity and incentivize voters to hand the keys to Congress to Democrats in November.

That's 0-for-5, by our count. So much winning! (L)

Never Forget: Short Stories, Part II

Once again, a collection of short accounts of wartime service:

J.A. in Austin, TX: Both of my grandfathers served during World War II—my maternal grandfather in the Army, my paternal grandfather in the Navy—and while neither saw combat, both were deployed away from their families during their service. My maternal grandfather's deployment was while my grandmother was pregnant with my mom. He was on guard duty when a telegram arrived, announcing the birth of my mother. Unfortunately, though, the telegram was garbled. It read: "Congratulations! Wou are the father of 7 8 oz. baby girls!" As it turns out, my mother was just ONE 7 lb. 8 oz. baby girl.

J.W. in North Canton, OH: My grandfather had a decidedly different role in World War II. Due to a medical condition (and lack of treatment options at the time), his spine was fused from the base of his skull to his tail bone. His mobility was severely limited. This disqualified him from a combat role, but he was determined to serve. He was stationed stateside during the war and served as a guard at Fort Knox protecting the majority of our country's gold reserves. During this time, Fort Knox also protected some of our country's most important symbols including the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

After the war, he started a company distributing industrial products, but eventually morphed the company into a small, but world-class manufacturer. I was so lucky to have the privilege to work with him for almost 15 years prior to his death, and am honored to continue his legacy as the third-generation owner of the business. In his later years, he marveled at how the business had grown and the type of work we took on. He toiled day and night for his family as did so many of the greatest generation. Family, country, business and kindness are his legacy.

As a side note, readers may be interested to know that they can request the military service records of their loved ones here.

J.G. in Star Prairie, WI: My father was the youngest of four brothers, three of whom served in World War II. My uncle Larry served stateside, while my Uncle Howie served on the USS Ward, a World War I-era destroyer. The Ward was on routine patrol outside Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, when a miniature submarine was spotted at 5:00 a.m. The Ward sank the sub and radioed in a report, but the general alarm was not raised. He was on deck later in the war when the Ward was sunk by a kamikaze, jumping into the sea from the rail. He told me they had just offloaded some Marines onto a Pacific island. He was an amateur boxer and fought many organized bouts on the deck of the Ward with other sailors.

My father attended Officer Training School in World War II and became a 1st Lieutenant. He was a drummer in a swing band in high school, so the Army offered to send him through the South to play at bond-drive dances. He told the Army he wanted to stay in the infantry. While in Texas, he was in a "mock up training town" when a young soldier mistook him for a life size mannequin and shot him through the forearm—so ended his drumming career. He left the Army, but in 1950 while in his last year of law school, was called back into the Army under the "inactive officer reserve program." He was sent to Korea and assigned a platoon of Black soldiers. He would talk about the war very rarely. One story he told me was when he lost two soldiers when the enemy crawled into their foxhole at night. His face revealed profound sadness when he recalled that day. He received the Bronze Star for leading a fighting retreat while bringing back wounded. That war affected him greatly. He practiced law in St. Paul, MN, for over 40 years and died in 2013.

J.A. in Forest, VA: I never met my cousin Roy Nilsen. He and his twin brother Walter and their older sisters were half second cousins to my mother. The families were from Norway; Roy and Walter were the first in their family to be born in the United States. My mother's family lived near the Nilsens in Brooklyn, NY, so they saw a lot of each other; Mom was about 5 years younger than the twins.

Roy and Walter were 18 years old when they enlisted in the Coast Guard in 1942. Originally they served aboard the same ship, but one of them (I don't remember if I ever knew which) contracted appendicitis and was moved to a hospital on shore for treatment, so the twins were split up (this happened to brothers throughout the services after the five Sullivan brothers were lost on the light cruiser Juneau in late 1942). By 1943, Roy was serving on the Coast Guard cutter Escanaba, escorting convoys along the east coast to Greenland.

The Escanaba had been built in the early 1930s for service on the Great Lakes, then was shifted from its home port of Grand Haven, MI, to the North Atlantic when the war began. In February 1943, the Escanaba rescued passengers from the torpedoed troop ship SS Dorchester; if you're familiar with the story of the four chaplins who gave their lifejackets to other men, that happened on the Dorchester. Most on the Dorchester died, but the crew of the Escanaba pulled 133 men from the freezing water; for the first time ever, rescue divers wearing survival suits went into the sea to rescue men too far gone to reach for lifelines.

The Escanaba was escorting a convoy of ships through the Labrador Sea from Greenland to St. John's, Newfoundland, when it exploded at 0510 on June 13, 1943. No torpedoes were seen and no U-boats claimed a sinking; the most likely cause was that the ship struck a floating mine. Of 105 officers and men, there were only two survivors, both thought dead when they were pulled from the icy sea. Most of the crew, including 19-year-old Seaman First Class Roy Nilsen, went to the bottom with their ship. His name can be found on the East Coast Memorial at Battery Park, New York City. The city of Grand Haven still holds an annual memorial service for the crew of their lost ship. Walter Nilsen outlived his brother by 60 years and I knew him quite well.

I seem to remember that when the Never Forget items ran last year, one writer mentioned that people really aren't gone so long as there's someone who remembers them. My mother passed away about 3 years ago, outliving her cousin Roy by more than 80 years. She was the last living person who could remember Roy Nilsen, knew what he looked like, the sound of his voice, the subtle differences between the twins. With her passing, the living memory of Roy Nilsen passed as well.

E.S. in Arlington, MA: My dad left his working-class home in San Francisco at 14, and by the time he was 19, he had traveled across the country and back, but he didn't have any idea of what to do next. So he enlisted in the army and got sent to Korea.

My dad was a wonderful man but he was disorganized, clumsy and absent-minded. Even the Army could figure out that giving him a gun was a bad idea. So he spent the war in a freight train, bringing urine samples from hundreds of soldiers back from the front to a laboratory where they could be tested for sexually transmitted diseases (called "VD" at that time). I don't know why the urine samples needed a soldier to escort them to the laboratory but perhaps there was a reason.

My dad eventually got transferred to Japan, where my mom (whom he had married the night before shipping out) joined him. And by the time he was discharged, he had figured out what he wanted to do with his life. He used the G.I. Bill to get his Bachelors at San Francisco State, then again to get his Masters and Doctorate in Political Science at Claremont. He went on to become a full professor at American University, and when he died in 2008, he had just finished another stint in school, getting his Masters in Social Work.

He did a very small but essential job for the country and then the country, through the G.I. Bill, did a great deal for him!

K.P. in Salem, OR: This perhaps is a bit different than the type of story you are looking for. It doesn't directly describe an act of heroism or death, but it does serve as a reminder to me of how lucky I am to even exist.

My father turned 18 in February of 1945. He was classified as 4F due to being legally blind without eyeglasses, yet was convinced he would be drafted anyway. So, he decided to enlist. The Navy turned him down but the Army didn't, so he signed up with them and was trained as a radioman who would be working behind the front lines. After basic training and Army radio operator school he found himself on a troop transport ship in San Diego Harbor. While they were waiting to shove off there was a smattering of small talk, which abruptly turned to silence as the ship's engines revved up moving the ship out into the harbor. As he looked around, the fact that half the guys would likely never make it back to the States became absolutely real.

A few hundred yards out, the ship's engines cut and the captain announced they had been ordered back to shore, where they would await further orders. Nobody thought much about it and assumed the move was an attempt to relieve some of the ship congestion in the harbor. After an hour or so, the captain made another announcement. Something along the lines of "Gentlemen, I have been asked to inform you that the Japanese have surren..." Nobody heard the rest of the announcement, and nobody really cared, since at this point, even if they ended up in Japan, they very likely would return and have the opportunity to get on with their lives.

Thanks to all of you. (Z)

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: I've Got a Mule, Her Name Is Sal

Fifteen miles on the Erie Canal.

We gave two hints as to last week's headline theme: (1) "we'll tell you that you're not on the lookout for just ONE friend of Dorothy, but for THREE friends of Dorothy" and (2) "the folks in question ostensibly lived in Miami, but the house that was always shown is actually about a mile from where (Z) lives in Los Angeles."

And here is the solution, courtesy of reader T.T in Vincennes, IN:

My wife is a big Golden Girls fan. The "Tom, Dick, and Harry" headline threw me, but they all seem to be Golden Girls Characters.

• In Congress: Looks Like Wannabe AG Blanche Is Already in Trouble—Blanche Devereaux
• Legal Matters: Tom, Dick and Even Harry Might Be Able to Get Away with This, but Not John Bolton—Harry Weston (Doctor that appeared on the show and had a spinoff; Empty Nest)
• The Sporting Life: What Would George (Washington) Do?—George Devereaux (Blanche's husband)
• The Golden State: Vote Counters Have Miles to Go before They Sleep—Miles Webber (Rose's boyfriend)
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: The N.I.S. Never Did Find Dorothy—Dorothy Zbornak
• This Week in Schadenfreude: So Much for the Hagia Sophia de Trump—Sophia Petrillo
• This Week in Freudenfreude: Instead of Raging, Morello Rose to the Occasion—Rose Nylund

Couldn't work in Max or Salvadore/Sal anywhere?

We specifically saved "Sal" for the headline of this item. And, of course, Dorothy's three friends—who live with her in Miami—are Rose, Blanche and Sophia.

Here are the first 60 readers to get it right:

B.M. in Chico, CA G.M.K. in Mishawaka, IN R.S. in Landing, NJ J.F. in Fayetteville, NC K.G.W. in Lafayette, IN B.A. in Edmond, OK P.Q. in Metuchen, NJ S.K. in Ardmore, PA K.R. in Austin, TX R.P. in Brooklyn, NY B.R. in Arlington, MA G.M. in Chevy Chase, MD M.K. in Long Branch, NJ M.Z. in Sharon, MA C.B. in Lakeville, MN A.W. in Brooklyn, NY E.J. in Homewood, AL R.E. in Birmingham, AL R.S. in Milan, OH M.W. in Altea, Spain M.B. in Albany, NY D.D. in Bucks County, PA D.D. in Highland Park, IL A.D. in Vass, NC D.E. in High Springs, FL E.S. in Providence, RI M.H. in Ottawa, ON, Canada D.P. in Mt. Rainier, MD D.L. in Springfield, IL D.E. in Ann Arbor, MI

M.S. in Canton, NY H.B. in Santiago, Chile P.R. in Havertown, PA G.W. in Avon, CT J.E. in Gilbertsville, PA J.R. in Austin, TX R.N. in Cleveland, OH M.L. in Simpsonville, SC J.N. in Zionsville, IN A.F. in Minneapolis, MN J.B. in Chicago, IL K.F. in Berea, KY B.F. in Madison, WI A.T. in Bloomington, IN E.W. in Silver Spring, MD W.L. in Springfield, MO J.B. in Chicago, IL C.D.R. in Alexandria, VA P.H. in Ft. Lauderdale, FL E.W. in Skaneateles, NY H.H. in Fort Lauderdale, FL P.A. in Redwood City, CA J.T. in San Diego, CA A.B.W. in New Haven, CT S.I. in Minneapolis, MN L.D. in Lexington, MA M.K. in Seattle, WA N.G. in Shrewsbury, MA D.B. in Pittsboro, NC W.R.S. in Tucson, AZ

The 60th correct response was received at 7:17 a.m. PT on Friday.

For this week's theme, it relies on one word per headline, and it's in the category Sports. For a hint, we'll say that it's a tricky one, and this headline is subtle. Well, to be precise, it's Suttles. Also, the item on sexual misconduct and the one on soldiers' stories are not part of it.

If you have a guess, send it to comments@electoral-vote.com with subject line "June 12 Headlines." (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: And Their Singles Ads Are Probably People Trying to Catfish You

Other than the legitimate journalists who are caught up in a mess that is not their fault, it's hard not to root against The Washington Post these days, given its editorial spinelessness and its plutocratic owner.

And now, there's a new reason to dislike the paper (and its owner). Everyone knows that hundreds of thousands of subscribers jumped ship thanks to the Post's new editorial policy. And the management decided to reward those stalwarts who remained by... exploiting them to the hilt, aided by algorithms and AI. The newspaper's website asked people to agree to cookies and other data collection activities, promising them that would make for a better experience. Then, the Post crunched that information, and used it to calculate the maximum subscription price they could extract from each user. If you visited the website multiple times per day, read a lot of reviews of fancy restaurants, clicked on stories about the newest vehicle made by BMW, enjoyed columns about the stock market, etc., then the paper would give you a subscription price fit for a king. This approach is generally known as surveillance pricing.

The reason that this is getting attention right now is that the Post has been sued by D.C. resident Chelsea Blink, who is trying to get the newspaper's current and past subscribers recognized as a class. The damages could, according to one calculation, reach into the billions of dollars.

This suit has a long, long, long way to go before bearing any fruit (if it ever does). And even then, the payout probably won't be in the billions of dollars. However, there are a lot of worse things in this world than Jeff Bezos losing at least a little of all that coin in his bank account. And it's also nice when the shady practices of a business are exposed to a little sunlight. (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: This Should Goose the Mexican Economy

Mexico has something called the National Fund for Agricultural, Rural, Forestry, and Fisheries Development (FND); it's a program that allows entrepreneurial Mexican farmers to apply for loans to help get their farms up and running. However, quite a few folks have been exploited by third parties, and had their names used to apply for loans they did not receive. Add in the compounded interest, and the debts have become unpayable.

This week, President Claudia Sheinbaum announced that her administration would take action. And so, the debts of about 50,000 farmers will either be erased entirely or reduced substantially. It is expected that 99.5% of FND debtors will be free and clear in short order.

Sheinbaum's primary motivation, by all indications, was humanitarian. However, there is also something in it for the government. Many people who were trying to deal with their debts ended up entangled with, and targeted by, shady lawyers, which in turn clogged up courts. Others who were trying to deal with their debts turned to means of questionable legality, fueling corruption networks. So, the money the Mexican government is using to defray the debts will be recouped in reduced expenses for law enforcement and the judiciary.

If only the leaders of certain much wealthier countries could appreciate the value of humanitarian assistance, not to mention that the second-order effects of such assistance often serve to cover the first-order financial costs. In any case, three olés for Sheinbaum.

Have a good weekend, all! (Z)

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger