As most of my readers know, there’s an element of romance in most of the books I’ve written, and sometimes even more than that, but I tend to present sex in what I call “thirties movies sex,” where a chapter ends in an embrace, suggestive language, or some similar fashion, and then the two reappear together either later or in the next morning.

The latest furor in the publishing world appears to be “romantasy.” From sales figures and from conversations with editors I know, romantasy appears to be taking over the speculative fiction field. Good hard science fiction is getting more and more difficult to find, and fewer major houses are purchasing and releasing it. Fewer and fewer straight fantasy novels, those that are being published, contain a freshness of view and style, and more than a few portray magic systems that, shall I say, lack any semblance of internal consistency.

Romantasy is supposedly a fusion of romance and fantasy, but in many so-called romantasies that fusion is more like fantasy, romance, and graphic erotica.

Some romantasy authors write very well, and more than once I’ve been engrossed in an interesting and intriguing book, only to have it come to a dead stop while the protagonists engage in detailed and fiery, possibly physically improbable, sexual gymnastics. I don’t mind a certain limited amount of that, but, as one deceased F&SF author noted, at some point sexual gymnastics become the mechanics of plumbing, at least for me.

In this respect, I’m definitely old-school, because I tend to favor writing about accomplishments, either single or joint, over endless rhapsodizing on the peaks of sexual consummation. But it’s also clear that such rhapsodizing sells – really sells. I recently read that one romantasy author’s latest book sold over 2.7 million copies in less than a week, but then it mixes that sex and romance with military dragon riders. I don’t know whether Anne McCaffrey is turning over in her grave or laughing her head off in the great beyond.

Why are lies so abundant today, especially in politics?

There are likely as many reasons to explain that prevalence as there are those commenting on the abundance of falsehoods. There’s also the possibility that lies aren’t any more prevalent , but that modern communications have made their spread easier and broader.

Personally, I’ve certainly seen more lies in current politics than I did when I began as a political staffer more than fifty years ago.

My own rationale for the growth of lies is based on the growing political and technological complexity of modern societies. Explaining almost anything today accurately isn’t simple. People want simple.

Even forty years ago, when I was at EPA, both Congressmen and their constituents wanted simple, straight-forward answers to complex issues. Everyone wanted yes or no answers to issues and questions to which the accurate answer was “It depends on the circumstances.”

Today science, technology, and politics are even more complex. So are taxes, for that matter.

But people want direct and simple answers, especially simple answers that appeal to their beliefs and prejudices.

Contrary to popular beliefs, lies are simple and believable; accurate statements require knowledge and understanding.

It’s much easier to blame government overspending on “fraud and waste” or diversity programs than upon the bureaucracy necessary to handle hundreds of billions in salaries and procurement, or for that matter, upon the 535 members of Congress, each trying to get government to make matters or the economy better in their individual districts and states, or to recognize the billions spent on lobbying to influence Congress and high-level bureaucrats.

Also, a great deal of that “waste” occurs because large organizations require checks and balances, standardized procedures, compatible systems, personnel checks on new hires, pay scales, and a whole raft of other requirements, including requirements for procurement to prohibit sweetheart contracts, bribes, conflicts of interest, etc.

It’s easier to blame the excess of immigrants on drug cartels than to address the shortage of agricultural and less-skilled labor in the U.S., or the internal urban and rural social conditions that fuel drug abuse, or the U.S. past federal and corporate meddling in the internal politics of Central and Latin American nations (as well as other contributing factors).

It’s easier to claim that the U.S. trade deficit is because other countries are “ripping off” the U.S. than to address the differential in wage costs between onshore and offshore, the American tax system that benefits corporate CEOs excessively while penalizing workers, an emigration system that allows more poor and less educated immigrants than highly educated ones, etc.

And, of course, there’s also the very real problem that American education has moved away from developing critical thinking and toward teaching to the [supposedly]objective tests, and that lack of critical thinking results in greater success for liars.

According to the dictionary, virtue is “behavior showing high moral standards.”

These days people don’t talk much about moral standards. The President talks about making America great again, but he never says much about morals. His talk is all about power and forcing others, both persons and nations, to do his will, and to get revenge on those who’ve opposed or thwarted him.

Trump has said little said about truth and honesty, and his words are merely tools of personal power. He can and has slandered people and then flattered them, or vice versa. He claims he’s out “to make America great again,” even as he attacks every foundation laid by the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

With each tariff, decree, and chain-saw slash, he’s undermining public trust, both within the United States and among our (former [?]) allies. In addition, DOGE and Trump are now creating lists of “undesirable” individuals and “persons of interest,” the principal criterion of which is often based only on a person’s speaking out against Trump. Those actions reflect more of a secret police mindset and indicate a President determined to be a dictator.

Workable and lasting human societies are based on a combination of trust and power. Too much power and too little trust results in autocracy, and too much trust and too little power leads to anarchy. There has to be a balance.

What’s being forgotten or ignored these days is that trust is based on virtues – where people can see and know that what leaders say is truthful and that their actions support their words; that they treat all members of society fairly and equally, and apply laws even-handedly; that they exhibit compassion for the less fortunate; that they respect others who do not share all their views.

Societies held together by raw and absolute power do exist, and they’re comparatively poor and inefficient. That’s because too many resources are required to police and control society. To this day, Russia cannot mass produce large numbers of high technology weapons and a range of complex durable consumer goods at prices affordable for most of its people. North Korea is even poorer. China has been forced to allow more freedom in order to be competitive.

A number of political scientists have claimed that Trump supporters take Trump seriously, but not what he says as that serious. This is likely true, but those supporters bespelled by his charisma are misguided in their belief that Trump won’t do all the awful things he’s promised… because he’s already doing them.

Virtues are important, especially in leaders, because lack of virtue results eventually in a lack of trust and political instability. Trump isn’t so much a cause of corruption, but the most prominent symptom of an increasingly dysfunctional political structure, and a society, that rewards the most charismatic of liars, while largely ignoring those who stick to the facts, an ignorance based on an increasing lack of virtue on all levels of society.

This past week, the mainstream media has suggested strongly that the Democratic Party has lost its way and doesn’t have a leader. That’s been more than obvious ever since the fall election and raises a simple question – Why?

I think the answer to that question lies in a line of a country song – “Let’s get back to the basics of living.”

The Democratic Party has been far too concerned about issues that aren’t important to the vast majority of the American people, while the Republican Party has been immensely successful in reframing basic issues in ways that avoid the underlying problems and appeal to negative stereotypes, often involving issues that get people upset and fearful, but really don’t affect all that many people.

The furor over transgender athletes is a good example. People are worried about the unfair physical advantage possessed by biological males transitioned to women and how such transitioned individuals shouldn’t be allowed in women’s lavatories. According to the NCAA, out of 510,000 athletes competing at the collegiate level, there are fewer than ten who identify as transgender. As a practical matter, I seriously doubt that biologically-born males would go to all the trouble and difficulty of transitioning to women merely to obtain a possible advantage in athletics.

In addition, no one seems to be making a furor about the size and weight disparities among male athletes or female athletes. That’s just accepted. Some sixty years ago, I swam competitively on the collegiate level. Except for the divers, I was the smallest and shortest man on a team that won the New England championships year after year. Today, that physical discrepancy is even greater, but no one even considers it, even in football where 180-pound receivers and running backs are routinely tackled by 300 pound plus muscular behemoths. I have a granddaughter who’s six feet tall and who played volleyball. Of course, she had an advantage over shorter women.

Likewise, has anyone really considered the actual construction of women’s public restrooms? They have individual stalls, with latches/locks. Yes, theoretically there’s always a possibility of an assault, but it’s minuscule, compared to the altercations among women.

Yet a few trans women in academic/school sports are considered a national political issue, while few politicians are seriously addressing the decline in the academic achievements of students? Except to bewail it, or act as though money alone will solve the problem.

And, then there’s the federal deficit. The Republicans have capitalized on the “waste and fraud” issue, citing comparatively minor – and highly unpopular — federal programs. All governments have programs that partisans can claim as waste and/or fraud, but truly wasteful programs don’t constitute a significant fraction of federal spending.

But by claiming massive fraud and indiscriminately cutting federal employees in all agencies while also cutting programs unpopular with the far tight, Republicans have shifted attention from the basic question of what programs are truly unnecessary and how to fund government responsibly. Fundamental questions are largely, if not totally, avoided, particularly why corporations and massively wealthy individuals get away with paying minimal or no taxes to support the governmental structure that allows them to amass their billions.

According to a study by Pro Publica, American billionaires, on average, pay between one and four percent on their actual income in taxes. Some have paid less than one percent for years. In addition, the bulk of their actual income is hidden and/or deferred.

The average middle-class family pays 14% of their income in federal taxes and five percent in state income taxes (except in a handful of states with no income tax).

The Republican/billionaire strategy is effectively based on blaming the federal deficit and increasing federal debt on Democrats (despite the fact that much of it was incurred in GOP administrations) and upon “wasteful” programs. The Republicans have also successfully cut funding to the Internal Revenue Service so that the agency has been unable to pursuit wealthy tax cheats and avoiders.

The basic issues are simple. What federal programs do we need to assure better lives for all Americans? How do we fix immigration so that we get the best of the would-be immigrants?
How do we ensure internal and external security? What is the most effective, fair, and practical way to pay for those programs?

Right now, the Republicans are defining the issues to suit the ultra-rich, while blaming all the financial woes on admittedly liberal excesses, but not bothering to mention that those excesses comprise a tiny fraction of total spending.

The Democrats continue to spread themselves too thin, especially on issues irrelevant or distasteful to the majority of Americans, while failing to come up with a strategy to address basic concerns.

And most of the United States is suffering from the failings of both parties, failings that will continue unless and until the Democrats come up with leadership that addresses the real problems and effectively calls out the billionaires’ game plan – because the Republicans will continue what they’re doing until stopped.

Just as the so-enlightened voters of Utah have fallen for the tax cut scam, so it appears will the MAGA masses following the lead of Trump and his sycophantic followers in the U.S. House and Senate.

As I pointed out in an earlier blog, the Republican-dominated Utah state legislature has passed minuscule tax cuts (1/10 of one percent) each year for the past five years and appears likely to do so again this year. The poorest families would receive a tax cut of $24 a year, middle class families $174, while millionaires would get thousands in tax cuts. At the same time, the legislature increased tuition rates at all state colleges and universities roughly $300 per student per year and cut university and college budgets by tens of millions of dollars while student enrollment in Utah is still increasing.

Also, following the lead of Elon Musk, the legislature has, in the last few weeks, also mandated a further cut of $60 million in higher education for the 2025-26 school year and created a committee charged with further reducing college and university budgets.

While Utah’s rate of sexual assault is the ninth in the U.S. (only eight states have higher rates), legislators cut back funding dealing with that problem, and only made minimal increases for primary and secondary education, despite the fact that Utah has on average the largest class sizes in the nation.

On the federal level, Trump and Musk are pursuing the same sort of policies. They’re destroying middle class jobs, both among federal workers and in the civilian economy, to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, and justifying those cuts by saying that private industry will create more jobs.

Really? Musk’s takeover of Twitter (or X) resulted in mass layoffs. Trump still delights in firing people, and Bezos’s policies don’t give workers time to eat and go to the bathroom.

There are a few old sayings that apply, such as “leopards don’t change their spots,” or “if it sounds too good to be true, it isn’t,” or “look before you leap,” but the Republicans don’t seem to recall any of them, preferring to glory in insignificant tax cuts for the masses, and major handouts to the rich.

Last Friday, Donald Trump and J.D. Vance browbeat Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the oval office and and attacked him for being ungrateful, as well as blamed him for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

What Trump, Vance, and the MAGA Republicans (who all fell into line behind Trump like the good little sycophants they are) seemingly forget is that the Russia/Ukraine conflict has never required the U.S. to put troops in the field, unlike all the other wars in which we’ve been involved. Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians have never asked for troops, only for weapons and equipment.

Trump (et al) also ignored the horrific acts continuously perpetrated by Russian troops, not to mention the prolonged drone attacks on civilian populations, and kept claiming that Zelenskyy wasn’t properly grateful. Shortly after that, CNN aired a montage of more than thirty separate occasions over the past three years in which Zelenskyy offered lengthy public thanks.

As usual, Trump made a raft of lies and misstatements, as is his wont, but when Zelenskyy attempted to set the record straight, that apparently offended Vance. No matter that both the British Prime Minister and the French President had to correct Trump as well when they met with him.

To date, Ukraine has lost 46,000 soldiers in combat, with 380,000 wounded, and suffered 40,000 civilian casualties, including 12,000 documented deaths, of which at least were 600 murdered children. In addition, Russia has illegally kidnapped nearly 20,000 children.

Russian military death claims total 85,000, and the Russian casualty figures are at least 500,000 and could be as high as 875,000. If I wanted to be purely mercenary about it, I could point out that we made a very good investment in supporting Ukraine, just because of the military and economic burden our aid imposed on Putin, all without costing an American life.

All Trump and the Republicans are concerned about are dollars, but the total of U.S. military aid sent (as opposed to that appropriated for possible use) to Ukraine amounts to some $120 billion, while European governments have supplied $140 billion – figures very much at variance with those incorrectly claimed by Trump.

But Zelenskyy clearly wasn’t subservient enough to Emperor Trump. But why should he be? He’s speaking on behalf of a nation that’s suffered roughly 60,000 deaths and half a million casualties from a Russian invasion, while Trump is demanding that Ukraine surrender to a despot so that the U.S. can save less money than it wastes annually (according to Trump), while claiming the U.S. is sending far more assistance that it actually has.

All this suggests that we’ve got an ignorant bully in the bully pulpit.