When it comes to politics, we frequently talk twice as much as we should and listen half as much as is deserved. With our mouths open so much of the time, we fail to get the facts. And this often leads us to paint things in hyperbolic black or white.

One area where we seem to do this regularly is with the Founding Fathers. Depending on our side, we label the Founders as devils or demigods and the constitution as a wicked document or holy writ.

Is it possible both sides are distorting the truth?

Joseph Ellis, one of the nation’s foremost scholars of American history, suggests that we are. He has written an excellent article for the online Encyclopedia Britannica called “Founding Fathers” that points out both the amazing things the Founders achieved with the birth of this nation and some of their most egregious failures.

I don’t know about you, but I find clarity a good thing. I think it helps us have more productive conversations. If you agree with me, I think you’ll enjoy the clarity Ellis brings to the Founders and the nation they set up. Read his article here.

For my part, I think the Founders set up an awesome system. Not because it was perfect at birth, but because it was a system that got enough right to allow us to get where we are today. Look at how far we’ve come on so many fronts! And it got enough right to allow us as a nation to get even better in the future.

Just consider what the Founders implemented that was in no government at that time. The ideals of individual liberty, the separation of powers, the ability for a huge swath of citizens to elect their leaders, the ability to change the constitution itself, the separation of church and state, and the engine of democratic capitalism that has lifted more people out of poverty than anything else the world has seen.

The Framers didn’t create the Constitution in a vacuum, but nowhere in the world had anyone set anything up that went so far. There was nothing like it, no real examples to follow. And many thought it would fail, just as France’s attempt in their revolution failed just a few years later.

As for things they got wrong. Well, they themselves soon recognized the way we elect the president and vice president didn’t work and adjusted it. Their idea that political parties wouldn’t form was wrong. Their idea of a militia for common defense didn’t work (see my writeup here). Their compromise on slavery was a festering sore that came to a head before the Union was 100 years old. Their treatment of the Indians was awful. Their reasons for excluding women and those not owning land was bone-headed.

So, yes, they got some things wrong. Some of them held some beliefs that we find appalling today. And the nation has not implemented their stated ideals as well as we might have hoped. However, the Founders got so many things right. And what’s more, they did it as men living in the times they lived, having grown up with the beliefs and values of that time, not those of 2019!

While we as a nation have progressed from some of their failures (thank heavens), in other ways the Founders may be are our betters. There are a great many lessons to learn from them, both from their successes and failures. One is their humility—they knew what they’d created wasn’t perfect. Let’s not imagine that we or our ideas are perfect either.

If you’re at all interested in politics, I recommend Ellis’s article and its view of the Founders. Read it article here.

I just finished the most important book on politics I’ve read in years.

Years.

In fact, I’ll go so far as to say it is the book for our current political times.

I say this because America isn’t facing the threat of Communism, Nazism, poverty, illiteracy, or disease. ISIS and the terrorists are on the run. We’re beginning to figure out a better way of treating our LGBT brother and sisters. And we’re not poisoning ourselves with the broad-based racism or sexism of the past. Yes, there are lots of areas where we can improve. But these are not the main problems of our current time.

In my opinion, the main problem of our current time is a burgeoning contempt between left and right.

Political scientists find our nation is more polarized than at any time since the Civil War. People in positions of power and influence on both sides of the spectrum, and everywhere in between, are setting us against each other. They tell us our neighbors who are on the other side are evil, corrupt, or stupid. And must be utterly vanquished. And many of us perpetuate the message, very frequently on social media.

By some measures the divide between right and left in America is beginning to approach the size and feeling of the one between the Israelis and Palestinians.

Is that really where we want to go?

I think most people will agree with me that it is not. So what do we do about it?

May I suggest we start by reading this terrific book by Arthur C. Brooks called Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt.

With that title you might think Brooks is suggesting that the solution to the divisions in our country is to start a national program for the singing of “Kum Ba Yah.” If so, you would be wrong.

Brooks doesn’t claim we need less disagreement. He thinks we need more disagreement. Yes, you read that right. More. He’s calling for more, strong disagreement. It’s just that we need to disagree in a better way. A different way.

At this point you might be wondering how it’s possible to disagree, and in greater amounts, and not run the nation off the cliff in flames.

I was wondering that too. And Brooks provides the research, the thinking, and a number of practical methods in his book. Brooks will make you think about how we interact in a totally different way. And he does it with his trademark good humor. You’ll laugh, you’ll think, and you’ll come away seeing a better path.

If a good portion of us disagree the way Brooks is suggesting, it will change our country. All we need is a core of us willing to try.

If you’re interested in politics, if you are getting tired of the insults on social media and the news, if you’re tired of the way the parties are not working with each other in Washington, I think you’ll love this book.

If you want a taste of what Brooks is talking about, watch his eleven-minute commencement speech at BYU this last April. Find it here. If you want another taste, watch his TED talk.

Habits are one of the most powerful forces in our lives. If we could consciously harness them, there’s no telling what we can do.

The problem is that we keep going about it all wrong.

We keep trying to motivate ourselves into behavior change. Sometimes motivation works, but motivation is fickle. And more often than not it leaves us hanging just when we need it the most.

So are we doomed?

No.

Because motivation is just one of four parts of creating habits. And it’s not even the most important one.

What are these other parts? How do you harness them?

Well, that’s the subject of Atomic Habits by James Clear.

And one of the neat things is that Clear reveals that tiny changes can lead to remarkable results. No Herculean efforts. No getting yourself amped up. Something else that’s much easier to do and much more effective.

The book’s been a New York Times bestseller.

An Amazon bestseller.

It’s been on the USA Today bestseller list for twenty-two weeks.

If you want to build some good habits, if you want to stop some bad ones, if you want to make any behavior in yourself or others more likely, let me recommend you find out what Clear has discovered in his research and give it a try. I think you’ll be happy you did.

*

Chris Christie, the two-term governor of New Jersey, is an interesting figure.

He was a federal prosecutor who cleaned up a ton of government corruption in New Jersey.

And then he became governor. He might have come and gone like hundreds of governors, but a video went viral, showing his direct, in-your-face politics.

Many begged him to run in the 2012 presidential election, including a whole bunch of billionaires.

He turned them down. Said he wasn’t ready. You’ve got to admire someone who does that.

Then he did run in the 2016 election, but failed to get the attention and votes he might have because Trump was sucking all the media out of the room. And that might have ended it. But Christie dropped out of the race and was the first to endorse Trump, who’d been a long-time friend.

Trump almost picked him for vice president. The choice ended up being between Christie and Pence. Ultimately, he chose Pence and asked Christie to create the transition plan.

Christie spent six months with a whole team of people creating that plan. It was a plan that would have helped Trump avoid so many disasters in appointments and policy during his first two hundred days. But when it was finished, the Trump team decided to throw it away.

Why? What was going on?

Christie is unlike Trump in many, many ways. Why would he support him?

Christie reveals all and much more in Let Me Finish: Trump, the Kushners, Bannon, New Jersey, and the Power of In-Your-Face Politics.

In the book he sets the record straight about his tenure as a corruption-fighting prosecutor and a Republican running a Democratic state, as well as what really happened on the 2016 campaign trail and inside Trump Tower. It’s a fascinating book that gives insights into the Trump team, Trump himself, and Christ Christie who I think would have made a terrific president.

If you’re interested in politics, larger-than-life figures, and a view from the inside, I think you’ll love this book.

*

In less than three minutes, you can amaze your friends, cut through a lot of political blather, and clearly assess what’s being proposed over the next eighteen months as the presidential campaign heats up.

How?

By understanding the simple taxonomy below. 

Every day folks in the media make accusations and claims about socialism, Sweden, Venezuela, capitalism, and the United States. Unfortunately, a lot of the time it’s clear they’re a bit muddled. So let’s cut through the confusion.  

Whether you’re an independent, Democrat, or Republican, you’ll want to know these three terms.

SOCIALISM

The state owns and directs huge portions of the economy. The government in these schemes is the old-fashioned Soviet, Mao, and Nazi style dictatorships.

These types of socialists did so much good in the 20th century. No other scheme was better at piling up dead bodies. Millions and millions of them.  

An interesting tidbit. Did you know that “Nazi” is the abbreviation in German of “Nationalsozialistische”? That word means “National Socialist”. It comes from the name of Hitler’s political party, the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” or “Nationalsozialistische der Deutsche Arbeiters Partei.”

Nobody running for president today is advocating for this type of government.

DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM

The state owns and directs huge portions of the economy. The government in these schemes is supposed to be democratic, which means you should be able to vote the bums out and put other bums in. Venezuela supposedly uses this model, although some wonder if it is a true democracy or a sham one.

For those who like socialism, this is supposed to be the good way of doing it as opposed to the bad way of the old fashioned authoritarians. I will let you determine whether the “good” scheme actually leads to any better economic outcomes than the “bad” one.

SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

You rely on lots and lots and lots of capitalism (private ownership and direction of companies in a free market) to fund government social programs. The funding is done via high tax rates. You have elections and can vote the bums out and put other bums in. This is Sweden.

A lot of people in the current presidential race are advocating for this type of government. Although, if they say that any system that allows billionaires to exist is immoral, you will need to scrutinize that candidate carefully because Sweden’s system allows billionaires. It may be that candidate actually wants some form of democratic socialism.

One last point. If you think about it, the United States and Sweden are similar types of governments. They’re on the same continuum. The difference is that the United States is simply much less of a welfare state than Sweden is.

There you have it. Three terms you are going to hear a million times over the next eighteen months.

Amaze your friends by actually knowing what they mean.

Be proud of your knowledge.

And use it to carefully consider the candidates.

I have cut my consumption of bread to almost nothing. And so when I want a slice, I’m not going to waste it on run-of-the-mill sandwich bread. I want something delicious. And the best bread we’ve found is the La Brea Bakery bread that’s sold at Smith’s and other Kroger food stores.

Our favorites are the cranberry walnut loaf, the toasted sunflower honey loaf, and the pecan raisin loaf. These breads are made the old-fashioned way with a substantial crumb and a crackly, chewy crust that’s a joy to eat. And unlike the bread from a chain bread company that will remain unnamed, these loaves are actually fully cooked.

We just got two loaves today on our trip to Logan. We came back home, cut a few slices, popped them in the toaster, buttered, and ate with some chicken noodle soup. Pure bread heaven.

#

With that bread you might want some bratwurst. Not grocery store brats. Real brats. If so, I found the spot to get them (thank you, Larry Correia). There’s a gem of a butcher’s shop in Morgan, Utah called Bingham’s Custom Meats. It’s clean, well-lit, and nice-smelling. The people there are friendly. And they have over thirty different flavors of brats.

Bratwurst, by the way, comes from German. It’s made up of two words. “Brat,” which means finely chopped meat, and “wurst,” which means sausage. At Bingham’s they don’t add nitrates or any other preservatives. Their recipes are pork mixed with various sets of spices.

So far I’ve tried nine of their flavors, and they’ve all been delicious. They’re great for a low-carb diet. A Bingham’s brat and a bunch of cooked vegetables makes an awesome lunch. If you want, you can also just slit the casing and cook the sausage patty or stir fry style.

#

I’ve also cut my consumption of sweets. Which means if I eat something, I want it to be worth it. And so it gives me great pleasure to report my discovery of a wonderful flavor of Aggie ice cream at the USU Creamery—it’s called lemon custard.

I know. Lemon ice cream?

And when I say ice cream, I mean ice cream. This is not a sherbet. And let me tell you right now, this ice cream is amazing. It’s amazing all by itself. It’s amazing with a banana, which they sell at the creamery. Furthermore, for a little fun, if you combine it with the regular Aggie chocolate, the two together taste like a Tootsie Roll. No lie.

I had it last month, and the month before, and I can’t wait for another date with the wife to go enjoy another scoop.