It's going to take 4 years of all kinds of body contortions: chin up, stiff upper lip, growing a spine, keeping an eye out, and the nose to the activist grindstone

My approach to Trump’s first term was not unlike the path our country too often takes when outraged by the actions of another country: all-out war.

My approach to his second term will be more aligned with the way I’d prefer we deal with conflict: diplomacy, finding common ground, listening carefully to their positions and trying to understand then, but speaking truth to power when necessary, working together to find acceptable solutions and calling out injustice when we see it.

And in this case, making sure as many people know our position, in specifics, on any given issue, when I disagree with the solution they’ve forced on us. But also, more radically, give the other side credit when they do something I agree with or that has proven to be successful.  And I desperately hope President Trump will take the same approach with us…as well as the foreign countries doing things we don’t approve of.

Along the same lines, I watched the recent Senate confirmation hearings of the (likely) incoming “SecDef” Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, and cheered on the Democratic Senators grilling him about his personal shortcomings involving excessive drinking on the job, financial mismanagement of organizations he ran, and allegations of sexual assault, as well as statements he has made regarding women in the military. It wasn’t until I read posts from Mark Cuban that I realized I should have been jeering many of their questions instead. Sure, 1 or 2 of the Senators should have attacked him about those semi-relevant issues, but what they really should have peppered him with were questions about the actual job ahead.

Cuban wrote: “I'm sorry but the Dems are ridiculously bad at their Hegseth questions. IMO, if you want to prove someone is incompetent, you ask them the hardest strategic questions they will have to know to succeed at the job. What would I ask? "What was your analysis of the Houthi Bombing in October? What counsel would you give POTUS regarding next actions?" "What should the US strategy be in Syria ?" " How would you counter Chinese aggression on the south China Sea ?" ‘How would you assure civilian oversight of DOD’"

And it is similar to the bigger issue I started with. What are the real issues here – his past or his future? It’s like a comparison of China’s foreign policy vs ours. They care little don’t care at all about human rights. They care only about how it impacts them financially and in terms of global power. Meanwhile, the US (to our credit) cares greatly factors in a country’s record on human rights when making decisions related to foreign policy. Or at least we have, historically, particularly when Jimmy Carter was President.

And we should continue to, but respecting their approach and working with them, not against them to right those wrongs, not taking a militaristic approach, but the same approach I’d use when my friend or neighbor has a different way than ours.

All that said, a number of friends have reached out, asking how we are dealing with the then impending Trump presidency. This was my reply to a friend this morning:

"I/we are really trying to not just stay above the proverbial fray but avoiding it entirely, or as much as possible. Frees up a fair amount of time, at least. Just ignoring it and pretty much everything DJT-related beyond the unavoidable headlines. I'm just in a completely different place than I was 8 years ago. Acceptance and revulsion co-mingled, and an absence of hate or protest, with a touch of hope that he can do some really good things. What I see in the headlines are just so effing awful. People talk about Dems needing to grow a collective, or even individual, spine/s, but my hope is that some of the Rs do, as they begin to realize what exactly he is doing to the people of this country. Collins and Murkowski in particular, but even Mitch McConnell and John Kennedy (LA) among others."