When Impeachment Happens, It Must Be Multiple And Simultaneous!

During the so-called "Alaska Summit" between Russian President Vladimir Putin and TRAITOR Trump, it should have become apparent to most rational Americans that TRAITOR Trump is owned and controlled by Putin, cannot take any definitive action on any subject which remotely involves Russia without the approval of Putin, and will do literally anything and commit any crime in order to appease Putin and attempt to legitimize a man who has open arrest warrants from the World Criminal Court as a result of his war crimes in Ukraine. Actually Putin is the second person TRAITOR Trump has held "summits" with who has open arrest warrants from the World Criminal Court also. Various journalists from every legitimate American media company have stated clearly after that so-called summit that the event was a disaster for both Ukraine and for TRAITOR Trump. It was immediately referred to by several journalists who are experts on war journalism as a "nothing burger", an old expression from the world of Hollywood gossip columnists in the 1950's to describe an event which has no worth, no significant importance, and is of little consequence to anyone. But it also signaled once again that TRAITOR Trump will do anything to appease and legitimize Putin, will do literally anything to harm Ukraine, and will stoop to any crime which will, in his twisted brain, give him some kind of advantage over anyone alive. Sooner or later, TRAITOR Trump must be impeached, removed from the White House by military force if necessary, indicted in federal criminal courts of at least part of his recent crimes, arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, incarcerated, and left in federal prison until the day he dies before being buried beside Osama Bin Laden. But this blog post is really intended to impress on the world that simply removing TRAITOR Trump from the White House is not sufficient and could actually endanger the country and the world even more. He is surrounded and supported by a hand picked conglomearation of criminals, TRAITORS, and Russian Agents who are all equally as dangerous. There is no one in the current line of succession who is fit to serve in any position of public trust at any level all the way down to potentially becoming a local magistrate or constable. Several of them have already been convicted of crimes or accused of serous crimes including TRAITOR Trump himself who has been convicted of 34 of the 82 felonies for which he was indicted; held legally responsible for the rape of E. Jean Carroll in a monetary sense; held responsible for stealing money from a New York based "charity" and barred from being an officer of any corporation licensed in New York. For those 92 felony indictments, he was indiced in fur jurisdictions by five seperate grand juries. Charles Kushner, Jared Kushner's father, who is now the Ambassador to France has previously pled guilty to several counts of tax crimes. Peter Navarro who is not in the direct line of succession in a position which doesn't require senate confirmation was found guilty of contempt of a congressional sub poena. Kristi Noem has admitted in her autobiography to killing at least two animals, her hunting dog, and a goat which had done nothing at time she chose to shoot it after killing the dog did not fully satisfy her rage. She is in the line of succession. admittedly, Noem is in last place in the line of succession;but if everyone who is disqualified for legal, moral, or ethical reasons from succeeding an impeached TRAITOR Trump, she could be the last dog standing, if you will excuse that turn of phrase. The one person in the line of succession who is not directly under the thumb of TRAITOR Trump is Chuck Grasley who is President Pro Tempore of the Senate but also already 91 years old. If he is the only rational replacement for TRAITOR Trump, God Help Us All! Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has been proven to have disclosed highly classified information to an unsuspecting journalist who had the patriotism and moral conviction to report the offense. First in the line of succession is J. D. Vance who has proven time after time that his entire life and career are built on lies, yet, if TRAITOR Trump should be impeacheed and removed after the 2026 congressional election theoretically gives the Democratic party a majority in both houses of congress, Vance would suddenly find himself in the position of power which he lusts after and proves on a daily basis he is tragically unfit to ever hold. Several years ago, he was summarily removed from the board of AppHarvest which has since failed, gone bankrupt, and been sold. There is only one remotely viable choice to succeed to the office TRAITOR Trump now holds, and that person is 91 year old Chuck Grasley. If and when the day comes, as it must, and TRAITOR Trump is impeached, removed, and criminally charged for at least part of his crimes, Grasley, must be the successor. To ensure that succession, Vance must also be impeached simultaneously with TRAITOR Trump. The Senate will find it necessary to hold the impeachment vote of Vance first, refuse to consider the possibility that the vice presidency could be filled instantly with another unfit subject, and vote to convict and remove TRAITOR Trump immediately after removing Vance. After the impeachment by a new House of Representatives majority in 2027, convicted by a new Senate majority, and removed from the White House which, based on the TREASON of January 6, will most likely require military intervention, we would be faced with the need to pray constantly that President Grasley be allowed to live and remain rational until January 20, 2029, when the new Democratic President, whomever that might be, could be sworn in.

Watching "Good Night And Good Luck" on CNN!

Last night, my wife and I watched the Broadway play "Good Night And Good Luck" which stars, and was written and produced by George Clooney. The play is about the impact the McCarthy Committee Hearings had on America as US Senator Joseph McCarthy ran amuck in the senate claiming America was being infiltrated by thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of commmunist party members and communist spies. I have writen on this blog in the past about a book by Lately Thomas, "When Even Angels Wept: A Story Without A Hero", which is about Senator McCarthy and terribly destructive impact he and his minions had on literally thousands of innocent victims of their effort to destroy anyone whose ideas they opposed. I have been blessed to know four people who were victims of Senator McCarthy who, to one degree or another, had their lives destroyed by the senator. None of the four people I knew ever wavered in their opposition to the senator, and all of them worked on a daily basis for the remainder of their lives to defend the US Constitution and Constitutional Rights. Clooney's play is now the only Broadway play ever to have a performance televised in its entirety. The play, and everything about the life and crimes of Joseph McCarthy, are a warning about just how fragile democracy is, even in what until January 29, 2025, was the most democratic country in the world. There is no difference in the morally degenerative nature of Senator McCarthy, his minions at the time, and TRAITOR Trump, and his minions today. America and American Democracy are under attack and that attack is directed, fomented, and led from the White House. That is why George Clooney, his business partners on Broadway, and the management team at CNN chose to take the unprecedented step of televising a full length Broadway play to America and the world wherever CNN is available. In today's world, nealry all of satellite based television is available worldwide except in a few of the most repressive countries. Without a doubt, it must have had an incredibly large viewership last night. In a stunning proof of just how dangerous TRAITOR Trump and his Criminal Syndicate are, just last night as the play was being televised and small demonstrations against his crimes were taking place in Los Angeles, he ordered 2,000 National Guard troops to go to California to quell the demonstrations over the public objections of California Governor Gavin Newome who stated that his administration and the police agencies in the areas of the demonstrations did not need the National Guard mobilization and that it would make matters worse. There can be no doubt that it did. This action by TRAITOR Trump is an escalation of the action he attempted to take in his previous illegal occupation of the White House against peacful demonstrators in Washington when he tried to order that those demonstrators be tear gassed despite their clearly peaceful intentions. These are the most dangerous times in America since at least the end of World War II, and they are dangerous solely because of TRAITOR Trump and his minions. Every American citizen should be standing up and voicing public opposition to TRAITOR Trump, his actions, his minions, and his continued occupation of the White House. But simply impeaching and removing him would not be the best answer since J. D. Vance, the Vice President of record, is just as criminal, just as evil, just as dangerous as TRAITOR Trump. If impeachment is to occur, it must be simultaneous impeachments of every person in the constitutional chain of command and succession until that chain of succession reaches a person who has not shown loyalty to TRAITOR Trump. The only person in the chain of succession at this time who can even be remotely believed to be capable of assuming leadership of the country without risk of further crimes is US Senator Chuck Grassley, the President Pro Tempore of the US Senate, who is second in line to the presidency. That means that only simultaneous impeachment of both TRAITOR Trump and J. D. Vance can hope to put an end to the ongoing attacks on democracy. It needs to happen today, might not be likely to happen until it is far too late, and the ultimate price could be the loss of Democracy in America if the other elected representatives in congress don't take the necessary actions as soon as possible. God Help Us All!

America's Worst Case Scenario Could Be About To Happen!

Many Americans are jumping up and down with glee because the short, destructive, TREASONOUS honeymoon between TRAITOR Trump and Elon Musk has come to an end. But I would not go so far as to say that this is a good thing. In fact, it could be the first public evidence that the situation could very likely get worse in the near future. Yes, I know that many of you are asking "how do you think it could get any worse than it is already". Humor me here, sit down, be quiet, and listen to what I am saying. In the bizarre public course of the breakup between the worst TRAITOR in history and the first immigrant who should be deported from America to the Salvadoran prison, we could be seeing the beginning of what is likely to turn out to be the worst deterioration of a full blown crisis in the history of the world. The full blown crisis the fact that TRAITOR Trump and his Criminal Syndicate which poses as a "cabinet" have been working daily to destroy America and American Democracy at least since November 5, 2024. So how could it get worse? In the rapidly flowing public insanity of the breakup many of you have probably either ignored or cheered the fact that Elon Musk publicly called for the impeachment of TRAITOR Trump and his replacement in the White House by J. D. Vance. In my analysis of that possibility, the situation for all Americans and the world at large would actually be made far worse instantly if that happened. J. D. Vance is just like every other member of TRAITOR Trump's Criminal Syndicate. He had to swear fealty to both TRAITOR Trump and Project 2025 in order to be chosen to be in the position he is in. He had to be willing to commit any crime up to and including TREASON in order to be where he is. He is just as amoral, criminal, and evil as TRAITOR Trump...and he is just a bit smarter. If he were in the White House, whether it was by hook or crook, he would be less likely to attract the kind of public venom which TRAITOR Trump does because he is smart enough to keep his mouth shut about what he is doing, who he is doing it to, and what his criminal objectives are in doing it. J. D. Vance's entire life and career have been built on lies, deception, deceit, and depravity. But he has generally managed to not become the kind of public recognized public enemy that Musk or TRAITOR Trump are publicly recognized. Vance would, to a degree, be able to fly below the radar as he worked feverishly with his version of the Criminal Syndicate to destroy America, American Democracy, and world peace. Vance, if TRAITOR Trump was impeached, might remove some of the members of the Criminal Syndicate in cooperation with Musk. But he would replace them with even more evil, more dangerous, and more deceptive minions such as the young criminals he placed in DOGE. The world would instantly become a far more dangerous place. America would be destroyed more quickly, more thoroughly, and silently while our collective backs are turned. If what we are seeing is a marriage between Musk and Vance, rest assured that it is a marriage made in Hell...or Moscow! DON'T BE SURPISED IF YOU SEEN MUSK AND VANCE LEAD A JOINT EFFORT TO EITHER HAVE TRAITOR TRUMP IMPEACHED OR REMOVED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE UNDER THE 25TH AMENDMENT. PUT MORE WATER IN THE SOUP WORSE TIMES ARE VERY LIKELY COMING!

Immoral and Amoral, Two Very Different Words

 

I have to admit that using a photograph of the cover of the Concise Oxford English Dictionary as the header photograph for this blog post might have been a fine way to run off potential readers.  But it is a far better thing to do than to begin this post with a photograph of either of the two people whose actions have merited their mention in this larger discussion of two related, but very different words: IMMORAL and AMORAL.  Or if we use their noun forms instead of the adjectival forms: IMMORALITY and AMORALITY.  If we refer to the "Concise Oxford English Dictionary", which I do frequently, we find that IMMORAL means "not conforming to accepted forms of morality".  AMORAL means "lacking a moral sense; unconcerned whether something is right or wrong".  Now you ask, what on earth could he be thinking to write a blog post about just two words in the vast English language which has always required 26 volumes for the complete Oxford English Dictionary.  This is not the first time I have written a blog post about the differences between two words.  This blog post about "Practicing" and "Professing" came up for the very same reason this one has, because our country and our democracy are under threat today by some of the most dangerous enemies this country has ever had, enemies who falsely claim to be devoted to this country and the values on which it has been built and which have made it the world's greatest representative democracy.  AMORAL and IMMORAL are very closely related and come from the same root word, and they both refer to deficiencies in morals in a human, or more appropriately, in a human soul.  IMMORAL refers to a person who lacks sufficient moral values or moral fiber, if you prefer, to meet the customary minimum standards of a civilized society.  But the IMMORAL person has one unique quality which the AMORAL person does not.  The IMMORAL person has the capacity to change, learn, improve, and to develop sufficient morals in order to become a socially acceptable person who is worthy of trust, respect, and, in some cases, admiration.  The AMORAL person is not built the same way psychologically as the IMMORAL person.  The AMORAL person lacks the ability to change, learn, improve and to develop morally to become a better human being who is worthy of trust, respect, or even admiration.  Psychologically, the AMORAL person is a very different breed of animal and, even more to be distrusted, disrespected, and guarded against in all forms of human interaction.  They have no internal controls or moderating factors to make them capable of successful, productive, and humane interactions with the human race.  Some examples of people who were AMORAL instead of IMMORAL would include Adolph Hitler, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Benito Mussolini, and Sadaam Hussein.  

 

We are facing the most momentous presidential election in the history of this nation which is almost 250 years old.  Even the presidential election of 1860 was not as potentially consequential as the presidential election of 2024.  If the 1860 election had gone wrong and Abraham Lincoln had not been elected, the United States would have simply split into two separate countries and both might well still be in existence today.  If the presidential election of 2024 goes wrong, the most likely outcome would be that while the title of United States of America might remain in use for an extended period of time, the United States of America would cease to exist in practice, not just as the most powerful democracy in the world, but as a democracy at all.  Fascism and Democracy are the real opponents in this presidential election with Democracy, as it has existed for almost 250 years, being represented by Vice President Kamala Harris and whomever she chooses as her running mate ; and with TRAITOR Trump and J. D. Vance representing the future Fascist and oppressive entity which might continue to exist under the name United States of America but would almost instantly become a government devoted to the destruction of nearly all individual rights, and totally uncommitted to defending our mutual interests jointly with our long term fellow democracies. This election is literally a contest between Good and Evil, Democracy and Fascism, Liberty and Totalitarianism, AMORALITY and MORALITY.  TRAITOR Trump and J. D. Vance both represent everything that is evil, destructive, dangerous, unethical, and AMORAL in the world today.  There is no crime which either of these men will not commit if it will further their momentary gains.  We, as loyal Americans, must ensure that MORALITY wins in this election.  We must not allow two men who belittle anyone different from them, and seek to destroy anything human, animal, mineral, or vegetable which stands between them and their short term desires. As Americans at the voting booth, we must support Democracy, Humanity, Fealty, Decency, Patriotism, and above all MORALITY.  We must not allow our country to follow in the historically malevolent footsteps of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Communist Cambodia, or any other nation which allowed itself, in the course of human history, to become the slave of a dictator and that dictator's evil.  

Watching "Judgment At Nuremberg" In Very Similar Times In America

 

My wife and I have just watched the incredibly well made movie "Judgment At Nuremberg" which was made in 1961 by Director Stanley Kramer.  The movie is about the trial of several Nazi judges at Nuremberg in 1947.  The movie was nominated for eleven Academy Awards and actually won three, including Maximilian Schell for Best Actor, who won out over his costar Spencer Tracy.  The movie was loaded with one of the greatest casts ever assembled in Hollywood history with Maximilian Schell, Spencer Tracy, Judy Garland, Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, Richard Widmark, Marlene Dietrich, and a young William Shatner.  But this blog post is not about a movie for a movie's sake.  This blog post is about the movie's depiction of a small part of the aftermath of World War II and its lasting effects on the world and how it is possible that the events which led to the trials at Nuremberg could be about to be repeated in America today.  

The movie portrays several of the Nazi judges and their trial for the crimes against humanity they committed for Adolph Hitler and the Nazis before and during World War II.  It discusses how these judges and, in particular, the judge played by Burt Lancaster could have been led to believe that their abuses of human rights could have been committed by men who had previously in their lives been relatively normal members of the German judicial system.  One of the most persistent questions which is still not fully answered about Adolph Hitler, the Nazis, and the ordinary German people who assisted them throughout World War II and the Holocaust involves the question of how the German people have been able to commit the atrocities they did, to murder more than 6 million innocent men, women, and children, to sterilize thousands of others, and to have driven hundreds of thousands of others out of the country.  The 16 judges who were actually tried at Nuremberg are represented in the movie by four characters played by Burt Lancaster and three other actors.  These judges held fake trials for hundreds of thousands of innocent German citizens who were sentenced to the concentration camps, and eventual death for most of them, or for compulsory sexual sterilization simply because they were different from the Nazis in some way due to their religions, racial or ethnic identities, political beliefs, or physical handicaps and disabilities. These people's fates were decided before they ever entered the courtrooms at the time someone in the Nazi chain of command had them arrested, sent to the court system, tried in sham trials with little or no evidence, and given sentences which were predetermined by the Nazi system and the judges involved.  After they were found guilty, the concentration camp system completed the work of the Nazi regime whether it be eventual death or a brutal life of starvation and slave labor until the Allied forces could win the war and liberate the camps.  

So the greater question, still unresolved, is this: could such a series of murderous, corrupt, and evil events take place in a country like the United States of America.  The common knee jerk response to that question is almost always "it couldn't happen here".  That knee jerk response was satirically portrayed in the song "It Can't Happen Here" by Frank Zappa and The Mothers of Invention.  It was also tested under laboratory conditions by Yale psychologist Stanley Milgram in one of the most famous psychological experiments ever completed.  Milgram's work is still a mandatory topic of discussion in nearly every college level class in group psychology or the clinical term social psychology. Stanley Milgram wanted to investigate whether Germans were particularly prone to obey orders from their superiors since this was the most common explanation for the Nazi killings in World War II. Milgram obtained volunteers for his experiment by advertising for people to take part in a study of learning at Yale University. The method of the experiment required that each participant was paired with another person and they drew lots to find out who would be the ‘learner’ and who would be the ‘teacher.’  The draw was fixed so that the volunteer was always the teacher, and the learner was one of Milgram’s associates at Yale who was "in on the scam" so to speak. The so-called "learners" were placed in a room and had electrodes attached to their arms, and the teacher and researcher went into a room next door that contained an electric shock generator and a row of switches marked Slight Shock, Moderate Shock, and Severe Shock. The shocks in Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments were not real. The “learners” were actors who were part of the experimental staff did not actually receive any shocks.  But the study volunteers were never told this and fully believed that the shocks they were told to administer were real.  The main goal of the experiment was to learn if the volunteers would continue to administer shocks to the "learners" which the volunteers believed would be capable of delivering serious injury or even death. The results of the experiment were that the great majority of the volunteers would continue to obey an authority figure to the point of administering a "shock" which they believed was capable of killing the other person.  The gist of the experiment was that American were no different than the Germans who had been those convicted judges, concentration camp guards, and other members of the general population of Germany who had assisted the Nazi regime in the murder of more than 6 million innocent victims.  

So the question now becomes what is the difference between normal American citizens today and normal German citizens of the 1930's and 1940's.  The answer derived from Doctor Milgram's experiment is that there was not in 1961, and is not today, one iota of difference between American citizens and German citizens when it comes to obeying people whom they believe to be legitimate authority figures.  And that is where we momentarily return to the movie "Judgment At Nuremberg".  It portrayed German judges, and discussed ordinary German citizens, who prior to the rise of the Nazi party had been simply ordinary members of society who later, at the direction of Nazi authority figures, murdered more than 6 million innocent victims, sterilized thousands of others, and were capable of committing any crime under the orders of their leaders.  And Americans today are no different.  And we are in a time, politically in America, when just such similar events could be possible if the American voters make a tragic mistake in the 2024 Presidential Election.  On January 6, 2021, we saw a few thousand "ordinary American citizens" commit both a mass insurrection and thousands of individual crimes against the government of the United States at the direction and incitement of what they perceived to be an appropriate authority figure, TRAITOR Trump, who had called upon them to "come to Washington on January 6.  It will be big."  The US Capitol was breached, seriously damaged, and five people died because TRAITOR Trump, a person those criminals believed to be a legitimate authority figure, told them it was the right thing to do to subvert the will of the American voters, prevent the congressional approval of that electoral process, and stop the US Congress from carrying out its constitutional duty by certifying the election of President Biden on November 3, 2020.  Today, we are faced with the fact that once again the Right Wing Radical Repugnican party has nominated TRAITOR  Trump as their presidential candidate, and he has chosen the equally reprehensible J. D. Vance to be his running mate. Both these men are malignant narcissists at the very least and are willing to commit any crime at any time against anyone in order to achieve their personal objectives.  And, at this point, on July 22, 2024, we do not absolutely know who the Democratic nominee for president will be which is temporarily clouding the issues involved in this most important election in American History.  We can assume the Democratic nominee will be Vice President Kamala Harris who was also a target of TRAITOR Trump's TREASON and his minions on January 6.  There is absolutely no doubt that both TRAITOR Trump and J. D. Vance would be willing in January 2025 to incite an even worse insurrection against the United States of America.  And, based on Stanley Milgram's experiment and the actions of the German people in World War II, there can be no doubt that many of the very same people who supported the insurrection of January 6, 2021, will be willing and ready to stage an even worse insurrection, kill even more people, and destroy the legally constituted government of the United States of America.  We also now have a House of Representatives under the control of the very same people who have never admitted to the fact that TRAITOR Trump and the actual participants of the Januarey 6 insurrection are criminals.  We also have a 6 vote Right Wing Radical majority on the United States Supreme Court which has already minimized the nature of the previous TREASON of TRAITOR Trump and given him, quite literally, a license to kill.  

 These times in America are just as dangerous as the times were in Germany in the 1930's and 1940's.  TRAITOR Trump is just as dangerous, just as demented, just as evil as Adolph Hitler was.  He is also just as maliciously and malevolently ambitious as Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Idi Amin,, Pol Pot, or any other malevolent dictator ever were.  He is also still under the control of Vladimir Putin and Russia.  We as American citizens must prevent America from becoming what Germany was in World War II.  We must go to the polls in the highest numbers ever recorded in an American election and we must elect the Democratic nominee no matter who that person is.  And, I can hear a few of you muttering "but what if the nominee isn't somebody I like or somebody who is qualified".  I can assure you that in America today we have roughly 45 million registered Democrats, and anyone of those 45 million people is a far more qualified candidate for president than either TRAITOR Trump or J. D. Vance.  We must, as a nation, do what we should have been doing in every election in recent times, vote Straight Democratic and prevent another insurrection by TRAITOR Trump and his Right Wing Radical Repugican followers.  We must not do as the German people did in the 1930's and allow evil in one of its most dangerous and virulent forms to win either at the ballot box, the streets of Washington, or the court system of America.

J. D. Vance, "Hillbilly Elegy", And The Defamation Of Appalachian Character

 Let me say unequivocally that the fact that I chose to read this book and write about it on this blog should never be considered a recommendation that anyone read the book, watch the movie, or waste your time, money, and mind on such efforts. 

Several years ago when I wrote the blog post at this link, I sincerely hoped that it would never again be necessary to write another word about J. D. Vance, his horrible and horribly ignorant book "Hillbilly Elegy", or his defamation of the character of every native of Central and Southern Appalachia who ever lived.  But now, after  the release on November 11, 2020, of Ron Howard's movie version of the Vance diatribe, I find myself once again wasting my time writing about J. D. Vance and his stupid but popular attacks on Appalachia and Appalachians in general.  Just as happened with the book, reviews of the movie are nearly universally negative.  And, just as happened with the book, a sizeable portion of the population of Appalachians, the people who should be universally incensed at this trash, are oohing and ahing at the movie which critics are using their most negative words to attempt to describe.  On several Facebook groups which are, theoretically, populated by natives of Appalachia, people are identifying with the aberrant, ignorant, criminal, and dysfunctional characterizations of the members of Vance's immediate family which both he and Ron Howard are attempting to pawn off on the general public as shining examples of the deviants whom they claim populate the entire Appalachian region.  I said in the November 2017 blog post about the book:

In my twenty years of practice as an Appalachian mental health professional, I never had a client walk into my office seeking professional therapy and carrying a biopsychosocial of their own composition.  If one ever had, that biopsychosocial very well could have carried the title "Hillbilly Elegy..."  The book is a wonderful piece of work if one were working with a single client or family unit in a mental health setting in an altruistic attempt to successfully intervene in the mental health and substance abuse problems within that particular family unit.  As a piece of literature intended to be considered as a blanket analysis of a culture, and particularly the Appalachian Culture, the book is garbage.  The fact that the book was seized upon by mainstream American critics and readers as a legitimate assessment of the overall Appalachian Culture is a great miscarriage of both justice and common sense. It is also an indictment of the decision making capacity of that general readership.(R. Hicks, Blog Post Cited And Linked Above, 2017)

I also said that earlier blog post that I had sworn when the book was released and I had read the early reviews of the book by legitimate Appalachian scholars and intellectuals that I had no intentions of ever reading the book until a copy had been given to me by my dear friend, Warene Hobson, after she and her husband, P. J. Laska, had chosen not to read it.  I swear to each of you who read this post and to the heavens above that I will never waste my time, money, or mind watching the movie, not even if some well meaning fool offers to pay me well to do so.  In a review in "Rolling Stone", David Fear and his editors chose the sub-headline "J.D. Vance’s story of growing up poor gets the prestige-drama treatment — and ends up as a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing".  I commend them in their choice of verbiage and I could not have said it better myself.  If David Fear and "Rolling Stone" had been the only major outlet to eviscerate the movie, his review could be discounted as false.  But nearly ever major writer, magazine, newspaper or press outlet which have wasted ink on reviewing the movie have concurred with David Fear in most opinions they express.  In a "New Yorker" review, Richard Brody states that 

"the film’s stagings, images, and tones are as formless and as vague as its characters’ mental lives, and that vagueness replaces elements of Vance’s book which are politically and ideologically quite explicit—and which have been criticized for the simplistic lessons that they extract from his experience." (Richard Brody, "The New Yorker", November 23, 2020)

Richard Brody is just as accurate in his assessment of the work of Ron Howard and J. D. Vance as was David Fear.  J. D. Vance, in his malignant narcissism and the resultant wounded response to the familial trauma which caused it, attempted to blame the entire world, Central and Southern Appalachia, in which his mother and grandparents grew up for his damaged psyche.   And, Director Ron Howard, who has spent the majority of his life 3,000 miles or more away from Appalachia, chose to take Vance at his word as have many of those mislead individuals who have read the book or watched the movie.  In my 2017 response to the book, I discussed the use of the cultural and ethnic epithet "hillbilly" in this manner: 

"The word "hillbilly" is just as much an ethnic and cultural epithet as the "n" word, the "q" word, the "k" word, or the "s" word.  It is just as inflammatory and derogatory as the "c" word.  Any person who would use such a word in reference to themselves, their extended family, and their dominant culture and ethnicity is both defaming and denigrating those to whom they refer.  For an excellent film discussion of the use of the word "hillbilly" to discuss and describe Appalachia and Appalachian Culture, please acquire a copy of the Appal Shop documentary "Strangers And Kin: A History of the Hillbilly Image". It is particularly enlightening to learn about the history of the mascot of Appalachian State University, a character named Yosef who is dressed as a "hillbilly" in overalls, a flop hat, and no shoes. That character is the one occasion I can remember in which anything positive ever came out of the creation of a "hillbilly" character.  If J. D. Vance had held any respect for his homeland and its people, he would have never allowed the word "hillbilly" to cross his lips, his pen, or his keyboard. And he certainly would not have used it hundreds of times, as he does throughout the book, to describe his closest family members and alleged role models.  The book is no more an assessment of the overall Appalachian Culture than it is a re-examination of "War And Peace"."(R. Hicks, 2017, Cited and Linked Above)

 I find it truly disheartening in this time when the general public is much more cognizant and enlightened about cultural stereotyping and defamation that the same cannot be said about a large portion of the natives of Central and Southern Appalachia.  If the average Appalachian were as aware of our culture and our history as is the average member of most other minority ethnic and cultural groups in America, those people like J. D. Vance who choose to defame, shame, and denigrate us could not succeed to the degree they do in achieving success in their endeavors.  In perhaps the most easily understood example of the flawed and erroneous pseudologic which Vance uses to press his argument about the negative nature of Appalachia and Appalachians, in an early chapter of the book, he makes the statement that in spite of the large number of men with whom his drug addicted mother kept company none of those men was abusive.  In the very next chapter, he tells the story of how, as a teenager, a physical fight between his mother and one of those men awoke him and he had to come from his bedroom in order to intervene in the altercation.  An error in logic of that nature would not have been well received by Vance's law professors at Yale.  Neither should it be well received by his readers. He also proudly tells the story of how, after he fell asleep on a funeral home pew, his grandparents lost awareness of where he was, assumed he had been kidnapped, and, at gunpoint, assailed the departing mourners at the edge of the parking lot in an attempt to locate him before someone, presumably funeral home staff found him asleep on the pew.  Such behavior is not admirable.  It is not exemplary of any human trait of value.  It is criminal and it is also a typical example of the behavior Vance's family members engaged in and which he attempts to pawn off as typical of all Appalachians.  

I have begun and will end this discussion of J. D. Vance, the book, and the movie, which I once again sincerely hope will be my last, as I began and ended that earlier blog post about the book in 2017.  

Let me say unequivocally that the fact that I chose to read this book and write about it on this blog should never be considered a recommendation that anyone read the book, watch the movie, or waste your time, money, or mind on such efforts.

 

"Appalachian Reckoning: A Region Responds to Hillbilly Elegy" Edited by Anthony Harkins and Meredith McCarroll--Book Review

This is a book which I should have immediately bought, read, and written about as soon as it was released in March 2019.  I'm only 13months late which is pretty good for me at times in my effort to keep up with my "To Be Read List".  The book was created as a response to the horribly defamatory "Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis" which I have written about in this blog a little over two years ago.  Since I mentioned "Hillbilly Elegy..." let me append the opening and concluding sentence of review of that drivel here: First and foremost, let me say unequivocally that the fact that I chose to read this book (Hillbilly Elegy...) and write about it on this blog should never be considered a recommendation that anyone read it."  No one, whether or not they consider themselves to be Appalachian, should ever read that book without first having read "Appalachian Values" by my friend Loyal Jones.  Although I am not totally pleased with "Appalachian Reckoning...", I will say also that it would be a good idea to read this book as well before entering the intellectual wasteland of J. D. Vance.  

And, since I have mentioned that piece of garbage, I have appended above the sentence with which I began and ended my thoughts on J. D. Vance's screed about the region of which he knows little and cares nothing: "Appalachian Reckoning..." was conceived and edited to be a response to Vance's diatribe in the form of essays, poetry, and a few photos and photo essays by various writers who perceive themselves to be native to and writing in the best interests of Appalachia.  It is a lengthy work of slightly over 400 pages and I read it, as I often do collections by numerous authors, in fits and starts because I prefer to allow one writer's work to congeal in my mind before I further muddy the water with more on the same topic(s) by other authors.  That is both an advantage and a disadvantage with a work of this size.  It greatly enhances the reader's ability to fully grasp the writing in a single essay and the collective total but simultaneously lengthens the time involved from start to finish in completing a book of this size.  But it a technique which I have utilized in my reading for many years, one to which I am long accustomed, and one which I believe makes me a better reader in the long run.

The list of authors in this book ranges from the editors themselves to established experts on the region such as Dwight Billings to others whose existence was relatively unknown and unheralded until the publication of this book.  They range in their areas of expertise across the spectrum of the written word including academics, essayists, novelists, photographers, and poets.  On the face of it all, they can be argued to have been a broadly based and well selected group of authors.  But, the number of genuine, proven experts on the sociology, history, and economics of the region is a bit thin.  While I found a few essays to be well reasoned, well written, and solidly grounded in knowledge of the region, I found at least one or two to be works which I doubt most other professional Appalachian editors would have included in a work intended to dispute, disprove, and de-legitimize Vance's misbegotten best seller.  At least one of the essays is at best an apology for Vance, and at worst, an attempt to justify his illogical conclusions and should never have been included in the book. Most of the poetry is above average, reasonably well written, and acceptable.  But I question the use of artistic works in general in an expository work intended to be a disputation of another which was mislabeled, based in a plethora of misconceptions, and  often accepted as being accurate in its conclusions.  I love poetry and even have one friend, Dale Marie Prenatt, who has an excellent poem in the book; but, I do not love poetry as a form of academic argumentation.  Let me go further and say that my argument about this aspect of the book is not against the poets or their poetry.  It is against the inclusion of that poetry in such a book with such a stated purpose.  

I have been aware for many years that there are three different definitions of Appalachia, which I have stated in this blog in other places.  While the Appalachian Mountain Range extends from Central Alabama to Newfoundland and Labrador in the maritime provinces of Canada   that definition is purely geographic and used primarily by the US Geologic Survey and other federal government agencies.

The Broad Geographical Map of The Appalachian Mountains--Photo by Thomas's Legion

 The definition of Appalachia which the US Congress and the Appalachian Regional Commission uses extends from Mississippi to Upstate New York and includes 35 counties in Alabama, 32 in Ohio, 52 of the 67 counties in Pennsylvania, and is purely a political and economic definition which came about over the years in congress as the need for votes to approve various pieces of pending legislation caused this mythical region to spread much like a fungus solely in the interest of pork barrel politics.

Appalachian Regional Commission Map by the ARC

The definition of Appalachia I use is purely cultural and is rooted in the work of early Appalachian scholars including John C. Campbell and Horace Kephart.  That definition does not cross the Ohio River and does not extend into the northeastern US beyond Western Maryland and the eastern panhandle of West Virginia.  It only includes a small number of Alabama counties in the Sand Mountain area and does not remotely include any portion of Mississippi or Ohio.  For those who would belabor this definition, I urge you to go stand in the middle of the Ohio River and convince that little puddle that it does not constitute both a geographical and a cultural barrier. This final map which I have appended below is very close to my definition of the cultural region of Appalachia although, in my opinion, those counties of Pennsylvania which are included are not truly culturally Appalachian.  I also state for the record that for a more than three years I worked for a Pennsylvania based human services company and performed home visits all over the state while living for a year in Venango County Pennsylvania which is not remotely Appalachian but is included in the political and pork barrel definition of the region which is used by the Appalachian Regional Commission.  I also spent a year living in the Mid-Hudson region of New York State, some of which is included in the ARC map which is far too inclusive in terms of cultural accuracy.

Map of Cultural Appalachia by Medium.com

I freely admit that hundreds of thousands of native Appalachians left the region of Central and Southern Appalachia and moved into the midwest and industrial north.  Some of them remain there as displaced Appalachians but their descendants are not Appalachian in any way other than heritage. Moving to Appalachia or Watts or Harlem does not make a non-native of any of these areas a legitimate Appalachian, African American, or Hispanic.

Now, let's get back to my discussion of the book in question, "Appalachian Reckoning: A Region Responds to Hillbilly Elegy".  In conclusion, it is a generally readable and enjoyable book.  But I do not remotely believe that the book has yet been published which will serve as the best, most logical, most accurate response to "Hillbilly Elegy..." I do hope that someone, someday writes and publishes that book.  If you read "Appalachian Reckoning..." I would suggest that you read it with a jaundiced eye, scan every essay closely the truths you know about the Appalachia which you know, use your critical thinking skills to examine it, find what truths you can in it, but do not blindly accept it as the authoritative response to "Hillbilly Elegy...". 

The DNA Of Writing In, Of, And For Appalachia

A few weeks ago I met a young writer in my local area who has already self-published one novel in a series  about an Appalachian mining family of about 1918 to 1925 or so.  They are working on a second novel in the series and, despite the best of religious based intentions, knows very little of Appalachian literature, sociology, culture, or history.  I recently read the first draft of that second novel, set in Harlan County in the coal mine organizing era and made some suggestions about the work, the author's intentions, and the need to know our subject matter if we hope to be successful as writers.  I actually wrote about 2,500 words in discussion of the manuscript, my responses to it, and my suggestions for a better book.  I will use the skeletal structure of that piece of writing in this blog post about writing in Appalachia.  A day or so after I sent the written response to that author, I saw a shared post of a short article from Appalachian author Chris Offutt  entitled "Why I Always Write About Appalachia" which I also sent to this young writer since some of our ideas about writing in Appalachia coincide.  

In my discussion of the young author's manuscript, I used a technique commonly used in the mental health and counseling fields called “Sandwiching”.  What this phrase means is that when we have some negative information to impart to anyone we also impart positive information and we “Sandwich” the negative between an opening and a closing segment of the discussion. That is supposed to lessen the strong emotional responses to the negative. I have always found in pursuing two collegiate degrees and another from an institution known as the Indiana College of Auctioneers that the teachers and professors who were able to teach me the most used some technique either base on or closely related to "Sandwiching" even if that particular teacher or professor had never heard of "Sandwiching" 

 
I have always thought that in the best books I have read in my life that plot is a lot like the double helix spiral structure of human DNA as discovered by Drs. Crick and Watson.  The double helix spiral of DNA is a twisting spiral of two long strands which wrap around each other and twist from one end to the other much like a pair of snakes or two strands of ribbon. Along each of these strands, there are chromosomes and genes for the entire length of the spiral which serve to make up the entire contents of the DNA structure.  An above average plot also works in much the same way.  In the plot we have parallel plots and subplots which progress for the length of the novel.  Along each of these “strands” of plot and subplot we also have characters, characterizations, key pieces of information, human interactions between characters, individual and group actions, and other elements and portrayals which advance the major plot or subplots throughout the length of a novel.  Perhaps the two greatest examples of such novels are “War And Peace” by Leo Tolstoy and “Grapes Of Wrath” by John Steinbeck.  Less well-developed but still wonderful novels are “Anna Karenina” by Tolstoy and “East Of Eden” by Steinbeck.  Much shorter, but equally wonderful novels, little masterpieces, are “Of Mice And Men” by Steinbeck and “One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovich” by Alexander Solzhenitsyn.  They have a smaller double helix, a more direct plot with much less subplot, and far fewer strands of events, people, and characterizations along the way.  But they are also genuine masterpieces and among the greatest literature in the world. I have always believed that if Steinbeck and Tolstoy had only written "War And Peace", "Anna Karenina", "The Grapes Of Wrath", or "Of Mice And Men", both of them would have gone down in history as great writers. The majority of novels are not at this level.  I also believe that if we want to become not good but better than average writers trying to be great, we need to read the works of the absolute best writers all the time.  I try frequently, and I believe that every would-be writer should try, to read the works of the writers who have either won or been nominated for the greatest literary prizes in the world: the Nobel Prize, the Pulitzer Prize, the National Book Award, the Hugo Award, the Man-Booker Prize, the Caldecott Medal, and the Newberry Medal.  As we read these books, we should also attempt to emulate the best elements of the work of these people.  I also recommend that people read the lesser known works of the same authors, not just their prize-winning masterpieces.  It is a wonderful way to learn about personal development of great writers. 

We should also attempt to write about the things we know best and to know the things we write about better than the people who are going to read our work. In his article about writing in Appalachia, Chris Offut concurs indirectly with that idea by saying "My 1992 book of short stories, Kentucky Straight, was the product of my own quest as a young writer for work that depicted the world I knew."  Instinctively, Offut knew that he needed to write about what he knew not what he wished he knew or what he fantasized about.  And that his where this other young writer went awry by trying to write about an area, a people, and a culture about which they knew little.   We should also attempt to write about the things we know best and to know the things we write about better than the people who are going to read our work.  That brings me to the most important words, in my opinion, in “Appalachian Values” by Loyal Jones.  On page10, in the introduction, we find these two simple, but profound sentences. “Whatever work is done in Appalachia must be based on the genuine needs as expressed by mountain people themselves.  Whatever work is done must be done with the recognition that Appalachian Culture is real and functioning.”  Those two sentences are one of the primary reasons I buy that book regularly and give it to people who express a desire to learn about, write about, or support Appalachian Culture.  Every word I write and publish about Appalachia is intended to live up to those two sentences.  In 2005, and again in 2006, myself and Dr. Heather Ambrose, PhD., one of my former professors, published articles through the American Counseling Association which were based strongly in those two sentences.  The first, “Clinical Supervision Of Counselors in Appalachia: A Culturally Appropriate Model” was delivered by us as an oral presentation at the 2005 National Convention of the ACA and published as a chapter in a book called “VISTAS 2005: Compelling Perspectives On Counseling”.  The other article in 2006, “Culturally Appropriate Counseling and Human Services in Appalachia: The Need and How to Address It” was published on the Internet, along with the first article, on the permanent ACA Internet resource site for professional counselors.  Both are frequently cited and quoted in the work of others who write about Appalachia.  Our article on “Culturally Appropriate Counseling And Human Services…” is quoted in a book called “Public Health In Appalachia Essays From The Clinic And The Field” (2014).  That chapter also cites and quotes the work of Loyal Jones in “Appalachian Values”.   Our other article, “Clinical Supervision Of Counselors…” is cited and used as the basis of much of an article called “Appalachia And Human Services” in “The Encyclopedia Of Human Services And Diversity” (2014).  I say all that, not necessarily to blow my own horn, but to impress on you that I know whereof I speak when I talk about the importance of writing about Appalachia and Appalachian people in a culturally appropriate and well-informed manner.  Both our articles are frequently quoted at the collegiate level in course materials and graduate degree level theses and dissertations.  Both are rooted strongly in the text of “Appalachian Values” and are well respected among other Appalachian writers, professors, and students.

When we write about the things, places, issues, and people we know and know best, we produce our best work.  Words flow naturally, smoothly, realistically.  We create characters who are living, breathing people who leap off our pages and our readers can recognize them and believe them.  Our plots flow naturally and the events we create are credible even to readers who also know the things, places, issues, and people we write about.  Chris Offutt addressed this issue of what happens when we write about the things we do not really know and understand in his article cited above by bringing up what I consider to be, and Offut may well also, the worst and most off base alleged "Appalachian" book written since Harry Caudill's "Night Comes To The Cumberlands", "Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir Of A Family And Culture In Crisis" by J. D. Vance.  Offutt is discussing what he refers to as "...false accounts of Appalachian life..." This is what Offutt says about that book and, indirectly about this compulsion of people who write without cultural, historical, and sociological knowledge, especially in the field of Appalachian Studies.  "The most recent addition to these false accounts of Appalachian life is the widely read book Hillbilly Elegy, the author of which grew up in the decaying Rust Belt town of Middletown, Ohio. Nevertheless, he blames his personal difficulties on the culture of Appalachia. The ongoing dismissal [Depiction?] of Appalachians as “lazy, dangerous, and dumb,” is the same method of denying humanity that has been applied to African Americans, Indigenous Americans, and wave upon wave of immigrant to this country."  I had written about the Vance book on this blog on November 2, 2017, at the article linked above in this paragraph.  I had assessed the book in this manner as "a splenetic diatribe about Vance's extended family which he has attempted to pass off as a discussion of the great values he sees in his deeply flawed family while also attempting to attribute the familial flaws to the general culture of which they are a minor part."  Chris Offutt and I are, by no means, the only Appalachian writers who have assessed the Vance book with similar words.  I bring the book up now only to reinforce what I have said earlier about the need for writers, especially Appalachian writers to know what, whom, and where about which we are writing. 

We must understand, as writers, that when we are not writing science fiction or fantasy literature we have a moral obligation to understand our subject matter and to make every attempt to tell the truth.  Appalachia, the land we love, and all its other people deserves no less. 

"Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir Of A Family And Culture In Crisis" by J. D. Vance--Book Review

Vance, J. D. Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis (New York. Harper Collins 2016)

First and foremost, let me say unequivocally that the fact that I chose to read this book and write about it on this blog should never be considered a recommendation that anyone read it.  When the book was released in 2016 and the first highly negative reviews by legitimate native Appalachian scholars began to reach ink, I realized that it was likely to be a waste of time for anyone to read the book.  I never bought it, never read it, never borrowed it from a local library, never pretended in anyone's presence that I intended to ever read it.  I made a vow to keep my mind and soul uncorrupted.  But during my aforementioned long vacation in the southwestern United States, I spent quite a bit of time in the company of my friends, P. J. Laska (post #1) and his wife, Warene Hopson.  One day Warene called me into another room of the house and told me that she had a book she wanted to give me.  As she presented me with the book, she was honest enough to tell me the full story of why she had chosen to pass it on.  Warene has a friend who reads quite a bit and apparently knows little or nothing about Appalachia and Appalachian Culture.  This unnamed woman buys books, reads them once, and passes them on to others with the stipulation that they be passed along further after each recipient is done with them. Warene informed me that she was done with "Hillbilly Elegy..." the first second it was placed in her hands and she never read it and had no intentions to do so.  She also informed me that her husband, my long time friend P. J. Laska (post #2), also had no intentions of ever reading the book.  It is also pertinent to say for those of you who still do not know who P. J. Laska (post #3) is that he is a native Appalachian, a doctoral level retired professor of philosophy, and a life long student and professor of Appalachian Literature and Culture as well as a former National Book Award finalist in poetry.  Warene Hopson is not a native Appalachian but she has been married to P. J. Laska for the past 48 years and has known the great majority of the best scholars and writers in the field of Appalachian Studies during that time. She also lived for several years in the heart of Appalachia in the Beckley, West Virginia, area.  Let it suffice to say that all three of us had chosen independently to avoid reading "Hillbilly Elegy..." for the same reasons based on publicly printed reviews of the book and the private opinions expressed to us by our many friends and colleagues in the field about the extremely negative and derogatory nature of the book.  But due to the nature of the gift and my respect for Warene Hopson, I chose to overrule my better judgment and read it anyway.  I also chose to honor the original owner's stipulation that the book be passed on to another after each recipient had finished with it.  

Let me also preface my comments about the book with the information that I know a great deal about Breathitt County Kentucky, the home territory of J. D. Vance and both sides of his extended family. I was raised in Knott County, a contiguous county to Breathitt.  For the past twenty-five years, I have lived in Morgan County Kentucky, another contiguous county to Breathitt.  For a total of about seven years, I worked in the human services and mental health fields in two other contiguous counties.  During that work period, I specialized in substance abuse and mental health therapy.  I was also the only certified provider of Kentucky's Twenty Hour DUI Education Program for first time offenders in that general area.  I worked with numerous residents and natives of Breathitt County during that time.  One of the agencies I worked for is headquartered in Breathitt County.  It is my considered professional opinion that I am at least as well qualified as J. D. Vance to discuss the strengths, weaknesses, assets, and liabilities of Breathitt County Kentucky.

I had actually read several chapters of the book before I left the Southern Arizona area where P. J. Laska and Warene Hopson live.  When I told them that I had read that much of the book, they asked me about my opinion of it.  The remainder of this paragraph is a close approximation of what I told them and what I still believe about the book after reading it fully from "kiver to kiver" as my ancestors used to say. In my twenty years of practice as an Appalachian mental health professional, I never had a client walk into my office seeking professional therapy and carrying a biopsychosocial of their own composition.  If one ever had, that biopsychosocial very well could have carried the title "Hillbilly Elegy..."  The book is a wonderful piece of work if one were working with a single client or family unit in a mental health setting in an altruistic attempt to successfuly intervene in the mental health and substance abuse problems within that particular family unit.  As a piece of literature intended to be considered as a blanket analysis of a culture, and particularly the Appalachian Culture, the book is garbage.  The fact that the book was seized upon by mainstream American critics and readers as a legitimate assessment of the overall Appalachian Culture is a great miscarriage of both justice and common sense. It is also an indictment of the decision making capacity of that general readership.

First and foremost, let me address the title itself.  The word "hillbilly" is just as much an ethnic and cultural epithet as the "n" word, the "q" word, the "k" word, or the "s" word.  It is just as inflammatory and derogatory as the "c" word.  Any person who would use such a word in reference to themselves, their extended family, and their dominant culture and ethnicity is both defaming and denigrating those to whom they refer.  For an excellent film discussion of the use of the word "hillbilly" to discuss and describe Appalachia and Appalachian Culture, please acquire a copy of the Appal Shop documentary "Strangers And Kin: A History of the Hillbilly Image". It is particularly enlightening to learn about the history of the mascot of Appalachian State University, a character named Yosef who is dressed as a "hillbilly" in overalls, a flop hat, and no shoes. That character is the one occasion I can remember in which anything positive ever came out of the creation of a "hillbilly" character.  If J. D. Vance had held any respect for his homeland and its people, he would have never allowed the word "hillbilly" to cross his lips, his pen, or his keyboard. And he certainly would not have used hundreds of times, as he does throughout the book, to describe his closest family members and alleged role models.  The book is no more an assessment of the overall Appalachian Culture than it is a re-examination of "War And Peace".

I further believe that if there is an afterlife with awareness of and ability to influence the events occurring in the earth from which the deceased has departed that the ghosts of both Jack Weller and Harry M. Caudill were whispering encouragements into the ears of J. D. Vance as he was writing this latest attack on Appalachia and its people.  This book is just as damaging, derogatory, defamatory, and debilitating to its subjects as "Night Comes To The Cumberlands" and "Yesterday's People".  J. D. Vance has used this book to become a member of that ill-informed and uncaring brotherhood of those who seek to further the negative image of Appalachia and Appalachians without even a minor degree of the necessary knowledge to accurately understand or describe the culture .

"Hillbilly Elegy..." is a splenetic diatribe about Vance's extended family which he has attempted to pass off as a discussion of the great values he sees in his deeply flawed family while also attempting to attribute the familial flaws to the general culture of which they are a minor part.  Vance proudly discusses the rearing he received from two grandparents he freely admits once held mourners at gunpoint as they left a funeral because the grandparents had failed to notice that the youthful Vance had fallen asleep in a funeral home pew and assumed he had been kidnapped.  He equally admires the virtues of a grandmother who curses like a sailor in the presence of young children, screams at family members as a form of purported affection, and generally makes herself a fearsome addition to the community in which she lives.  In an early chapter of the book, Vance makes the statement that in spite of the large number of men with whom his drug addicted mother kept company none of those men was abusive.  In the next chapter, he tells the story of how as a teenager, a fight between his mother and one of those men awoke him and he had to come from his bedroom in order to intervene in the altercation.  A error in logic of that nature would not have been well received by Vance's law professors at Yale.  Neither should it be well received by his readers.

I read "Hillbilly Elegy..." primarily because it was a gift from a friend whom I respect and admire.  The time I used to read it while on a long vacation road trip would probably have been wasted in an even more egregious manner if I had not read the book.  The most positive aspect of the experience is that I can now say  I fully understand why so many intelligent, educated, committed Appalachian activists have received the book with such scorn and disgust and I must admit they warned me in advance.  Now I am warning you with the same words which I used to begin this review.   Let me say unequivocally that the fact that I chose to read this book and write about it on this blog should never be considered a recommendation that anyone read it.