TUESDAY: Conrad had the heart of darkness!

TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 2026

We have those programs at Fox: Joseph Conrad had the realm he chose to explore in Heart of Darkness. The leading authority on the novella thumbnails it as shown

Heart of Darkness 

Heart of Darkness is an 1899 novella by Polish-British novelist Joseph Conrad, in which sailor Charles Marlow tells the story of his assignment as steamer captain for a Belgian company in the African interior. The novel is widely regarded as a critique of European colonialism in Africa, whilst also examining the themes of power dynamics and morality. Although Conrad does not name the river on which most of the narrative takes place, at the time of writing, the Congo Free State—the location of the large and economically important Congo River—was a private colony of Belgium's King Leopold II. Marlow is given an assignment to find Kurtz, an ivory trader working on a trading station far up the river, who has "gone native" and is the object of Marlow's expedition. 

And so on from there.

As far as we know, Heart of Darkness remains a challenging work. This week, we've been asking you to focus on a pair of Fox News Channel programs in our morning reports.

This is depressing, tiring work. It raises questions about life inside the zone known as Silo Red, but also about life inside the ramparts of Silo Blue.

This is tiring work. Or maybe it's just from setting our clocks ahead! It could always be something like that!

Tomorrow morning: The mutts who were eager to bark

THE REMAINS: They pretended to discuss the tape...

TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 2026

...which they pretended they'd seen: "Some say the world will end in fire. Some say [it will end] in ice."

The name of the poet in question was Frost. Did a minor prejudgment lurk there? 

Somewhat similarly, some say our societal disintegration started in 1990 with Newt Gingrich's list of wordswith his list of the "contrasting words" the GOP should always use when describing Democrats.  

("Destructive, shallow, sick, shame, cynicism, lie, disgrace, taxes, devour, anti-child, anti-flag and traitor"and on and on from there.)  

Others say the demise started earlierfor example, in the attack on Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork conducted by Senator Ted Kennedy in 1987. 

Whether you teach it flat or round, the remains of those days can now be viewed, every night, on various "cable news" programs. In our view, the Fox News Channel is especially committed to the practice of prying the lid off the garbage can, then deciding to let the mutts out. 

Our own language may seem strong, you might imaginably say. If so, we'll suggest the possibility that you haven't been watching the instruments of the ongoing demisethat you've taken the cue from such Blue American "news orgs" as these:

The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, MS NOW 

Those news orgs, and all their journalists, have agreed to avert their gaze from the conduct of the Fox News Channel and its expansive kennel of "mutts." Those orgs will neither report nor analyze or discuss the behavior of those aggregationsfor example, of the collection of savants let out last night at exactly 10 o'clock Eastern: 

Gutfeld! panelists: Monday, 3/9/26 
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler" 
Kat Timpf: comedian 
Greg Gutfeld: host
Michael Malice: podcast conspiracy theorist 
Nick Shirley: independent journalist

As an example of the culture which obtains at these "cable news" programs, Gutfeld introduced Malice this way: 

"He causes more troubles online than emails from Nigeria."

He introduced Tyrus in much the way he always does:

"He's like a shower chair. Old ladies sit on him in the shower."

According to his nightly intro, Tyrus is constantly having sex with "old ladies" (over 80), implicitly for pay. At any rate, with a congregation of analysts like those, what could possibly have gone wrong on some such enchanted night?

As the American news industry has continued its headlong collapse, we the people are now receiving primetime "cable news" instruction from gong-show panels like that one. 

As any sentient being could see, the panels on programs like Gutfeld! and The Five are assembled to spread preferred corporate messaging all through the warrens of Red America. As their inane behavior proceeds, the finer people in Blue America have agreed to avert their gaze. 

And so it was last Tuesday night when The Five went on the air at 5, followed by Gutfeld! at 10. The corporation had decided to let the mutts out. On this profoundly unfortunate evening, the analysts in question were these:

The Five panelists: Tuesday, 3/3/26
Emily Compagno: co-host, Outnumbered
Jessica Tarlov: twice-weekly punching bag
Jesse Watters: host, Jesse Watters Primetime
Dana Perino: co-anchor, America's Newsroom
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler
Gutfeld! panelists: Tuesday, 3/3/26
Tyrus: former professional "wrestler"
Kat Timpf: comedian
Greg Gutfeld: host
Dave Landau: comedian
Mike Benz: Foundation For Freedom Online

Those were the aggregations in question. Now for the rest of the story:

As we noted yesterday, the videotape of Bill Clinton's recent deposition had been released by the House Oversight Committee the day before. Now, those collections of corporate messaging agents would pretend to discuss what they would pretend to have seen in the four and a half hours of tape. 

Full disclosure: 

In all candor, "clown show" isn't a strong enough term for what those panels produced. As they pretended to discuss what they pretended to have seen, each panel focused on one small piece of videotapea piece of tape whose context we laid out in yesterday morning's report.

We know of no reason to believe that any of those panelists had actually reviewed the actual videotape on which they and their fellow panelists would pretend to comment. We know of no reason to believe that any of these corporate "mutts" knew what was being discussed in the inconsequential line of questioning which preceded that brief bit of tape.

We'll now attempt to execute a change in tone, moving from the inexcusable clowning performed by last Tuesday's messenger children to the very serious questions under review during Bill Clinton's deposition:

The former president was being asked about his past association with Jeffrey Epstein, a major purveyor of sex crimes. The former president said his association with Epstein ended in 2003, a point which went unchallenged all through the 4.5 hours of tape.

Last Tuesday night, the children cavorted and clowned. In that way, they completed their corporate mission. During his lengthy deposition, the former president responded to reasonable questions from Jack Emmer, chief counsel to the House Oversight Committee.

What had been the nature of the former's president's association with Epstein? You can see what the former president said by reading the transcript of his deposition, or even by watching the videotapesomething none of the children showed any sign of having done.

In what way had Clinton interacted with Epstein? As we noted yesterday, the first Q-and-A went like this:

EMMER (2/27/26): Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to testify today and for your years of service to our country. I want to start from the beginning. When did you first meet Jeffrey Epstein?

CLINTON: ...There's a picture where it shows him shaking hands in the White House Historical Association reception. That was in 1993, but I'm not aware of that. I first remember meeting him when I got on his airplane to take the first trip with my foundation in, I think, 2002, whenever it was.

None of that was ever seriously challenged. As the early questioning continued, the president described the way the association began:

CLINTON: Sometime after I left the White House, either in late 2001 or early-ish 2002, I received a call from Larry Summers, who had been on my economic team and was later secretary of treasury...He said that he was calling because a man named Jeffrey Epstein who had made a substantial commitment of several million dollarsI think it was 10, but whatever it wasto brain research, and that he was a information hungry person and he wanted to spend some time talking to me about economics and politics. 

And he said he's got this massive airplane and he said he would take you, your staff, your Secret Service detail, and anybody else you wanted to bring on the trips that he knew I was planning to set up a global network to provide lifesaving AIDS medicine to as many people as possible, as quickly as possible.

This basic account went unchallenged during the long deposition. According to President Clinton's testimony, a series of "four or five trips to Asia and Africa and one to north of Europe" ensued.

The last of these AIDS-related trips took place in 2003. After that, the president said, he had no further contact with Epstein.

None of this chronology was challenged during the long deposition. As we noted yesterday, there was an inconsequential line of questioning at one point, in which Emmer seemed to be testing President Clinton's claim that he and Epstein had never been personal friends.

Yesterday, we showed you the transcript of that line of questioning. We'd say the line of questioning was transparently inconsequential. 

Last Tuesday night, two panels of pretenders cavorted and joked and pretended and undermined the possibility of maintaining an American nation as they pretended to discuss that one small piece of that videotape.

None of them showed any sign of having any idea what they were clowning about. They were engaged   in the nightly project of creating convincing "imitations of life."

We're dealing here with the sacred, but also with the grotesquely profane. There's no excuse for what those "cable news" panelists did that night, but we'll remind you that they're only human, and they were being well paid.

Also, their behavior is enabled by the elites we Blues are told we can trustby our own Blue American elites, over here in our own failing half of our plainly failing so-called United States of America.

Some say fire, some say ice. Some say that last Tuesday's appalling behavior shows us what is leftwhat little remainsof our rapidly failing culture. 

Tomorrow, we'll look at what was leftwhat little decency remainedafter they had let the mutts out, which they of course do every night.

Tomorrow: "[Little] beside remains"


MONDAY: The costuming for the El Salvador shoot!

MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2026

We won't mention this again: As soon as Kristi Noem got sacked, the piling-on got started.

In Sunday's New York Times, Maureen Dowd took her turn at the helm of this ship. Along the way, she joined a cast of thousands in retyping the highlighted script:

‘Wuthering Heights,’ MAGA Style

Eat your heart out, Emerald Fennell.

You may have the alluring stars Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi cavorting on the moors in your crimson adaptation of “Wuthering Heights.” But for radioactive romance, you can’t beat Washington.

Emily Brontë’s Cathy and Heathcliff are selfish, manipulative creatures, destroying each other and all around them as they indulge their passions and egos. But their damage was kept to one windswept village.

With MAGA’s version of “Wuthering Heights,” the far less alluring but equally intertwined Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski have been cavorting over the swamp, scandalizing the capital as they’ve spread their cruelty far and wide. (To Lewandowski’s credit, he didn’t try to kill a dog like Heathcliff did. That’s Noem’s department.)

Holiday Barbie, as Robbie’s Cathy has been dubbed for her ostentatious dresses and hairstyles, pales in comparison with the costumes and Rapunzel extensions of ICE Barbie. Imprisoned in her marriage to Edgar Linton, Robbie’s Cathy gleams in elaborate gowns and necklaces. But Noem topped that. When she went to see migrants in prison in El Salvador, she sported a baseball cap with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement logo—and a gold Rolex Cosmograph Daytona that’s worth $50,000.

And so on from there.

It's true! Incessant costuming seemed to prevail during Noem's adventures at DHS. That said: 

To our eye, the point of the costuming at that gulag-style prison was plainly not the gold watch.

To our eye, the El Salvador shoot looked like a scene straight out of some sequel to Apocalypse Now. The half-naked male prisoners were all half naked. Quite plainly, the lady was not.

We don't think the focus was really the watch! We promise not to roll our eyes at this timid bit of scripting again.

Additional bonus disclosure: We thought Emerald Fennell was right on target with her 2020 directorial debut, Promising Young Woman.

We haven't seen her version of Wuthering Heights.


WHAT REMAINS: Who let the mutts out?

MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2026

This horseplay is all that remains: For starters, let it be said that Chairman Comer seemed to be suitably staffed. 

Two Fridays back, the chairman was on the ground in Chappaqua, prepared to depose Bill Clinton. At the start of the lengthy session, his 34-year-old chief counsel introduced himself: 

"Thank you. My name is Jack Emmer and I am the chief counsel of investigations for Chairman Comer."

Emmer conducted himself in a professional manner during the long day's journey. When the testimony finally began, he thanked the former president "for agreeing to testify today and for your years of service to our country." 

So said the chairman's chief counsel. First, though, the chairman's additional staffers signed instaffers on the House Oversight Committee, which Comer serves as chairman.

First, seventeen committee membersseventeen members of the Houseintroduced themselves to Clinton. After that, it became fairly clear that Chairman Comer was suitably staffed:

EMMER (2/27/26): For the record, starting with the majority staff, can the additional staff members please introduce themselves with their name, title, and affiliation?

BILLY GRANT: Billy Grant, deputy chief counsel for investigations for Chairman Comer.

PETER SPECTRE: Peter Spectre, deputy director of oversight for Chairman Comer.

DANIEL ASHWORTH: Daniel Ashworth, general counsel for Chairman Comer.

RYAN GIACHETTI: Ryan Giachetti, chief counsel for Chairman Comer.

WILL HARNESS: Will Harness, professional staff member for Chairman Comer.

ANNAH CATHEY: Hannah Cathey, professional staff member for Chairman Comer.

MELVIN SOTO: Melvin Soto, digital director for Chairman Comer.

ALLISON COLEMAN: Allison Coleman, counsel for Chairman Comer.

EMILY FEYERABEND: Emily Feyerabend, counsel for Chairman Comer.

MARK MARIN: Mark Marin, staff director for Chairman Comer.

AUSTIN HACKER: Austin Hacker, communications director for Chairman Comer.

ASHLEY GINGER: Ashley Ginger, deputy staff director for Chairman Comer.

EMMER: Thank you, all. 

Based on a cursory look at their bios, they all seemed to be "majority staff," though we could be wrong about that. At any rate, it seemed that Chairman Comer had managed to arrive on the scene with plenty of help.

This legion was present to question the former president about his past association with the late Jeffrey Epstein. Laboriously, Emmer instructed the former president in the rules of the gamefor example, by telling him this: 

EMMER: Furthermore, you cannot tell half-truths or exclude information necessary to make statements accurate. You are required to provide all information that would make your response truthful. A deliberate failure to disclose information can constitute a false statement. Do you understand? 

President Clinton said that he did understand. No half-truths would be allowed! 

After roughly nineteen minutes of this, the questioning finally began. The questioning started with this: 

EMMER: Mr. President, thank you for agreeing to testify today and for your years of service to our country. I want to start from the beginning. When did you first meet Jeffrey Epstein?

CLINTON: Well, I will try in this testimony and I will point it out when I'm aware there's a picture or something that predates this. There's a picture where it shows him shaking hands in the White House Historical Association reception. That was in 1993, but I'm not aware of that. I first remember meeting him when I got on his airplane to take the first trip with my foundation in, I think, 2002, whenever it was.

The foundation to which he referred was, in fact, the Clinton Foundation. The trips in question, the former president said, were "four or five trips to Asia and Africa and one to north of Europe on Mr. Epstein's airplane"trips taken in 2002 and 2003 in connection with the former president's desire "to set up a global network to provide lifesaving AIDS medicine to as many people as possible." 

(For the record, few questions were asked about that effort. For the record, that's because no one actually gives a flying felafel about a tedious topic like keeping AIDS victims alive.)

The deposition took place on Friday, February 27. For the record, the ongoing war on Iran started that very same Friday night. 

For reasons which weren't clear, or possibly were, Hillary Clinton had been deposed the day before.

Based on this transcript from the invaluable Rev, the deposition of President Clinton burned roughly four and a half hours away, not counting time for breaks. When C-Span posted the committee's official videotape, it ran 4:33:48.

As a general matter, Emmer engaged in perfectly reasonable lines of questioning. (When the questions came from other staffers or from some members of Congress, maybe just possibly not.) But in these ways, we've set the scene for the onslaught by the mutts which was destined to follow. 

The committee's official videotape was released on Monday, March 2. The onslaught by the mutts began on Tuesday, March 3.

Who let the mutts out with respect to this deposition? Tomorrow, we're going to say the names of the various performers in question. 

For today, we're going to close by posting an inconsequential exchangean underwhelming set of Q-and-A's which took place about one hour and fifteen minutes into the committee's official videotape.

During this exchange, Emmer seemed to be testing the president's claim that he and Epstein had engaged in cordial relations on the lengthy plane trips in question but had never been "friends." This semantic distinction came under reviewor so it now basically seemed.

You can check the transcript and the videotape for yourselves. For the sake of clarity, we've edited our interjections by the former president's counsel.

You can check the record yourself! Starting at roughly 1:13 on the transcript or tape, this is what you'll find:

EMMER: At this time, I'd like to introduce what'll be marked as Majority Exhibit 14. And while it's being handed out, this is an article published by The New York Times on August 5th, 2025, entitled "A Look Inside Epstein's Manhattan Lair." And once you receive the article, I will just direct your attention to page 10.

[...]

And we're specifically looking at a framed photo on a wooden table, alongside multiple other framed photos. And we're focusing on the photo in the middle, which appears to have a golden frame.

CLINTON: Yeah, okay, I see it.

EMMER: Mr. President, do you recognize yourself in this photo?

CLINTON: I do.

EMMER: And it appears that the man on the right of the photo is Jeffrey Epstein. Is that correct?

CLINTON: I think so.

As can be seen in that New York Times article, a photo exists of Clinton and Epstein, apparently from one of those flights. As can be seen in that article, the photo was on display in Epstein's Manhattan mansion, along with many other celebrity photos, including one of Epstein with the former Pope!

President Clinton said he recognized himself in the one photo under review. The colloquy continued:

EMMER: And for the record, what is happening in this photo?

CLINTON: He's smiling at me. He looks like he's talking to me.

EMMER: This is one of the friendly interactions that you were describing earlier?

CLINTON: Yes.

EMMER: And can you describe the circumstances surrounding this photo?

CLINTON: I do notI have no idea. I see Richard Branson in the back, and other people [in other photos]. But I don't remember anything about it.

EMMER: Okay, that's fine. And you appear to be comfortable with Mr. Epstein in this photo. Would you disagree with that characterization?

CLINTON: I'm comfortable. I'm comfortable here. I'm not happy, but I'm comfortable.

[Substantial pause]

And my conscience is clear. That helps.

At this point, Clinton and attorney Cheryl Mills continue to look at one or more of the "multiple photos" from the New York Times article. After pausing his questioning. Emmer eventually moves on to a different line of questioning.

Our view? That one photograph was hugely underwhelming, as was that exchange. 

Emmer seemed to be trying to claim that Clinton and Epstein had actually been more friendly than the president had claimed. We'd have to say that line of questioning was underwhelmingwas essentially inconsequential. 

Nothing much was taking place as Clinton and Mills continued to look at those photos. But the next night, the Fox News Channel let the mutts out, and the mutts proceeded to behave in their typical way.

Tomorrow, we'll show you what these fiendish creatures said about the brief chunk of videotape before Emmer starts his new line of questioning. More generally, we'll show you what happens when the trainers at the Fox News Channel let the mutts out every night.

As the week proceeds, we'll have more to show you about this depositionrather, about the way its contents have frequently been portrayed. Most strikingly, we'll show you an exchange about one of Jeffrey Epstein's victimsa poignant observation to which, or so it says here, attention should be paid.

We'll do that later this week. Tomorrow, we'll restrict ourselves to the fun enjoyed by the mutts on last Tuesday's edition of The Five, and then on the Gutfeld! show.

No one in our own Blue America will ever tell you what those performers did that night. More generally, no one will ever report the way they like to roll in the garbage spread out by their handlers most nights. 

At this site, we will tell you this:

Their conduct is bringing the possibility of the American enterprise to an end. 

This steady descent has been underway for a good long time now. We Blues say it started with Newt's list of recommended words. Reds say it began before that.

With respect to last week's events, Blue America's journalists and academics refuse to report the way these mutts behavewon't even say these nitwits' names! 

This has been taking place for decades. What happened last Tuesday can sometimes seem to be all that remains.

Tomorrow: "[Little] beside remains?"

SURROUNDINGS: Wilma Rudloph won the hundred!

SATURDAY, MARCH 7, 2026

Let's call the whole thing off: According to the leading authority on the practice, the practice started like this:

State of the Union 

The State of the Union address is an annual message delivered by the president of the United States to a joint session of the United States Congress near the beginning of most calendar years on the current condition of the nation. The speech generally includes reports on the nation's budget, economy, news, agenda, progress, achievements and the president's priorities and legislative proposals.

The address fulfills the requirement in Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution that the president "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." During most of the country's first century, the president primarily submitted only a written report to Congress. After 1913, Woodrow Wilson, the 28th U.S. president, began the regular practice of delivering the address to Congress in person as a way to rally support for the president's agenda, while also submitting a more detailed report. With the advent of radio and television, the address is now broadcast live in all United States time zones on many networks.

The speech is generally held in January or February, and an invitation to the president is extended to use the chamber of the House by the speaker of the House.

[...]

Because the address is made to a joint session of Congress, the House and Senate must each pass a resolution setting a date and time for the joint session. Then, a formal invitation is made by the speaker of the House to the president typically several weeks before the appointed date.

The practice dates to 1913. By tradition, an invitation is extended to the president. 

The president is invited to come to the House. He's invited to deliver a speech to members of the House and the Senate.

This year, the war in Iran was three days away as the president spoke. Moments after he began his address, he brought in the men's hockey team.

What follows isn't a comment on the men's hockey team, which had recently vanquished Canada. 

With respect to the players on that hockey team, we'll assume that they're good, decent people, though possibly still a bit short of perfect. We think of the words from the Hank Williams song:

I was just a lad, nearly twenty-two.
Neither good nor bad
just a kid like you.

Did Williams actually write those lyrics? The leading authority says no. To us, they're deeply insightful, sacred wordsbut, at any rate, this:

The president called the players in, as was apparently part of his right under terms of his invitation.

It wasn't the worst thing he could have done. But by the time the evening was done, Peggy NoonanPresident Reagan's brilliant speechwriterwas discovered to have written this for the Wall Street Journal:

The Oprah State of the Union 

The president’s State of the Union address came straight from the heart of Crazytown. It had everything—tears, cheers, spectacle. They handed out medals and honors like Oprah in the early 2000s: “You get a car! Everybody gets a car!” At one point I thought he was going to pull out a ceremonial sword and knight Kristi Noem. There was yelling and booing and people crying, it was big and rousing, boring and absurd. And important in some things it revealed.

Ten years in, and Democrats still don’t know how to handle Donald Trump. He used them as foils and they allowed it, sitting there snarling, at points screaming. Part of how to handle him is if he tries to manipulate you into doing the right thing—if, for instance, he challenges you to stand in respect for a mother mourning the murder of her daughter—you put aside that you’re being manipulated and stand. Because it is right to show human sympathy and regard. The thing to do is look better than Mr. Trump, not worse. You say: My base demands coldness. Then get a new base. If you can’t, leave before you are reduced to a soulless husk of the eager, happy person who walked into that chamber a decade ago.

It had everything—tears, cheers, spectacle, awards. Democrats still haven’t figured Trump out.

When the gallery doors swung open and the triumphant U.S. Olympic men’s hockey team marched in, it was vulgar and fabulous. They were wearing their medals and their Ralph Lauren sweaters and smiling and laughing like good young men. We all think we’re above theatrics. Perhaps you had a moment like this: You were home on the couch and you saw the guys bounding in and thought, “I am sophisticated, I know what they’re doing, they’re manipulating me, but I’m not some rube, I’ll watch clinically. Oh Jeez, Jack Hughes’s tooth is still broken, God bless him. The goalie’s chewing gum like some 1945 GI.” And your throat hitched up against your will and your eyes moistened and when they started with “USA! USA!” you gave up, gave in, and pumped your fist. It is a damnable fact of life that great propaganda works even when you know it’s propaganda. 

Was it "vulgar" when the team came in? We wouldn't have used that word. 

Did the event come to us the people "straight from the heart of Crazytown?" That's tough language too!

We'd avoid blaming Oprah Winfrey for any of this. If she once gave away fleets of cars, that was her prerogative. Meanwhile, let it be said, perhaps in search of basic fairness, that President Trump has basically handled the southern border, while possibly making a giant mess of other parts of his spectacularly muddled MASS DEPORTATION versus "Worst of The Worst" presidential campaign brief. 

Noonan is a much better wordsmith than we are. That said, we almost might have gone with words like "bread and circuses"and that seems to be, in substantial part, akin to some of what Noonan said.

She also referred in that passage to the president's gotcha games that night, though not in those exact words. More on that topic below.

Based on what happened that Tuesday night, we'd say that the State of the Union event has possibly run its course. With all the medals and honors and spectacle and of course with all the theatrics, we'd have to say that it might be time to say this:

Let's call the whole thing off. 

A major war was three nights away. Perhaps in service to military strategy, that topic was barely mentioned.

Instead, we the people were asked to cheer the men's hockey team, which had recently defeated their Canadian teammatesin overtime, no less. Noonan, who's a good, decent person, seemed to say that she had reacted like this:

Despite her sophistication, her throat hitched up against her will and her eyes moistened, and when they started with “USA! USA!” she gave up and pumped her fist.

There's no reason why she shouldn't have reacted that waylarge numbers of people did. 

"Great propaganda works," she then said. There Noonan went again!

As we recently noted, we were lucky enough to have attended the so-called "Greatest Track Meet of All Time"the spectacular U.S. / Soviet Union meet in July 1962. It was held at Stanford Stadium, maybe ten miles from our family's front door 

We saw Bob Hayes win the men's 100. We saw Wilma Rudolph run away from the field in the corresponding women's event.

That event took place at the heart of the nuclear-tinged Cold War. Starting in the first grade, we kids had practiced hiding under our desks to defeat the possible bomb blast.

As the two-day meet took place, the Bay of Pigs had disastrously failed one year before. The so-called "Cuban Missile Crisis"more on that event belowwas now just three months off.

The U.S. men outpointed their Soviet rivals that weekend. The Soviet women won their half of the meet.

We saw Valery Brumel set a world record in the high jump. But the part of that meet which has lasted longest occurred when the athletic events were all done.

Many years later, Red Shannon chronicled the meet in fascinating detail for The Bleacher Report. We'll give you two bites of the apple:

USA vs. USSR, 1962: The Greatest Track Meet of All Time

[...]

While negotiations in Washington and Moscow intended to diffuse a ticking time bomb were falling apart, the few days in Palo Alto leading up to the competition were a demonstration of the very best humanity has to offer.

Private homes were opened up to the Soviets. Spontaneous cross-culture pickup games of basketball and baseball broke out in parking lots and streets. Host families organized informal tours of the many attractions in the San Francisco area. Banquets and press conferences were characterized by levity and mutual respect.

The charming Soviet world-record high jumper, Valery Brumel, entertained the press by doing his famous high-kick, touching a basketball rim with his toe, ten feet above ground.

Not one protest or demonstration marred the entire week.

On Saturday, July 21, 1962, 72,500 track fans filed through the gates of Stanford Stadium. The following day, another 81,000 filled the seats. It was the greatest two-day crowd to ever witness a non-Olympic track meet.

While the enthusiastic fans were indeed partisan, any superb effort was rewarded with cheers, regardless of nationality. The Americans were especially curious to get a look at Brumel and long jumper Igor Ter-ovanesyan who had recently eclipsed Ralph Boston's world record—and of course the famous Press sisters, Tamara and Irina.

In a manner typical of those days, the Americans dominated the sprints, middle distance, and pole vault. The Soviets ruled the longer distance races and jumping events.

The crowd got its money's worth. "Bullet" Bob Hayes, who went on to a second career with the Dallas Cowboys, won the men's 100 meters. His female counterpart, the great Wilma Rudolph, noted for her childhood battle with infantile paralysis, won the women's 100 meters and, through a gutsy anchor leg, secured a dramatic come-from-behind win in the 400-meter relay.

[...]

Perhaps the most symbolic and heart-gripping moment came as the athletes prepared to exit the stadium. The plan was to exit directly through the south end, in two columns. At the head of the columns, American [high jumper] John Thomas and Soviet javelinist Viktor Tsybulenko held a mini summit meeting of their own and decided instead to make a final victory lap.

All the athletes followed in unison, holding hands, embracing, waving their national colors. The fans stood and cheered as the entire formation of American and Soviet athletes completed their lap, then disappeared through the south gate.

The press would report that the American men won, 128-107 and the Soviet women prevailed, 66-41. No one really cared.

And no one wanted to leave. The Marine Corps Band continued to play for nearly an hour. Tears came easily for most of the record crowd as a cleansing torrent of emotion washed over them.

Ralph Boston would later recall, "I can't remember if the Cold War ever came into my mind at any time. All I was thinking was 'here was this super track and field team from the other side of the world...'"

In our view, the wordsmith Shannon got one word wrong. That wordsee abovewas "perhaps."

Citizen Shannon, please! Perhaps the most heart-gripping moment came as the athletes exited? 

We were physically present that day, and emotion swallowed the stadium as the athletes themselves, but surely the spectators, entertained thoughts of "something higher. Something more enduring," to return to Shannon's words.

The Soviet athletes joined in that long, slow farewell march. They circled the stadium, arm in arm with their American counterparts.

It wasn't the worst thing to see that occur. Three months later, the thirteen days of the Cuban missile crisis took place. 

We ourselves were just a lad, nearly 15a mere high school sophomore. One day, the spirited junior who would later be Aragon High's head cheerleader approached us and said these words:

"I'm afraid I won't get the chance to grow up."

If film existed of what she said, we think those might be her exact words. And of course, a lot of kids, this very day, don't get the chance to grow up.

Will our political culture ever grow up? The president has handled the southern border, but at that State of the Union event, he responded to his invitation to speak by playing the usual games. 

Noonan didn't use the word gotcha. We'll offer that word on our own.

Responding to an invitation, the president formed a gotcha game aimed at the chamber's Democrats. We'll spare you an extended discussion of his most vaunted gotcha game, but we will remind you of this:

Under terms of their oath to the Constitution, members have obligations to American citizens. But under terms of that same oath, they also have obligations to people who are "illegal immigrants"to people who are in the country without authorization. 

In theory, they're required to honor both sets of obligations. But the president, playing an increasingly familiar game, seemed to be working from this silly old football cheer that night:

Lean to the left, lean to the right.
Stand up, sit down
Fight fight fight!

Offered an invitation to speak, he responded by playing games with one set of his hosts. We're living in two (2) Americas now, and some of us seem to want to keep pushing farther on.

For ourselves, we didn't care all that much about that U.S. / Canada hockey match. We watched the third period and the overtime, but we didn't much care who won.

Other people very much didand there was no reason why they shouldn't have! Unless you were watching the agitprop on "cable news," there was also no reason why anyone should feel they had to.

We rooted for the Yanks at that 1962 track meet, but it ended with something larger. We were lucky that we got to attend. As the current war in Iran drew near, the gotcha game the president almost might perhaps have staged was part of the cultural surroundings.

We can still see Wilma Rudolph as she pulled away from the field. Also, we're still able to recall what that high school junior said.