The Dave Bowman Show

On the bright morning of August 6, 1945 (Japan time), a solitary B-29 floated gently over the city of Hiroshima. It was not an unusual sight, nor was it unexpected. In many ways Hiroshima had been either lucky or protected during the devastating air raids that had recently set many Japanese cities on fire. There were rumors that Hiroshima had some special protection because of some secret relationship with FDR, or perhaps it was the Emperor himself whose steady hand protected the city. In any case, Hiroshima had thus far been exempted from the fire bombing that had already killed hundreds of thousands around the rest of the nation. The reason for Hiroshima’s fortune and the reason it was would soon come to an end, was less about secret relationships than it was about silence. As the B-29 released its single bomb it banked away with its engines roaring loudly enough to be heard on the ground. The 155 degree turn seems an odd tactic, but it had been seen in recent weeks on a regular enough basis that it generated no special attention. In those final seconds, the real reason that Hiroshima had thus far been spared became blindingly obvious. And the world changed forever…

Join us in the latest episode of The Buffalo Alice Exit 314 Podcast as we delve into the multifaceted concept of “Privilege.” Dave explores the non-linear pathways of thought, drawing intriguing parallels between historical events and contemporary issues. This episode begins with a personal reflection on the French Revolution, unpacking the complex layers behind the uprising that sought to eliminate privilege. We then transition to modern-day discussions, highlighting a controversial Zoom call featuring the TikTok personality Mrs. Frazzled, and her remarks on using white privilege for systemic change. This provocative dialogue invites listeners to consider the historical context of privilege and its implications in today’s society. Tune in for an intellectually stimulating journey that challenges conventional thinking and encourages a deeper understanding of societal structures. Perfect for history enthusiasts and those curious about the intersection of past and present.

On this weeks gripping episode of “Dave Does History” on the Bill Mick Live Show, historian Dave Bowman takes us back to the harrowing final voyage of the USS Indianapolis during World War II. We explore the top-secret mission that led to the ship’s fateful journey, the catastrophic torpedo attack by a Japanese submarine, and the horrific ordeal faced by the surviving crew members in shark-infested waters. The episode also touches on the infamous court-martial of Captain McVay and the eventual discovery of the shipwreck. Join us for a detailed and emotional retelling of one of the most tragic maritime disasters in U.S. Naval history.

What if… we had a President who disagreed with Congress on everything? And when I say, “everything,” I mean… “everything?” What if the Congress passed a law that was so important to the national development of our society that it was deemed in many places, and a “new birth of freedom,” and the President, vetoed it? What would the reaction be? If this were to happen, how would it change the course of the nation? What would be the result of a direct conflict between the power and authority of the executive and the power of Congress to make law? And… if this were to ever happen, what could Congress do to make sure that the President couldn’t even try to do it again? This week on Dave Does History on Bill Mick Live, we’re going to take a look into one of the most controversial acts of the Reconstruction era: President Andrew Johnson’s veto of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. In the aftermath of the Civil War, the United States found itself at a crossroads, grappling with the challenges of reintegrating the Southern states and defining the status of freed slaves. It was a time of bold ideas, fierce debates, and monumental legislation that aimed to redefine the fabric of American society. The Civil Rights Act of 1866 emerged as a cornerstone, promising to grant African Americans the rights of citizenship denied to them for centuries. However, it faced opposition from an unexpected quarter: the President of the United States. Andrew Johnson, who ascended to the presidency after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, vetoed the Act, setting the stage for a historic clash with Congress. Why did Johnson veto this groundbreaking legislation? What were the implications of his actions, both immediate and long-term? And how did Congress respond? In this episode we will explore these questions and more, shedding light on a tumultuous period in American history that continues to resonate today.

Many people say that they “hate” Daylight Savings Time. Is that actually the case? Or is what they actually hate the twice a year fiddling with digital clocks in their cars? So it was that on March 19, 1918, the United States enacted the Standard Time Act, much of which remains on our law books today. But, was it just a war measure designed to held beat the Huns? Or was it a vast conspiracy by US Farmers to… to… to… well… to do something that would benefit their business at the expense of your sleep? Did it actually help anything in 1974 when the energy crises hit? Did it actually “save” anything? Did it help to win the war? And why exactly do people blame Benjamin Franklin for this? Let’s stop getting our history from Nicholas Cage flicks and see if we can figure out why Daylight Savings Time is still a thing…

On Monday, the Supreme Court released its much anticipated but anti-climatic per curiam ruling in Trump v Anderson, the Colorado attempt to remove him from the 2024 Primary ballot. While there was nothing truly surprising in the ruling – that it is Congress that decides to enforce 14.3 – there was a bit of blowback from the fact that Justice Barrett appeared at first glance, to join the dissent in part. We had a caller to the show on Tuesday who referred to what she said as “the most naive thing” he had ever heard. One of the the things that I most dislike about the immediacy of Talk Radio is that there are too many occasions when there isn’t time to fully digest a story after it breaks, and even less time to form anything but a surface level opinion about it. Often we lose out on the opportunity for deeper consideration of an idea or what someone has said. Certainly that is the case with Justice Barrett’s comment. While I fully agree that it was unnecessary, that does not equate to being “naive.” Moreover, what if what she said was to counter the dissent (in part) and point out the fact that the ruling was 9-0. Which, by the by, is exactly what was unexpected in the ruling, but not for the reasons that you might think…

Yesterday the Kitsap Superior Court held a hearing regarding a petition to remove Donald J. Trump from the ballot fro both the Primary and General elections in the State of Washington. This is, of course, based in the now well understood 14th Amendment Section 3 argument, and apparently, a radio show interview that encouraged the petitioners to file as soon as they could under Washington state law which they did… in Kitsap County. For reasons, I went to the hearing. And I am here today to tell you, we have some issues in this country. One of which is that people – on both sides – have no clue how to behave in a courtroom…

I am literally five days into my “college” experience. It’s been… interesting. I always enjoy learning things. I enjoy seeing things from a different perspective. And at least one of my professors seems to agree with that idea. Others seems unsure of how to conduct a class in an online environment. An, of course, the kids in these classes are panicking over stuff that doesn’t matter. But they don’t have the life experience to know that… yet. So what have I learned in a week?

I have a photo of myself that is… well.. let’s just say that it is something that I hate. I should have fed it to the shredder years ago, but I can’t. Why not? Because for as hideous as that photo is, it also tells the truth. As much as I would like to ignore or forget that truth, it was a fact that it was me in that picture. It’s a painful memory but one that I absolutely, for two diametrically opposed reasons, cannot let go. On the one hand, it appalls me. On the other hand, it reminds me of why I cannot ever let that happen again. So this week over in Seattle, a city which boasts that it is among the most healthy cities on the planet, is hosting something called “FatCon.” This is a celebration of the gravitationally challenged as well as having a mission to “improve the lives of fat humans through art, health, public policy, and community outreach. By improving visibility and uplifting the voices of people of size, we don’t seek acceptance, we seek fat liberation.” I have no clue what that means. I’m not convinced that anybody does. It’s just a bunch of politically acceptable buzz words and phrases thrown together like a corporate mission statement generator. At the end of the day, it sounds impressive, perhaps it even has gravitas. But it’s just another attemnpt to ignore reality and at the same time force everybody else to accept ignoring reality. The problem is that telling people that everything is just okay and that they should ignore reality has a way of killing people.

In case you missed it, the embattled President of Harvard, Claudine Gay, resigned over allegation of plagiarism. we are told, by no less an authority than the Associated press, that this was caused by “conservative attacks.” Meanwhile, the Chair of a State GOP has refused to resign after being outed for being involved in a ménage à trois, which, according to reports, was “more about here than about him.” So who is it that is leading the calls for him to resign? That’s right… conservatives. It’s almost like those crazy whack-a-doodle conservatives just go around attacking everybody for anything. More to the point, it’s just a manifestation of Dave’s 3rd law…

Last night as I was dropping Cami off at work, the news broke that the State of Maine had joined Colorado is removing Trump from their ballot. The stated justification for this was, of course, the infamous 14.3. In so may ways, I feel as if I have been somehow transported back to April of 1861. After Abraham Lincoln was kept off the ballot in numerous slave states and won anyway, there was some hope that rational men could reach reasonable accommodations and have avoided the calamity that so many were calling for anyway. It was the most hot-headed and unthinking of all of those men in those days that decided instead to take the course which they took. As the first shells arced through the air towards the fort sitting in Charleston Harbor, nobody knew what the next day, weeks, months or years would hold. No one understood the changes that this action would bring about. No one had the vision to see that the old structure of the republic was being blasted away like the bricks and mortar of the fort. In many way, the actions of Maine and Colorado are the moral equivalent of opening fire on Ft Sumter…

The great Colorado Conundrum has set talking head tongues to wagging all around the country. Is it Judicial activism? Is it a coup attempt? Is it a well considered judicial ruling, based on procedural due process and precedent? Or... is it all just a matter of interpretation of a few lines of text written a hundred and fifty years ago at a time with the nation was the "most divided its ever been?" In the aftermath of the "most important midterm election ever," the President found himself locked in a death struggle with his political opponents, who refused to allow the Presidents presumed allies to even take their seats in the debate. Like Sherlock Holmes let us pull at one of the threads hanging off the edges of the 14th Amendment and ask a question: What if the 14th amendment, Section 3 IS about a President. Just not the one the State of Colorado thinks it is about?

In the ashes of World War II, it was becoming quite clear that Jews needed a homeland where they would be relatively safe. Even after the destruction of Nazi Germany, Vichy France and fascist Italy, hatred for Jews remained quite strong, certainly in Europe. The new United Nations decided to create a plan, known as Resolution 181 (III), that would partition the former British Mandate of Palestine into two new nations, Israel, and an independent Arab State. There was much debate and modification to the plan before the UN finally voted on November 29, 1947, to approve the plan. While there were objections, most Jews around the world welcomed the plan. So why did the plan never go into action?

I had just started in radio and I was still working for another company that... well... lets just say that they had reservations about me being on the air and sharing my opinions. Because of their objections, they demanded (and got) me to use a radio nom de guerre. It was a name that was not my first choice (Herb Focaccia), but reflected my perceived role at the station. I was supposed to report on sports and fill in a a news guy. The demand was NOT a violation of my first amendment rights. It didn't offend me or cause me any actual heartburn. Later I would make it clear - AFTER I left the other company for full time radio - that it was not my real name, which led to two interactions with listeners that still make me... if not smile, at least remind me that Lincoln was absolutly correct about who can be fooled, at least some of the time. All that said, there are things about the first amendment on my mind today. When the Party that tells you to your face, "We support and defend the constitution. Please give us money and your vote," has a leading candidate - by some polls running second in the race for the nomination - who tells you that she doesn't give two cents about the first amendment if it stands in the way of what she wants, you have a problem. If it was isolated case, you'd shrug it off as a mistake. when she repeats it, you have to presume that she means it. The bigger issue is that we the People have no clue what it means to have freedom of speech or association or the press or even of conscience. In our society today, there is, led by the politicos, a move towards supporting free speech that we like, and condemning all others. And zero understanding that just because YOU choose to believe something, there is no requirement that I must share your belief...

In 1954, the United States re-designated the 11th of November as Veterans Day. Prior to then, the day had been known as Armistice day, and was intended to remind people of the absolute madness that had been The Great War. The intention, as express by then President Woodrow Wilson, was: To us in America the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service, and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of nations. While the re-designation to celebrate all US Veterans makes sense to our country, I often wonder if we miss the importance of the day? Do we lose the connection that we forged in 1918? Today we have the pedantic people who will always post the meme about “What Veterans day, Memorial day and Armed Forces Day mean” and inform you that if you celebrate any of them “incorrectly” that you are somehow being disrespectful. But I submit to you that, in the midst of all the freebies and benefits that Veterans will receive this weekend, it might be appropriate to recall the 11th Hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, when the guns of August finally fell silent. But only after the death of as many as nearly five million military casualties on the Allied side. Today, we have forgotten that cost. More importantly, we have forgotten the incredible stupidity of The Great War that led to those costs. which is why if you pass a VFW Post Member today, they will ask you to wear a poppy flower. Because, it’s NOT just Veterans Day. It’s Armistice Day and Remembrance Day. We should take a moment before we dive into that free meal or desert, and remember that a century ago, our forefathers scarified to secure the liberty we enjoy today. It is neither “wrong,” nor “insulting” to bow our heads and recall the fallen today. Or… any other day for that matter…

I am absolutely fascinated with religious cults. What really draws me in is the question about motives, both leaders and followers. Even more, I am always interested in the way that the leaders of these various cults manage to not only convince people that they are not just right, but they are doing what G-d commanded them to do AND what is BEST for them. What is even more interesting is the way that other cultish organizations manage to convince us of the same thing. And lest you say, “No, not me! I will NEVER do that!” let us consider the biggest, richest, and most powerful Master of them all…

There's an old saw that says: If you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart. And if you're not a conservative when you're old, you have no brain. As strange as it may seem, given the media coverage, in recent days, there are a lot - and I mean a lot - of folks who have been startled awake from their wokeness. For some it has come as a shock, for others, maybe it's the realization that crazy never rests. In either case, the real question is whether it will be enough to turn things around? For my own part, the media seems hell bent on making certain that it's not enough, but we've reached a point where it's no longer just MAGA Conservatives that no longer trust the media. What that ultimately means is still not visible in anybody's crystal ball. That isn't stopping talking heads from telling us what they "know" is going to happen as if they received it from the foot of Mt Olympus.

I love ancient history, particularly that of the Roman Republic. You knew that. But what if one of my most cherished beliefs about the past is… well… incorrect? Yesterday, Jim Jordan cancelled a third vote on his campaign for Speaker of the House. It all seems surreal and at the same time, has generated arguments galore as to who is right, who is doing the people’s business, who is protecting the Constitution, the republic and even… liberty? Once upon a time, some in a government that had become so corrupted by money and power. So they sought to eliminate a challenge to their own continued power and wealth. They wrapped themselves in phrases and ideologies that sounded great. Liberty! Honor! Republic! But, what if… they… were… you know… wrong?

RADIO FEED ONLY On the night of October 14/15, 1781, a combined force of American and French forces stormed two British forts, known as redoubts, that held the right side of the British lines at Yorktown. Behind those forts waited seven thousand or so British troops and their German mercenaries. Leading the assault on Redoubt 10 was Colonel Alexander Hamilton. He had been personally selected by George Washington to lead what he hoped would be the final attack of the battle. He had also selected crack Rhode Island troops to carry the assault. They had been chosen for a specific reason and they were more than ready to inflict defeat on the hated British. When the attack was over, Washington knew, as did General Cornwallis, that the Yorktown campaign was over. The were only two questions now. First, would this end British war on America? The second question was much more telling. The answer would haunt America for the next four score years and four years…

The winter of 1775-76 was not a good one for the Americans. Defeat after defeat had followed the early success, and many were rethinking their own involvement in the revolution against the British. Congress was desperate, money was gone, troops were leaving as short enlistments expired. And everywhere, Washington’s tiny and shrinking army was on the retreat. The flame of liberty, seemingly, was extinguished. On the side of the road, as the Army retreated, one man took every opportunity, not to complain or commensurate over their lot with his fellow soldiers. Instead, he took every chance he had to scribble words on paper. As the Army retreated, he wrote ever more furiously. His words flowing from heart, were inflammatory. and the fire they would re-kindle, would lead to actions which hitherto, had been the words of radicals and rabble-rousers. When the words he wrote were published, they became the best selling book in the history of The United States. While some of what he wrote is occasionally remembered today, such phrases such as “Summer Soldiers” or “Sunshine Patriots,” his deeper meaning resonated with Americans. And as we watch the world today, it is that deeper meaning of “Common Sense,” to which we should apply ourselves, lest we also become the Summer Soldier or Sunshine Patriots.

It’s been a very tough week. Between some health issues and the loss of a fellow SubVet, it’s been long and stressful. The Congress this week voted to remove the Speaker. It was an unusual event, one that hasn’t happened – at least in this manner – before. It has caused a great deal of brouhaha, and a great deal of “discussion” between conservatives as to whether or not it was a “smart” moves. I tend to look at things from a historical perspective and so I wander back through those halls and ask myself what the people who actually invented democracy would have had thought about it all? Something tells me that they wouldn’t have been impressed…

Before I could get to the show I had planned for today, we received the word that Senator Diane Feinstein has passed away at the age of ninety. Certainly the loss of a family member is painful, so my condolences are with the Feinstein family. I ended up getting distracted by a couple of errands that had to be done this morning, so I had time to read more than a few articles about the passing of the Senator, when one in particular caught my eye. I know that the Daily Signal is produced by the Heritage foundation, but I find that it tends to drift from my libertarian principles. So I read it because I already know what I think, I want to know what others think. That said, on the occasion of the passing of a noted Senator, it’s really a shame that what we are getting are AI generated articles that, at best, are kludgy…

Over the past few days, the whole world watched as the Canadian Parliament gave a standing ovation to a known Nazi soldier. Or... at least they should have known that he was a Nazi. You know... and actual real-life Nazi. Not one of their political opponents that was labeled as a Nazi because they want to be insulting and yet seem suave and politically bourgeoisie. Nope.... an actual Nazi. And an actual standing ovation. Now, look, we could spend a lot of time detailing how insulting this was to those of us of the Jewish faith, or... we could spend a lot of time discussing the ridiculous way that the Parliament and the Prime Minister have reacted, or technically attempted to react by blaming literally everybody - including Hitler - except themselves for the fiasco. In the end though, the reason that we study history is to inculcate societal values and traditions that are useful to a culture. Ideas and lessons that help to prevent that society from making a giant ass of itself on worldwide television. The kind of lessons that we find so rarely in history, and somehow manage to forget or ignore them anyway. Which is why I can say without any hesitation or concern that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is certainly no Pericles. Then again, neither is anybody else who thinks that they are a "leader" in today's world...

Yesterday, the Mexican Government showed video that it says proves that aliens from UFO crashes are real. In Pennsylvania, elements of the US Government captured an escaped murdered and illegal immigrant. Mitt Romney announced that he was not ruining for re-election, and in an effort to ingratiate himself further, said that we need "younger leadership." In the Ukraine, President Zelinsky informed us that we have to keep funding the war, because otherwise Ukrainian refugees would be upset. On TV, Nancy Pelosi admitted that the Vice President of the Unites states doesn't really do anything. And a Biden appointed Judge blocked the New Mexico Governors Executive order to ban guns. It was a busy day. Oh yeah... and there was a letter...

It’s one of those “myths” of history, that on September 12, 1962, then President John F. Kennedy stood in Rice Stadium in Houston and announced to a stunned and surprised nation and world that the United States was committing itself to putting a man on the moon – and returning him safely – before the end of the decade. The speech is stirring and it was certainly one of Kennedy’s most noted. What it was not, was any kind of surprise at all. More than a year before, Kennedy had told a wildly cheering Congress that the moon was the goal, and they in turn were more than happy to fund it. What hadn’t happened after that announcement was the wild across the board support for the goal for which he had hoped. In fact, many newspapers ran articles explaining why the moon simply wasn’t a realistic goal, some going so far as to “prove” that it was, in fact, impossible. The genius of Kennedy’s 1962 speech was that he knew all the naysayers would be listening, along with the folks who simply wanted to hear something inspirational of uplifting, given the troubling times in which they lived. In one of the greatest moment of oratory, JFK delivered on the challenge to challenge America. And this time, the naysayers would have to come up with a different response… Note: The entire speech by John F Kennedy is added to the end of the podcast…