We the People: A Call Against Tyranny and Loyalty

NO KINGS

Colorful graphic with the text 'NO KINGS' in bold letters, accompanied by decorative elements including a crown and stars.

For nearly 250 years, America has stood for one simple, powerful idea: we do not bow to kings.

The truth is in the name of the protest itself — NO KINGS.

It doesn’t matter if you’re Republican, Democrat, or Independent — this isn’t about party. It’s about principle.

A Nation Built on Limits — Not Loyalty

When our founders declared independence, they weren’t just rejecting a monarch; they were rejecting the very idea that one person should ever hold absolute power.

They understood that freedom depends on limits — limits on government, limits on leaders, limits on ego.

Today, that same fight continues.

There are those who would have us return to the rule of one man — not through lineage, but through blind loyalty.

We’ve seen leaders who demand fealty, who call anyone who disagrees traitors, who use the machinery of government to punish opponents and reward friends.

That is not democracy. That is monarchy in a new disguise.

To the Most Loyal Among Us

To the most MAGA among us: maybe you supported some of Trump’s policies. Maybe you believed he spoke for you.

But ask yourself — do you really want him, or anyone else, to rule as KING?

How long will it be before he comes after you for disagreeing?

How long before troops are ordered into your cities under the excuse of “maintaining order”?

We fought a revolution to prevent exactly that.

We swore allegiance not to a man, but to a Constitution.

And that Constitution begins with three words: We the People.

Liberty and Justice — For All

Every schoolchild knows how the pledge ends:

“…with liberty and justice for all.”

Not for some. Not for one man. For all.

That’s who holds the power — We the People.

Not kings. Not billionaires. Not bullies with golden crowns and fragile egos.

Stand Together

So when you see a NO KINGS protest — go.

Go not as a partisan, but as an American.

Stand beside your neighbors, your coworkers, your friends — left, right, and center — and say together what generations before us have said:

No. Not here. Not now. Not ever.

Flag featuring the phrase 'We the People' and 'NO KINGS IN AMERICA' in bold, colorful typography against a black background, displayed outside in a garden setting.

Trump and the GOP: The Truth Behind the Government Shutdown

The government shut down will affect all of us. In big ways and small. We all know that Trump will cave because that is what he does. We also must acknowledge that Trump and the GOP who effectively control all branches of government are 100% to blame.

BUT WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN? In short, we had to shut it down to keep a functioning government open.

While searching to explain it I came across this Substack from Robert Reich. Professor, writer and former Secretary of Labor.

I’ve been directly involved in government shutdowns, one when I was secretary of labor. It’s hard for me to describe the fear, frustration, and chaos that ensued. I recall spending the first day consoling employees — many in tears as they headed out the door.

In some ways, this shutdown is similar to others. Agencies and departments designed to protect consumers, workers, and investors are now officially closed, as are national parks and museums.
Most federal workers are not being paid — as many as 750,000 could be furloughed — including those who are required to remain on the job, like air-traffic controllers or members of the U.S. military.
So-called “mandatory” spending, including Social Security and Medicare payments, are continuing, although checks could be delayed. (Trump has made sure that construction of his new White House ballroom won’t be affected.)

There have been eight shutdowns since 1990. Trump has now presided over four.
But this shutdown — the one that began yesterday morning — is radically different.
For one thing, it’s the consequence of a decision made in July by Trump and Senate Republicans to pass Trump’s gigantic “big beautiful bill” (I prefer to call it “big ugly bill”) without any Democratic votes.
They could do that because of an arcane Senate procedure called “reconciliation,” which allowed the big ugly to get through the Senate with just 51 votes rather than the normal 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster.

The final tally was a squeaker. All Senate Democrats opposed the legislation. When three Senate Republicans joined them, Vice President JD Vance was called in to break a tie. Some Republicans bragged that they didn’t need a single Democrat.

The big ugly fundamentally altered the priorities of the United States government. It cut nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act — with the result that health insurance premiums for tens of millions of Americans will soar starting in January.

The big ugly also cut nutrition assistance and environmental protection, while bulking up immigration enforcement and cutting the taxes of wealthy Americans and big corporations.
Trump and Senate Republicans didn’t need a single Democrat then. But this time, Republicans couldn’t use the arcane reconciliation process to pass a bill to keep the governing going.
Now they needed Senate Democratic votes.

Yet keeping the government going meant keeping all the priorities included in the big ugly bill that all Senate Democrats opposed.

Which is why Senate Democrats refused to sign on unless most of the big ugly’s cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act were restored, so health insurance premiums won’t soar next year.

Even if Senate Democrats had gotten that concession, the Republican bill to keep the government going would retain all the tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations contained in the big ugly, along with all the cuts in nutrition assistance, and all the increased funding for immigration enforcement.

There’s a deeper irony here.

As a practical matter, the U.S. government has been “shut down” for over eight months, since Trump took office a second time.

Trump and the sycophants surrounding him — such as Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, and, before him, Elon Musk and his DOGE — have had no compunctions about shutting down parts of the government they don’t like — such as USAID.

They’ve also fired, laid off, furloughed, or extended buyouts to hundreds of thousands of federal employees doing work they don’t value, such as at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (The federal government is already expected to employ 300,000 fewer workers by December than it did last January.)

They’ve impounded appropriations from Congress for activities they oppose, ranging across the entire federal government.

Yesterday, on the first day of the shutdown, Vought announced that the administration was freezing some $26 billion in funds Congress had appropriated — including $18 billion for New York City infrastructure (home to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries) and $8 billion for environmental projects in 16 states, mostly led by Democrats.

All of this is illegal — it violates the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 — but it seems unlikely that courts will act soon enough to prevent the regime from harming vast numbers of Americans.
Vought is also initiating another round of mass layoffs targeting, in his words, “a lot” of government workers.

This is being described by Republicans as “payback” for the Democrats not voting to keep the government going, but evidently nothing stopped Vought from doing mass layoffs and freezing Congress’s appropriations before the shutdown.

In fact, the eagerness of Trump and his lapdogs over the last eight months to disregard the will of Congress and close whatever they want of the government offers another reason why Democrats shouldn’t cave in.

Were Democrats to vote to keep the government going, what guarantee do they have that Trump will in fact keep the government going?
Democrats finally have some bargaining leverage. They should use it.

If tens of millions of Americans lose their health insurance starting in January because they can no longer afford to pay sky-high premiums, Trump and his Republicans will be blamed. Months before the midterms.

It would be Trump’s and his Republicans’ fault anyway — it’s part of their big ugly bill — but this way, in the fight over whether to reopen the government, Americans will have a chance to see Democrats standing up for them.

Rejecting the ‘Blue Scare’ in Local Politics

A Local Call to Reject the “Blue Scare”

As Dover’s Ward 3 councilor I want to expand on a warning that should concern every resident who cares about good government and a healthy civic culture. Our nation has a long and painful history of allowing fear to do the work of reason — and we are beginning to see echoes of that history here and now.

Fear as a Political Weapon

Throughout American history, fear has been used to short‑circuit debate and chill dissent. The early 20th‑century Red Scare and the McCarthy era in the 1950s are stark reminders of what happens when suspicion and paranoia replace facts and open discussion. People lost livelihoods, reputations, and even basic freedoms because they were labeled “un‑American” for asking tough questions or holding unpopular views. Those episodes weakened our democracy and left scars that lasted generations.

A New Scare: The “Blue Scare”

Today we are witnessing a different but related phenomenon: a “Blue Scare.” Rather than accusing citizens of communism, some political actors and media outlets now demonize people for being Democrats, liberals, progressives, or for not being sufficiently aligned with the MAGA movement. Support for causes like affordable housing, public education, or healthcare becomes a reason to brand a neighbor as disloyal or dangerous. The result is the same: conversation collapses into caricature, and complex policy debates give way to tribal shaming.

Why This Matters Locally

This isn’t just a national story; it plays out in our city meetings, on neighborhood sidewalks, and across the wards of Dover. When we allow partisan fearmongering to set the tone, we undermine the very processes that produce practical solutions. Projects stall. Trust erodes. People stop attending meetings or offering ideas because they fear being attacked for their political identity rather than critiqued for their proposals.

I see better outcomes when residents engage respectfully. In Ward 3, when neighbors come together—regardless of party—we accomplish real things: potholes get fixed, housing gets built, fields get finished. Those achievements are the product of conversation, compromise, and the willingness to put community needs above partisan point‑scoring.

How We Can Resist the Scare

  • Keep the focus on policy: Debate the merits of proposals — costs, benefits, trade‑offs — rather than attacking the people who propose them.
  • Call out fearmongering: When you hear rhetoric meant to frighten or dehumanize, name it. Remind people that our democratic duty is to listen and to challenge ideas, not to silence or ostracize neighbors.
  • Build cross‑partisan relationships: Reach out to people who vote differently. Attend events, volunteer on local projects, and find shared priorities that transcend party labels.
  • Model civil discourse: As elected officials and as citizens, we set the tone. Use facts, cite sources, and treat opponents as fellow residents, not enemies.

A Local Pledge

I believe Dover succeeds when we refuse to let fear guide our politics. I pledge to continue inviting residents from every background and political stripe into conversation. My priority as a city councilor is pragmatic problem‑solving—roads, housing, schools, public safety—that improves daily life for everyone.

The Red Scares of the past are rightly remembered as national embarrassments. If we are honest with ourselves, we already see the outlines of a contemporary shame: a Blue Scare that trades substance for spectacle and loyalty tests for policy discussion. Let’s refuse to repeat that mistake.

Join the conversation, share your concerns, and help build the pragmatic, inclusive Dover we all want. Together, we can ensure our disagreements stay rooted in policy and purpose — not in fear or exclusion.

The Recklessness of Leadership: A Call for Accountability

Sometimes I have to stop and ask myself: does anyone else see how insane this all is? Or are we just supposed to pretend that this is normal?

The President of the United States casually tosses out an unsubstantiated claim that there’s a link between Tylenol and autism. No research cited. No scientific consensus. Just words, and yet words from the President carry enormous weight. Families across the country are left in fear and confusion, while actual scientists scramble to clean up the mess. This is not leadership—it’s recklessness.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court—the very institution designed to uphold checks and balances—abandons its responsibility. By allowing Trump to fire officials who were appointed with congressional approval, they have effectively erased a critical guardrail of our democracy. What’s the point of having a system of checks and balances if one branch simply abdicates its role when it becomes politically inconvenient?

And while all this chaos unfolds, every single GOP senator voted against releasing the Epstein files. Let that sink in. We’re told over and over that transparency is a pillar of democracy, yet here is a bipartisan scandal begging for sunlight, and they slam the door shut. What exactly are they protecting? Whom are they protecting?

Then, as if that weren’t enough, Russia brazenly invades NATO airspace. An act that should send shivers down the spine of any world leader. But what do we do? Nothing. What do we say? Nothing. Silence where there should be strength. Passivity where there should be resolve.

Now add to this the alarming pattern of weaponizing the justice system for political ends. President Trump has publicly called on Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice to prosecute his political opponents—an explicit invitation to turn law enforcement into a tool of retribution. When the head of the executive branch pressures prosecutors to pursue cases against rivals without transparent evidence or due process, it corrodes the rule of law. Prosecutors hold immense discretionary power; when that power is wielded for political vengeance, it chills dissent, undermines fair trials, and transforms accountability into persecution. This isn’t just partisan politics—it’s a direct threat to the impartial institutions that keep democracy functioning. We cannot normalize demands that the justice system be used as a political cudgel.

It’s all happening in real time, right in front of us. Dangerous lies. Broken checks and balances. Willful secrecy. Silence in the face of foreign aggression. The politicization of our legal institutions. And we just keep moving along, as though this is business as usual.

It is not normal. It should never be normal. And if we don’t recognize that now—if we don’t demand accountability—we risk losing not just credibility, but the very foundations of democracy itself.

So I ask again: does anyone else see how crazy this is?

News You Missed While You Were Distracted by Charlie Kirk

News You Missed While You Were Distracted by Charlie Kirk

I While cable hosts, viral pundits, and culture-war theatrics fought for your attention, major global and domestic events unfolded with real consequences. If you were scrolling past serious headlines, here’s what actually happened.

  1. GOP Senators Blocked Release of Epstein Files In a unanimous GOP vote, every Republican senator opposed releasing documents related to Jeffrey Epstein’s network and dealings. That vote raises questions about transparency and accountability at the highest levels — and what powerful interests might prefer kept secret.
  2. UN Votes to Recognize Palestine — 142 to 10 In a sweeping international move, the United Nations voted 142–10 to recognize the State of Palestine. This is a diplomatic milestone with broad geopolitical implications for peace negotiations, aid, and regional alignments. The vote marks a significant shift in global sentiment and will influence policy discussions for months to come.
  3. Largest Civilian Maritime Humanitarian Mission Heads to Gaza A massive civilian flotilla — the largest maritime humanitarian mission in history — set sail for Gaza carrying supplies and volunteers. This mission underscores the severity of the humanitarian crisis and the lengths civilians are willing to go to deliver relief where governments and international agencies have struggled.
  4. Russian Drones enter NATO Airspace: Russian Drones Intercepted Dutch, German, and Polish fighter jets scrambled to intercept Russian drones in what officials are calling the largest incursion into NATO airspace in decades. Despite the scale, the international response stopped short of escalation. That restraint — or inaction, depending on your viewpoint — deserves scrutiny: how prepared are NATO members, and what message does this send to Moscow?
  5. March for the Constitution: A 100-Mile Protest to Congress A group of citizens walked over 100 miles to deliver a copy of the U.S. Constitution to Congress, protesting what they see as a growing erosion of civil liberties. Whether you agree with their methods or not, the march reflects widespread anxiety about rights, rule of law, and democratic norms.
  6. Bolsonaro Convicted for Attempted Coup, Sentenced to 27 Years. Former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro — an ally of conservative figures including Donald Trump — was found guilty of attempting to overturn a free and fair election and trying to remain in power illegally. He was sentenced to 27 years in prison. The conviction is a stark reminder that threats to democracy exist beyond U.S. borders and that consequences can follow. (ON Monday The Trump Administration sanctioned the wife of the Judge who sentenced Bolsonaro and then revoked the visa of another official who criticized the decision).

These are not niche stories or slow-burn features. Each item affects geopolitics, democratic institutions, or human lives. Meanwhile, partisan personalities and viral distractions command headlines and airtime. If you want to stay informed, prioritize verified reporting and substantive coverage over the noise. The stakes are higher than any pundit’s hot take

How Italy’s Political Violence Mirrors U.S. Extremism

Italy’s Years of Lead (late 1960s–1980s) were marked by sustained political violence—bombings, kidnappings, assassinations—by both far-left and far-right militants. The period left deep scars on Italian democracy and institutions. The United States today faces its own surge in politically motivated violence, rising extremist networks (predominantly on the far right), intense polarization, and institutional strain. Drawing lessons from Italy can help the U.S. avoid escalation and protect democratic norms.

What’s happening now in the U.S.

  • A rise in right-wing violence: Research and law-enforcement reporting show increasing activity by white supremacist, anti-government, and militia groups. The FBI and DHS have repeatedly identified domestic violent extremists—especially racially motivated violent extremists and anti-government actors—as among the top domestic threats. 
  • High-profile political violence: Charlottesville (2017) and the January 6, 2021, Capitol attacks are stark examples of organized political violence and the willingness of politically motivated mobs to use force. 
  • Rhetoric and radicalization: Prominent conservative activists and media figures (like Charlie Kirk) have used combative, often dehumanizing rhetoric. In NO WAY does this justify his killing – BUT- Scholars link such rhetoric to environments that can facilitate radicalization even when direct causation is hard to prove. Public figures’ statements that stoke grievance and delegitimize opponents lower norms and can embolden violent actors. 
  • Media and accountability pressures: Major media organizations have fired or disciplined hosts and contributors after controversies over comments about public figures or political matters, reflecting both commercial pressures and debates about editorial tolerance. Some critics argue media responses have been inconsistent, fueling perceptions of selective accountability. 
  • Use of federal forces in cities: Debates over federal deployments—whether federal agents at protests or National Guard activations—have heightened tensions, with critics warning such moves can escalate conflict or be perceived as politicized if not transparently justified and overseen.

Comparing to Italy’s Years of Lead: parallels and limits

  • Parallels: Polarization, media amplification, organized extremist networks, and institutional stress are common factors. Italy’s descent shows how unresolved grievances and state overreach can create feedback loops of violence and delegitimation. 
  • Limits: Italy’s violence involved more sustained, symmetric campaigns by both left and right, large-scale bombings, and Cold War geopolitics that have no direct modern U.S. equivalent. The U.S. context is shaped by social media radicalization, different political institutions, and a mostly far-right profile of violent groups today.

Risks to watch

  • Normalizing dehumanizing rhetoric from public figures, which lowers barriers to violence. 
  • Selective enforcement or politicized use of federal force, which undermines trust. 
  • Media incentives that amplify polarizing content and inconsistent accountability, which reinforce grievance narratives. 
  • Online ecosystems that speed radicalization and facilitate operational planning.

What Can We Do in Dover and New Hampshire?

  • Community violence prevention: Invest in local organizations, crisis-intervention teams, and intervention specialists who can mediate disputes and identify early radicalization signs. 
  • Robust civilian oversight: Create empowered civilian review boards and independent investigators for incidents involving political actors. 
  • Prosecutorial independence and ethics: Strengthen rules and oversight to ensure local prosecutors act impartially on politically sensitive cases. 
  • Education and media literacy: Expand programs in schools and communities to build critical thinking and resilience against disinformation. 
  • Local reintegration services: Fund job training, counseling, and social supports for those leaving extremist movements to reduce recidivism.

Civic and media responsibilities

  • Public figures should be held to higher standards of rhetoric; platforms and outlets should apply policies transparently and consistently. 
  • Media organizations must balance accountability with due process, resisting both partisan pressure and reflexive cancellations that feed grievance narratives. 
  • Civil society should bolster spaces for cross-partisan engagement to rebuild trust.

Italy’s Years of Lead show how democratic backsliding and political violence can feed off polarization, institutional weakness, and state overreach. The United States is not destined to repeat Italy’s worst extremes—but avoiding that path requires recognizing the growing threat from right-wing violence, curbing incendiary rhetoric, ensuring impartial enforcement, reforming federal interventions, and investing at state and local levels in prevention and reintegration. Clear oversight, consistent accountability, and civic renewal are the best defenses against escalation

Compassion Is Stronger Than Cruelty

The political atmosphere in this country has become dangerously toxic. Too many leaders, pundits, and influencers no longer work to bring people together—they work to keep us divided, angry, and afraid. Division has become a tool for holding onto power. When we are constantly told to fear one another and to treat “the other side” as an enemy, violence becomes inevitable.

The recent assassination of Charlie Kirk is a tragic and disturbing reminder of where this road leads. I disagree with nearly everything Charlie Kirk stood for and said, but disagreement is not dehumanization. His death should not be celebrated. Political violence has no place in our country.

In the aftermath, discussions have predictably become polarized. Some commentators emphasize the danger of right-wing violence, others deflect blame or minimize the pattern. As Howard Kurtz reported on Fox News, President Biden pushed back against suggestions that right-wing violence is to blame, underscoring how fraught and contested public reactions can be. The piece “Why blaming ‘the left’ is easier than deterring violence after Charlie Kirk’s murder” highlights how convenient narratives and political convenience often shape the conversation—yet they do little to actually deter violence or heal a divided nation.

Fear as a Weapon

When cruelty is directed at one group, it becomes easy for the rest of us to look away and feel grateful it is not aimed at us. That is exactly what those in power count on. They weaponize fear—fear of immigrants, fear of people with different skin colors, fear of other religions, fear of neighbors who vote differently.

This us-versus-them mentality blinds us to what our country could be. We are told that if we don’t agree 100% with whichever party is in charge, we are un-American, radical, or dangerous. That is not freedom. That is manipulation.

More That Unites Us

I have spent much of my life traveling—across states and countries, among many languages, religions, and cultures. What I know with certainty is this: people everywhere want the same basic things.

They want safe neighborhoods. They want to raise their families with dignity. They want meaningful work and the hope of a brighter future. These are not partisan goals. These are human goals.

When you open yourself to the richness of the world, you see clearly that compassion—not cruelty—strengthens a society.

Rejecting Violence, Choosing Unity

There is no need for political violence, and there is no excuse for those who instigate it. Violence, intimidation, and cruelty cannot build a future; they only destroy one.

We cannot be tricked into believing cruelty is strength. We cannot let fear divide us into warring camps. The truth is there is far more that unites us than divides us—and our leaders should remind us of that every day.

Compassion is not weakness. Compassion allows communities to thrive. If we choose compassion, we choose unity. If we reject violence, we choose hope.

The world is still a wonderful place. It’s time our politics reflected that.

References

  • Howard Kurtz, “President makes comments following Charlie Kirk murder as he rejects suggestions about right-wing violence,” Fox News.
  • “Why blaming ‘the left’ is easier than deterring violence after Charlie Kirk’s murder.”

Let’s make sure NH stands for science, safety, and community

Let’s make sure NH stands for science, safety, and community

Sept. 8 − To the Editor:

Florida’s decision to end vaccine mandates is a terrible mistake − and it is one New Hampshire should never consider repeating.

For most of human history, the average life expectancy was only 30 to 35 years. People lived on organic food, breathed clean air, and consumed no artificial additives. And yet—they still died young. As Neil deGrasse Tyson has explained, lifespans only increased when science got involved. Vaccines, antibiotics, and public health measures changed everything.

By rejecting this progress, Florida risks a tragic return of diseases once thought eradicated and a rise in preventable deaths. That is not freedom—that is recklessness.

Here in New Hampshire, we pride ourselves on common sense and responsibility to our neighbors. Vaccines are not just a personal choice; they are a social compact that protects the most vulnerable among us—children, seniors, and those with health conditions.

There will also be a huge economic toll from plants and factories initially temporarily shutting down because of the spread of diseases (like during covid) to businesses moving to locations where this will not be an issue. In my work, I spend a great deal of time in Europe, and I already hear of families canceling vacations to Florida and even the U.S. because of health concerns. Do we want New Hampshire associated with that same reputation?

Public health should never be a partisan issue. It is about protecting lives. Let’s make sure New Hampshire stands for science, safety, and community—not politics that put us all at risk.

Tony Retrosi

Dover

Dover’s Future: A Commitment to Progress

Staying the Course for Dover’s Future

When I first answered the call to serve on Dover’s City Council, it wasn’t for fanfare, recognition, or awards. It was—and continues to be—about getting things done. About making Dover a community where families want to live, where businesses want to grow, and where people feel proud to call home.

I have been a proud resident of Dover since the 1980s and have owned and operated Atlantic Gymnastics with two locations for more than 30 years. My roots here run deep, and my commitment to our city has only grown stronger. Over the past term, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside my colleagues, city staff, and the residents of Ward 3 to accomplish a great deal. We’ve made Dover safer, kept our budget responsible—successfully passing a budget under the tax cap—and started important initiatives that are already shaping the future of our city.

But much of our work is still ahead of us.

Infrastructure and Housing

We’ve begun critical infrastructure projects to modernize Dover’s roads, utilities, and public spaces. These are not abstract plans—they are investments that will directly improve daily life for residents. We’ve also laid the groundwork for housing initiatives to address one of Dover’s greatest challenges: providing opportunities for families, seniors, and young professionals to find affordable and sustainable places to live.

Athletic Fields and Community Resources

We’ve put in motion plans to expand and improve athletic facilities, including the sports complex at Dover High School. These spaces are about more than recreation—they foster community, teamwork, and provide vital opportunities for our young people to grow and thrive.

Work Left to Do

While I am proud of what we’ve accomplished, the reality is that we are only partway through this journey. Many projects require steady leadership, experience, and a clear understanding of both our progress and what remains. It’s not the time to change course or start over.

Why I Am Running for Reelection

I am running for reelection in Ward 3 because Dover deserves follow-through. We cannot afford to have half-finished projects or lose momentum on issues that directly impact our quality of life. My pledge is to continue the work we’ve started—responsibly, transparently, and with Dover’s long-term success always at the forefront.

Public service, to me, is not about personal ambition or political stepping stones. It’s about doing the hard work necessary to ensure Dover remains one of the best places in New Hampshire to live, work, and raise a family.

With your support, I will continue to provide steady leadership, community-focused decision-making, and the persistence needed to see these projects through. Ward 3 deserves consistency. Dover deserves progress. And together, we will get the job done.

Thank you for your trust and support.

— Tony Retrosi

Real Strength Is Community, Not Cruelty

The current state of the MAGA party is not about prosperity, or security, or even policy. It is about cruelty.

If you can be shown images of suffering—children in Gaza denied medical care, migrants detained by masked men, families deported without explanation—you are supposed to forget how far your own quality of life has slipped.

The State Department has halted “medical-humanitarian” visas for people from Gaza. If you see others denied life-saving care, you don’t focus on the millions of Americans who can’t afford health insurance. You forget about our broken healthcare system.

When masked men scoop people off the streets and deport them to who knows where, you don’t focus on the fact that millions of Americans are priced out of safe, affordable housing. You forget that in one of the richest countries on earth, we have children who go to bed hungry.

Donald Trump deploys the National Guard into American cities. Not because crime is surging—it isn’t. Crime rates are at historic lows. The point is to create fear. To remind you what could happen to you if you step out of line.

This isn’t about law and order. It’s not about national security. It’s about cruelty.

And cruelty is a distraction. If you’re focused on the pain of others, you’re not asking the real questions:

  • Why are wages stagnant while corporate profits soar?
  • Why does healthcare bankrupt American families?
  • Why do we have more empty homes than unhoused people?

The sign of a functioning government is a social safety net. A society where people do not live in fear. Where illness does not mean bankruptcy, where housing is a right, not a luxury, where safety is measured not by soldiers on a corner but by stability in people’s lives.

Cruelty is not strength. Cruelty is weakness disguised as power.

Here in Dover, on the Seacoast, we know what community looks like. We see it every day—in neighbors helping neighbors, in volunteers who staff our food pantries, in people who step up when someone stumbles. That is real strength.

The politics of cruelty only works if we accept it. We don’t have to. We can build a Dover, a Seacoast, and a New Hampshire that shows what compassion, fairness, and responsibility look like. That is our task, and it’s one worth doing.