Book 'Em.

Of course, if I were somehow visited by a magical genie who could grant me three wishes or (inflation adjusted) one point six wishes, I'd have Heidi Klum sitting by my side, and untold wealth. I'm only human--and I apologize for that.

Eventually, on my "wish Hit Parade" I'd get to world peace, eradication of hate, reversal of environmental despoilation, elimination of racism, and a good old-fashioned salt stick, warm out of the oven and made without calcium propinate to preserve freshness.

At the very top of any list however would be a strange one. But just what a-merry-kaka needs at the moment. 

I wish we had political leadership that could read--and that engaged in reading as a way to surround themselves with genius--as I do.

I wish we had political leadership who could see past the everyday and learn from the past so that we can arrive at a better present. In short, I wish we had leaders who could read and learn from reading. Not just read and calculate what such-and-such will do to their polling numbers or how they can capitalize on the latest event or non-event.

Last night, reading-wise, was one of those syzygy moments for me. 

Useful. Not just for Scrabble.

I finished one book early enough in the evening so that (thank you, Dame Insomnia) I could start another.

I finished this:

And started this:

Here's the headline and subhead of "Blood" from a recent "Wall Street Journal" review. I finished reading this on the evening of the day I went to the "No Kings" rally in my little Gingham Coast town, where I spend more time than I like, preferring the island Manhattan, 'smoke in your pipe and put that in,' as Leonard Bernstein wrote and Chita sang.

I'll admit, 17th Century British history is not my strong suit. I get lost in the sea of Henrys, Georges, Charless and various bishops and the strife between the state religion and the pope's religion. But during the mis-era of trump, it's hard to NOT read a book summed up by the subhead here:

Through most of the book's 432 pages, I had to stop every paragraph or so and shake my head. Was the author writing about today--or almost 400 years ago? Here's a bit from the "Times'" review that will explain.

If you don't have the curiosity, stamina and there are too many football games on tv for you to read "Blood," do me (and yourself) a favor. Read these two pages. They're like the recap of a great boxing match written blow-by-blow by an A.J. Liebling or Red Smith.

Moving forward in time (just a bit) to the 18th Century, once done with "Blood," I began, eagerly, to read "The Zorg." (Zorg, though it sounds like a TV alien from a 1970s sitcom, means "care" in Dutch.)

Zorg got one of the best reviews I've ever read in "The Times." What's more, the review itself was illustrated with a painting by JMW Turner. I can no more resist JMW Turner than Ike could resist Tina.

There's an emerging trend in a-merry-kaka now, to deny the horrors of slavery. Even to deny that it was bad, unchristian, and wrong. Many in power are trying to re-write history and that it ever happened. Many are saying its victims should be thankful for slavery--we civilized them!

I'd wager in the next couple of years, we'll see the stirrings of a movement to allow dark-people entrance into our country if they submit to a certain unpaid-servitude. How else can we keep people of color down while getting our grass cut?

Here's a small summary of what happened on the Zorg only 250 years ago, a mere fart in the diarrhea of time:

And here's the Times' review concluding paragraphs.

The ...clash between humanity and property. (I removed the word 'ancient'.

That's why my wish would be for leadership who could read and lead. And learn, not just burn.

I can dream, can't I?