Tag Archives: Braver Angels

We Rise Together

Posted on by
2

Anybody else feeling deeply conflicted and fatigued right now?

It’s getting late and I still have to prepare for the workweek ahead. Lots of exciting movement and connection on the Book front, and so many ideas for future posts on the Crowns Trilogy (binged books two and three again last weekend) and Heart of Champions, a movie Son and I eagerly watched together that speaks to everything I espouse about teamwork. So much to dissect about humanity and leadership–which all applies to what’s going on in our country right now. Awesome–I will dig in soon! But for now I’m just tired and overwhelmed.

Please find below an update from last week’s post and a compilation of what agitates me and gives me hope (mostly the latter).

I will try to muster something more coherent and thoughtful next week, friends.
ODOMOBaaT.

Friend J, my staunchly conservative high school classmate, and I spoke on the phone for 90 minutes on Tuesday. We agreed more than we disagreed, though our disagreements loom heavily on my consciousness. I always feel connected and reassured after my calls with Red voting friends. But disappointment and frustration inevitably set in later when I realize they seem wholly unmoved by my thoughtful, well-reasoned, and well-articulated arguments. HA! I suspect they may feel the same… or maybe they feel sorry for me, or dismiss my concerns as delusional and irrelevant. I wonder if they fear I do the same to them? Somehow I doubt it, though I know people on both sides who do this, which shoots us all in the collective civil discourse foot. I realize as I write this, how I truly may not understand and cannot relate to a conservative ethos. Or rather, I can understand it intellectually but cannot relate limbically, where it counts. Regardless, I’m grateful for my conservative friends who are still willing to connect. Three more actively reached out to me this week and I have two dates on the books this month, one that will involve cooking together, which I especially look forward to.

Thank you to all who provided feedback on last week’s post, including comments here, texts, emails, or replies on social media. I had not expected such an energetic response, and it means so much to me to receive such earnest engagement. I hope we may all continue the important, uncomfortable, and grappling conversations, in service of connection and de-escalation.

New England Journal of Medicine on Instagram

What Worries Me

Federal immigration and border patrol abductions cause active, direct, and mortal harm to people. The lack of due process prevents any kind of record or recourse for their medical care, the morbidity and mortality of which boggles the mind. That our federal government is the original perpetrator of such traumatic pain and suffering to so many, regardless of immigration status, is beyond egregious. Racial profiling resulting in violently forceful detainment, separating parents from their terrified and then unattended children, rightly causes people of color (because this isn’t happening to white people), regardless of immigration or citizen status, to avoid leaving their homes, forgoing necessary medical care (eg labor and delivery, wound care, cancer care). It’s sickening and makes me rage. Hear from a veteran physician in Minnesota as she lists case after case:

From Instagram

It’s about our shared humanity, my friends. I wrote to my libertarian friend tonight, “The more I perceive this administration actively, directly, and mortally harming people with less and less accountability, the harder it is to accept anyone’s argument for having voted for it.  The direct human costs (as I and so many perceive them) for whatever broader economic or ideological gains is just too high and unacceptable.” ICE and border patrol treat people ‘way worse than any other law enforcement agents; they follow no standards for respecting people’s rights, human or otherwise, and act with impunity and violence. The officers who shot Alex Pretti continued to work for days afterward, moved elsewhere ‘for their safety’–as if they were not a danger to anyone based on their shooting of an unarmed man. Even now it’s unclear what kind of investigation will take place, and whether it will be objective or trustworthy in any meaningful way. Does any legitimate law enforcement agency operate with this profound lack of oversight and accountability?

My heart rate, blood pressure and nausea rise even as I write this.
ODOMOBaaT.

Senate vote on 6-bill package for government funding, 1-29-2026, from Instagram

What Gives Me Hope

From Politico, January 29, 2026:
“Eight Republicans joined every Senate Democrat to block sweeping government funding legislation from advancing Thursday amid ongoing negotiations around a potential offramp to avert a lengthy shutdown of several agencies.
The Senate voted 55-45 against moving forward with a six-bill package that would fund, among other things, the departments of Homeland Security, State and Health and Human Services, as well as the Pentagon.”

From <a href="http://<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fberniesanders%2Fposts%2Fpfbid02MQM14h42JRDaaKAB4vbpTFt2evRcQccE3shyxDfKD77JLUzw6atvKYhCZBytHkxal&show_text=true&width=500&quot; width="500" height="498" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share">Bernie Sanders’s Facebook Page, yesterday:

From Justice Patrick Schiltz, Chief Judge of the District Court of Minnesota, a Bush appointee and former clerk for the late Antonin Scalia, in an order filed January 28, 2026:
“…That does not end the Court’s concerns, however.  Attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court orders that ICE has violated in 74 cases.  The extent of ICE’s noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated.  This list is confined to orders issued since January 1, 2026, and the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges.  Undoubtedly, mistakes were made, and orders that should have appeared on this list were omitted. This list should give pause to anyone—no matter his or her political beliefs—who cares about the rule of law.  ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.  The Court warns ICE that future noncompliance with court orders may result in future show‐cause orders requiring the personal appearances of Lyons or other government officials.  ICE is not a law unto itself.  ICE has every right to challenge the orders of this Court, but, like any litigant, ICE must follow those orders unless and until they are overturned or vacated.” [boldface added by me–cc]

Braver Angels and the Builders Movement:

Braver Angels will host “a National Webinar on America’s Deportation Policy this Friday, February 6th, from 8:00 – 9:30 pm ET. We will both be panelists—along with Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), Congressman Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Gaby Pacheco, Peter Skerry, David Izquierdo, and Jorge Pineda. We will get into all the issues involved, and most importantly, we’ll explore how America climbs down from this scary confrontation and get to what we need as a nation: cooperation!” I am registered to attend. I hope to see some of you there.

Take the time to read and watch this collaborative Facebook post from Builders with Helene Biandudi Hofer, journalist and co-founder of The Good Conflict with journalist and author of High Conflict Amanda Ripley (I highly recommend this well-researched, well-written, and practical book):
“Why Republicans backed a Democrat in this small town…
In a town where red dominates and Democrats rarely run, respected Republicans supported a Democratic candidate. Leadership had stalled, decisions were made on autopilot, and the town seemed to be coasting instead of planning for the future.
Joe Lamanna ran on showing up—joining boards, serving as chair, and engaging with neighbors. He focused on the work, the people, and the community, not the left-right divide. Some criticized him; others recognized his competence and dedication.
He didn’t win, but the results were striking: nearly half the vote and far better performance than previous Democratic candidates. Beyond the numbers, the campaign sparked conversations and connections that had been dormant for years. Neighbors started talking, sharing ideas, and reconsidering assumptions.
It’s a reminder that local politics doesn’t have to mirror national division. Change starts with participation—showing up, asking questions, and engaging with your community. Even small actions can shift the conversation and open space for progress.”
Here is the Instagram link if you don’t use Facebook.

Also from <a href="http://<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FBuildersMvt%2Fposts%2Fpfbid0jSYQKB1XDBsMCqFWTqLNfap5QJR6fC98mvNk7GcQuGoCg9Mngrr9iNFwFLu5hR8Vl&show_text=true&width=500&quot; width="500" height="496" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share">Builders on Facebook, Five points on which I imagine we can all agree, and if not, please, let’s talk about it (as they invite us at the end):

“A “recent CBS poll found 59% support deporting people who are in the U.S. illegally, but only 37% approve of how deportations are being handled.

That tells us something important:👉
People want enforcement AND accountability.
So here’s a question for you 👇If enforcement is
going to happen, should it follow the same basic rules we expect of any law enforcement agency?
Here are some nonpartisan, practical reforms many Americans across parties are talking about.
Do you agree or disagree?

1. No anonymous agents
Require visible identification for ICE officers. No masks. No mystery. If someone has government authority, the public should know who they are.

2. Independent investigations after deaths or serious injuries
Federal agencies shouldn’t investigate themselves. Independent oversight builds trust, especially after fatal encounters like the recent shooting in Minneapolis.

3. Clear limits on where enforcement can happen
Prohibit enforcement actions at vulnerable places like hospitals, schools, and churches. Public safety shouldn’t mean people are afraid to seek medical care or send their kids to school.

4. Homes require a real warrant
ICE should only enter homes with a judicial warrant signed by a judge—not administrative paperwork. That’s a basic Fourth Amendment principle, not a radical idea.

5. Body cameras for every enforcement action
Mandate body cams across the board, just like many local police departments. Body cams protect civilians from abuse and officers from false claims. Accountability cuts both ways.

What would you add? What would you change?

Reply. Disagree. Improve it.” [boldface added by me–cc]

From The New York Times, today:
“For one constituency, Mr. Pretti’s death did more than grant permission to criticize. It confirmed a long-held fear.
For decades, the conservative case for the Second Amendment has rested largely on the premise that an armed citizenry is the last defense against government tyranny. N.R.A. fund-raising letters once warned of “jackbooted government thugs.” The language was apocalyptic, the scenario hypothetical.
Minneapolis made it real. Masked federal agents killed a legal gun owner who had never drawn his weapon.
Gun rights groups pushed back. Gun Owners of America posted on social media: “Peaceful protests while armed isn’t radical — it’s American. [The First and Second Amendments protect those rights, and they always have.] GOA will hold any administration accountable.”
[bracketed text added from original post by me–cc]

To my Red voting friends: I don’t need you to relinquish your conservative ideals. We need both conservative and progressive perspectives intact and healthy for productive debate and earnest policy negotiation.

But we are well beyond the conservative vs progressive debate here.

This is about the government hunting and abusing people without any due process or accountability.

The only way this gets better is if we all call forth our shared humanity and rise together to stop it.

Start Where It’s Safe; Make It Safe For Each Other

Posted on by
1

When and where is it safe for you to disagree strongly and still maintain healthy relationship?

My friend and I had a brief text exchange recently.
Me: “…I wonder when they will start profiling East Asians on the street. My kids and I all live in target cities. It’s less and less safe to be non-white.”
Friend: “You’re citizens; no need to worry.”
Me: “Citizens have been picked up and detained already. Lots to worry about on many fronts. Please do not dismiss people’s concerns, even if you don’t share them. They are not all unfounded.”

Our friendship has developed over a couple of years, accelerating and deepening this year around and through mutually respectful and unreserved political discourse. This thread occurred spontaneously last week. I felt safe to express my fears as well as my reaction to his response. I know he did not mean to dismiss my feelings; he knew that my response was meant to uphold mutual accountability rather than incite shame. Our relationship is now strong and trusting enough for us to be bluntly, caringly honest. We caught up on the phone today and reaffirmed that respect and trust, that bond of platonic love that transends difference even as we embrace and grapple with it. I cannot wait to sit down over lunch and explore each other’s perspectives again soon.

This summer I gave a series of wellness presentations to a global professional firm. Over five Zoom sessions we explored self-awareness and -regulation, open and honest communication, generational differences, variables of diversity, psychological safety, authenticity, leadership, and culture. I did my best to leave an impression and aspiration of empathy, compassion, and accountability in action and relationship, to be cultivated intentionally, both individually and collectively, in the year to come. In all of my conversations with the series organizers before and since, we continue to seek the attitudes, postures, resources, and practices that help a workforce engage and contribute, dissent and challenge, all in the name of elevated collaboration and excellence.

This weekend I traveled to New York City (hence this delayed post) to meet Andy “AJ” Wilson-Taylor and my fellow fans. I only knew two other attendees walking in, and was welcomed and folded into a truly unique throng of uplift and bonding. This community, led by a loving, humble, curious, generous, and kind soul, reflects and amplifies those qualities and values in spades. The brightest love and joy radiated from every person gathered; oxytocin flowed and saturated my whole being. I wondered aloud to more than a few people about the possibilities of capturing the energy of that assembly–the joy, love, shared humanity and connection–concentrating and focusing it, then aiming it to heal the wounds of the world. Members of this group, led by AJ in his unassuming and self-effacing way, have already healed themselves and one another in presence, encouragement, and steadfast mutual support through darkness and disconnection back to light and flourishing kinship.

I pondered this weekend what political discourse would look and feel like in these groups–collegial coworkers practicing interpersonal effectiveness to leverage diversity and elevate creativity and innovation, and a gathering of women brought together by shared love and admiration of a man whose purpose in their space is to ally with and elevate their personal, sexual, and social well-being.

Then yesterday Braver Angels hosted an extemporaneous gathering of leaders from bridging organizations across the country: “Dignity Over Violence: A Unified Civic Response”. I hope to have a link to the recording to share here soon. Claim hope, my friends. This movement of intentional, resilient, and empowering connection across political polarization grows stronger and tighter every year. Love can still win. Over the two hour program, at least twelve leaders both acknowledged what is and pointed to what could be. They cited words and acts of people across the political spectrum, from every demographic, that defy the loudly skewed rhetoric of extremes. In this, yet another mission-driven gathering, I felt an unwavering commitment to mutual understanding and connection, to humility, curiosity, empathy, generosity, and accountability.

“When you hear something triggering, take a deep breath and ask a [good, open and honest] question. Try to understand why that person believes what they believe.” This is the first step to any exchange of true connection.

All systems of human relationship require us all to practice these skills. We cannot just rely on designated leaders to lead by example (especially since so few today do so). Each of us must take up the cause of connection and get to work; more urgently now than ever in my lifetime. But how daunting, to consider reaching across a great political chasm to connect with an adversary, real or perceived?

So after this weekend immersed in gatherings of hope and possibility, I remember that any skill must be developed and cultivated deliberately, consistently, and iteratively. As I prepared to leave the office at 8pm today, I debated briefly about doing my five minutes on the slackboard. Consistency. Commitment. Every session on the slackline, no matter how brief, is another chance to train my nervous system in sensory awareness, feedback integration, and dynamic balance. Over the course of 2.5 songs on my Spotify liked list, I had the best session to date. So too, political discource can be trained in the workplace, in a social gathering, in a family–anywhere and with anybody–by practicing humility, curiosity, empathy, generosity, kindness, and accountability in any relationship system around any topic. We all do it, but I bet we don’t think of it in these terms.

The slackboard, a Braver Angels Zoom call, an AJ’s Angels meet up, my wellness talks, and my conversations with Friend–these are all spaces where I feel safe to express my authentic self. I can challenge staid and conventional social norms, explore the possible. I practice and develop the skills that make me confident to engage in political discourse calmly and with equanimity. Come to think of it, patient encounters train me for this every day, too.

So I ask again: When and where is it safe for you to disagree strongly and still maintain healthy relationship?

Where do you already do this well? When you disagree without getting triggered, how do you show up and conduct yourself? How can you translate this mindset and behavior pattern to the more fraught and emotionally higher risk scenarios? What do you need to feel safe to try/train? Can you identify the ladder of escalating potential triggers to tackle, the way a skier progresses from green to blue to black diamond trails? Can you schedule practice sessions the way an athlete trains for a race, so you can hone the skills, see and feel yourself improving with each encounter?

How can we all make it safe for one another to practice? Like accountability partners at the gym, how can we hold each other up in this effort to save our democracy, to reconnect across polarization and mutual dehumanization, one conversation at a time?

Humility. Curiosity. Empathy. Generosity. Kindness. Accountability. Start where it’s safe and easy. Then look for the next challenge. We grow and strengthen through struggle. Environments and circumstances that feel threatening are not conducive to learning or progress. We can create and cultivate safety for effective disagreement for ourselves and one another. Take a deep breath and ask one good, open, honest question. Start there.

Curiosity, Humility, and Emotions

Posted on by
Reply
Temple of Aesculapius, Villa Borghese, Rome, Italy

Huh. It’s all a jumble tonight.

Another dense week of patient care and life in a chaotic geopolitical environment. *deep breath* All I can say is, thank God for my friends. Without fail, they hold me up every day. Our conversations lift me; our connections nourish me. The exchange of ideas, the positive reinforcement of kindness, generosity, and optimism–they make life worth living!

How often do you find yourself asking your friends and loved ones lately, “How are you?” Where do you put the emphasis? How are you? How are you? How are you? Context matters, right? Yesterday that remark, today this event, tomorrow that executive order, next week a reversal. This friend’s lab shutting down and that friend’s project halted because funding is suddenly gravely uncertain. Legal immigrants getting detained, POC history erased from public visibility (then reinstated and called a mistake). All kinds of emotions, all over the place, just under the surface if not fully emergent, effusing, and utterly hijacking.

I had an amazing call with Mande and Sharon tonight, my wonderful friends from Braver Angels. None of us actively lead Braver Angels workshops anymore, but we meet on FaceTime monthly to discuss and mutually support one another in living its principles. For ninety minutes we shared, questioned, reflected, admired, and wondered. By the end of the call my mind was so full of ideas for this post that I could barely wait to write. I quickly jotted it all down and now here I sit, befuddled at the scope of it all. Each idea could be its own post! I share the list of ideas below to document it for myself, and also to show how rich conversations can be if we approach them with a certain mindset.

Curiosity

If you haven’t already, I highly recommend reading Curious by Ian Leslie. I have consumed this book about three times and what struck me most the last time was the origin of curiosity: the desire to know more about something. Curiosity does not emerge from a vacuum; it originates from a germ of information or knowledge that we then wonder about–when we recognize a gap between what’s already known and not, and seek to fill it in.

Too often now, Blue and Red voters assume that they already know everything there is to know about the other side and everybody on it. I see and hear an utter dearth of curiosity on both sides, so many people speaking and writing in sweeping assumptions, narrow conclusions, and disparaging judgments all around. Honestly, how can you know everything there is to know about any person just by how they voted in one election? You may say you don’t need to know anything more; you feel justified judging them wholly and disparagingly just based on that one act. You are entitiled to this position, of course. I just think it’s one of the foundational mindsets that drives our most toxic divisions.

When was the last time you learned something about someone that surprised you, or that you simply did not previously know about them? When was the last time you wondered about someone and acted on that curiosity in a nonjudgmental, open, and connecting way? When did you last connect with someone meaningfully across difference, finding something in common that brought you closer as fellow humans? Imagine if these were all regular occurrences in your daily life–how wonderful would that be? I submit that this life is absolutely attainable–all we have to do is get just a little more curious than we are today, and express that curiosity openly and without prejudice.

Humility

When did you last honestly admit that you don’t know something? When someone offered new information or knowledge, how open were you to receiving it? How open are you in general to admitting what you don’t know, to entertaining new ideas, to holding space for your mind to be changed on any given topic, to acknowledging that you may be wrong? I will look harder this week now that I have posed the question, but I don’t notice a lot of humility in political discourse on either side. What do we not know? What assumptions do we make, and then draw incorrect and potentially harmful conclusions, based on ignorance and worse, the delusion of certainty? What would a more humble existence feel like?

Emotions

Friend Sharon is so wise. She practices attunement, emotional awareness, self-regulation, and effective communication. She queried her own reactions, responses, and needs in the chaos and determined that in order to connect across difference, we need to address our feelings. Not rocket science, and also profoundly uncomfortable and threatening for so many of us. Imagine gathering under the premise of politics, and conducting a discussion in which you don’t actually talk about policy, politicians, or political happenings. Rather, you talk about how it all makes you feel, how your values are involved, and what you believe. How would your expressions necessarily change in that kind of conversation? Leave your opinions, judgments, and arguments at the door, folks. Let’s talk and connect from the heart. Wow. Sign me up. Wanna join in?

Take a look at the idea list at the bottom of this post. What piques your curiosity? Leave a comment and I can write about it next week.

Meanwhile, here is my most current To Be Listened (to–TBL) book list and some resources that I found helpful or fascinating(ly frustrating) this week.

Wishing you all a week of curiosity, humility, and connecting emotion!

Possible, William Ury
Food For Thought, Alton Brown
Abundance, Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson
How to Change, Katy Milkman
The Certainty Trap, Ilana Redstone

Pete Buttigieg:
on DEI–watch here and here
his Substack
his book Trust–fast, easy, accessible, and important–a blueprint for healing our divisions, one interaction and relationship at a time.

A thoughtful and short piece from The Free Press: “I’m a Liberal at a ‘Conservative’ University. How Did I End Up Here?”

From The Guardian:
“The US has blocked Canadian access to a library straddling the Canada-US border, drawing criticism from a Quebec town where people have long enjoyed easy entry to the space.
“The Haskell Free Library and Opera House is located between Stanstead, Quebec, and Derby Line, Vermont. It was built deliberately to straddle the frontier between the two countries – a symbol of cooperation and friendship between Canada and the US.
The library’s entrance is on the Vermont side. Previously, Canadian visitors were able to enter using the sidewalk and entrance on the American side but were encouraged to bring documentation, according to the library’s website.
“Inside, a line of electrical tape demarcates the international boundary. About 60% of the building, including the books, is located in Canada. Upstairs, in the opera house, the audience sits in the US while the performers are in Canada.
“Under the new rules, Canadians will need to go through a formal border crossing before entering the library.”

Personal leadership
Known and unknown unknowns
Unknown to known is a huge step IF we are willing to take it
Openness
Relationship
DEI implementation methods, fairness, Buttigieg reel
Cis het white male allies
Historical romance as non-adversarial, powerful male-allied change agency
Lie in the bed we made of burn down the patriarchy, all men suck
Masculine and feminine energy in balance
What if we recorded our calls
How would we monitor and modify our words
Sharon’s workshop: feelings, values, and beliefs only. No judgments, no ad hominem, no politics. Connect across difference through shared humanity–harder than anyone anticipated
Vulnerability
Psychological safety
Woman doc bad exprience
Past adverse experiences that make us rigid, eg blood transfusion story
Stories we know nothing about that drive others’ thoughts feelings and behaviors