In 1940, Eastern Europe was being overrun by an aggressive totalitarian regime based on the denial of the right of small nations to exist. The aggressors intended the abolition of the nations of the region and their replacement with an overlordship of a single class based on national origin ruling over a subordinate class deemed unworthy of nationhood by the aggressors. FDR and Lend-lease destroyed that aggressive agenda.

In 2021, Eastern Europe was being overrun by an aggressive totalitarian regime based on the denial of the right of small nations to exist. The aggressors intended the abolition of the nations of the region and their replacement with an overlordship of a single class based on national origin ruling over a subordinate class deemed unworthy of nationhood by the aggressors. The present US administration has supported the victims of aggression, but the outcome is uncertain.

The major differences? One paragraph uses the past tense, and the other refers to a single country, which one might well argue is but the first objective of aggression and destruction, and we don't yet know the results.

Currently, one congressional faction purportedly worried about fiscal deficits is arguing that support should be ended, because it strains our pocketbooks. These same patriots have also voted to gut social programs, while they seek to cut regulations on corporations and put limits on defense of civil rights and universal access to voting.

The idea of abandoning others to oppression so that a few of us might pay less taxes is nothing short of cowardly fecklessness.

Henny Youngman might observe, "Now take the Freedom Caucus," PLEASE!

Whither support for Ukraine?