Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Tall girls from Iowa

Caitlin Clark in her Iowa uniform

Caitlin Clark changed never shrinks.

Elizabeth Flores/Star Tribune via Getty Images

Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."

So, what could Nelson Mandela and Caitlin Clark possibly have in common?

Both are conclusive proof that “the times, they are a-changin’.” Also, neither the former president of South Africa nor the basketball superstar “shrink” to accommodate others’ ideas of how they should live. Neither “plays small.”


Mandela helped end apartheid in South Africa 30 years ago. In his inaugural speech in May 1994, as he was sworn in as the country’s first Black president, he spoke of what it takes to overcome the most daunting obstacles, often those we have no control of, like the color of our skin.

Other things we have no control of: our sex (at least at birth,) and our height. Just 30 years ago, women, still considered the “weaker” sex, were preferred smaller. They needed “bigger” men to “take care” of them — basically a parent/child relationship, unfair to both sexes. “Shrinking” girls were common then.

How exactly does one shrink, anyway? Oh, there are ways. A tall girl can shrink herself by slouching, wearing whisper-thin shoes, remaining seated — anything not to tower over the boys. A short boy might do the opposite: sneak lifts into his shoes or hang upside down like a bat to “stretch” himself. Not long ago, tall girls and short boys were considered an unfortunate result of genetic dice, or even medical problems. Hormonal therapies were available to help a short male attain increased height by delaying his puberty. Hastening a tall female’s puberty had the opposite effect: Though it likely would not qualify her to shop in the petite section, she might “shrink” to a more desirable height.

Fast forward 30 years and bring on 6-foot-tall Caitlin Clark from Des Moines, Iowa, one of the most recognized figures in sports, men’s or women’s. Her NCAA legacy is the stuff of legend. All-time leading scorer, breaking the men’s Division 1 record with a career total of 3,685 points. (But who’s counting?) The Big Ten’s all-time leader in assists and a unanimous AP preseason All American. The list of her accomplishments goes on and on. After sporting No. 22 on her University of Iowa jersey (now retired), she was picked first in the WNBA draft in April and now plays for the Fever wearing the same No. 22. She is all of 22 years old. Must be her lucky number.

But it is not luck. It is not shirking, and not shrinking. It is a combination of talent and hard work, with a huge dose of commitment thrown in. Renowned for her shooting range, but just as much for her passing ability and assists, Clark shares both the ball and the accolades with her teammates. She will not lose her false eyelashes during the game, and won't be assessed fouls for using profanity. She is real; she is nice. Little girls want to be like her when they grow up; big girls want to be her now.

Caitlin Clark makes Iowans proud. She makes sports fans everywhere proud. But sports fan or not, one cannot help but be dazzled by her. “The Caitlin Clark effect” has been credited for the surging popularity of women’s basketball, changing everything for women’s sports.

Keep the faith, share the ball, make the most of your abilities, practice what you’re good at. Basketball and life are not so different. The stakes are high in both; both are tough and often unfair. Mandela spent 27 years in prison. Then he became first Black president of South Africa? A “girl” breaking the NCAA Division I scoring record? Impossible! Or so they said.

Oh, no! Neither Caitlin Clark, when missing a shot, nor Nelson Mandela, when missing a third of his life in prison, “shrank” so others wouldn’t feel insecure around them. They simply got on with their game. Whether “Caitlin Clark fever” continues with the Indiana Fever remains to be seen. This much is certain, however: She will not “play small.”

If looking for a sign the world is going in the right direction — often two steps forward, one back, yet still the right direction — remember Nelson Mandela from South Africa and think of Caitlin Clark and tall girls from Iowa, from everywhere. Tall girls and short boys, Black people and white people and sky-blue or pink people, all people.

We each bring something no one else can to that big table called Life.

We each bring our one and only self.

Read More

Donald Trump

Trump's reliance on inflammatory, and often dehumanizing, language is not an unfortunate quirk—it’s a deliberate tactic.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

From ‘Obliteration’ to ‘Enemies Within’: Trump’s Language Echoes Authoritarianism

When President Trump declared that the U.S. strikes “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, it wasn’t just a policy claim—it was an exercise in narrative control. Predictably, his assertion was met with both support and skepticism. Yet more than a comment on military efficacy, the statement falls into a broader pattern that underscores how Trump uses language not just to communicate but to dominate.

Alongside top officials like CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump claimed the strikes set Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by years. However, conflicting intelligence assessments tell a more nuanced story. A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency report concluded that while infrastructure was damaged and entrances sealed, core components such as centrifuges remained largely intact. Iran had already relocated much of its enriched uranium. The International Atomic Energy Agency echoed that damage was reparable.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump Shows That Loyalty Is All That Matters to Him

Guests in the audience await the arrival of U.S. Vice President Mike Pence during the Federalist Society's Executive Branch Review Conference at The Mayflower Hotel on April 25, 2023, in Washington, D.C.

Drew Angerer/Getty Images/TNS

Trump Shows That Loyalty Is All That Matters to Him

Last week, the Court of International Trade delivered a blow to Donald Trump’s global trade war. It found that the worldwide tariffs Trump unveiled on “Liberation Day” as well his earlier tariffs pretextually aimed at stopping fentanyl coming in from Mexico and Canada (as if) were beyond his authority. The three-judge panel was surely right about the Liberation Day tariffs and probably right about the fentanyl tariffs, but there’s a better case that, while bad policy, the fentanyl tariffs were not unlawful.

Please forgive a lengthy excerpt of Trump’s response on Truth Social, but it speaks volumes:

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats, Gavin Newsom Is Not Your Blueprint

California Governor Gavin Newsom (right) speaks as California Attorney general Rob Bonta looks on during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard on April 16, 2025, in Ceres, California.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images/TCA

Democrats, Gavin Newsom Is Not Your Blueprint

Few in American politics are as desperate as California Gov. Gavin Newsom is right now.

Newsom, long considered — by himself, anyway — a frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president, has been positioning himself and repositioning himself to be next in line for years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Americans Want To Rein In Presidential Power

Protestors march during an anti-Trump "No Kings Day" demonstration in a city that has been the focus of protests against Trump's immigration raids on June 14, 2025 in downtown Los Angeles, California.

Getty Images, Jay L Clendenin

Americans Want To Rein In Presidential Power

President Trump has been attempting to expand presidential power more than any president in recent history, in large part by asserting powers that have been held by Congress, including federal funding and tariffs. Public opinion research has shown clearly and consistently that large majorities—often bipartisan—oppose expanding presidential powers and support giving Congress more power.

The Pew Research Center has asked for nearly a decade whether presidents should not have to “worry so much about Congress and the courts” or if giving presidents more power is “too risky.” Over seven in ten have consistently said that giving presidents more power would be too risky, including majorities of Democrats and Republicans, no matter which party is in power. In February 2025, 66% of Republicans and 89% of Democrats took this position.

Keep ReadingShow less