Politics – Years Of Being

Beto, Biden & Bernie

Here we go. The Democrats are off to the races to decide who will face the huge pile of certifiably insane orange excrement our country currently boasts as its President. In terms of the continued viability of our Republic, there’s never been a more important election than the one we will have in 2020. If Donald Trump were by some outlandish set of circumstances to again win the presidency, the long-term damage to America would be incalculable.

Given the stakes, some would find cause for concern at the sheer number of Democratic candidates, either already announced, or almost certainly assured of announcing. So many faces and voices might serve as a distraction. But the primary process is inexorable: eventually one candidate will emerge. And regardless of who that individual turns out to be, every single voter who truly cares for our nation must be committed to vote for that person. There is no room whatsoever for the ideological errors of 2016. The overarching guiding principle must be, “Donald Trump cannot be allowed to stay in the White House. Period.”

But the yellow brick road through the primaries has yet to be trod. At this end, standing in the center of Munchkinland, just taking our first steps, there is great latitude, and a dizzying smorgasbord of candidates on the menu. Ultimately, this is a good thing. These people will provide useful ideas to be explored, more options from which to pick and choose. One of the best lessons of 2016 was seeing how Bernie Sanders, even in defeat, significantly moved the Democratic needle to the left and to a more progressive platform. His ideas have become solid in the minds of many, if not most, Democrats.

As the horses stamp and stomp around the starting gate, it is already clear that a definite set of favorites has emerged. Polling reveals that Bernie Sanders and Beto O’Rourke are leading the pack, at least among those who have announced. Joe Biden has not yet announced (other than by a slip of the tongue, the sort of thing that endears Joe to lots of supporters). Even so, Joe regardless actually leads many of the polls. Another metric is fund-raising, and in fund-raising, Bernie pulled in an record-breaking $5.9M on the first day of his announcement.

Beto then raised $6.1M on his first day.

Even given his popularity and his fund-raising ability, for some reason, Beto has immediately become the recipient of a barrage of fairly harsh criticism… from fellow Democrats. The primary (stated) reason for this castigation seems to be a perceived lack of specificity by O’Rourke w.r.t. policy specifics. But the underlying problem feels more like disdain for a man who has “white privilege.” The fact that Beto is neither a person of color nor a woman has somehow made him a target for many Democrats.

Look, Beto has freely admitted that he has had a life that benefitted from white privilege. That’s a problem in American life that he is actively working to correct. As for policy specifics, this is not the time in a campaign to nail those things down, not withstanding the fact that he did articulate policy points in his contest against Ted Cruz. This is the time for generating enthusiasm, raising campiagn funds and building a team of advisors and strategists to help win the primaries, and then the election. And there is simply no other person in the Democratic field that even comes close to generating enthusiasm like Beto O’Rourke.

Beto has been compared to Barack Obama, and how he presented himself in the early days of his campaign. The comparison is an apt one. Both men have an energy and a charisma that just naturally draws people to them. Infectious is a good description. Both project an integrity and a powerful optimism that calls forth our better angels.

The same could reasonably be said for how Bernie Sanders campaigned in 2016, when he drew large and extremely enthusiastic crowds wherever he went. And Joe Biden certainly has a wide appeal and a good heart, and that cannot be denied. But both men are ancient. Biden is 76, Sanders is 77. They would be in their 80’s in their first term as president.

As much as these elder statesmen have done for America, as progressive as their ideas are, we cannot afford to put our fate in the hands of men that old. The Presidency erodes a person like no other job on earth. The pressures are unrelenting. Donald Trump is an anomaly in so many horrible ways; he simply ignores the overwhelming responsibilities of the office, and so is untouched by its life-draining nature. The man whose job it will be to undo the travesties Trump has perpetrated on our nation will have even greater than usual stress and pressure.

Beto O’Rourke will find advisors; members of Obama’s team have already started to join him. He will fill in the blanks on planning and policy. And along the way, he will snowball and concentrate the positive enthusiasm we need to both defeat Trump and turn the ship of state around.

I think O’Rourke deserves our support and our vote. Time will tell its tale, but, unlike Han Solo, I have a good feeling about this.

Eat An Impeachment

“Let us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table…
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo…
Do I dare to eat a peach?”

“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, T.S. Eliot

It is difficult to overstate the negative impact that occurred when Civics ceased to be a mandatory high school or junior high class. I took Civics in the 9th grade at Carr Junior High in Vicksburg, Mississippi. (The fact that such a thing as “junior high” still existed pretty well dates me.) I cannot remember the teacher’s name (Harwell? Hargrove?), but I recall not liking him very much. I don’t even remember whether he was a “good” teacher or not. But I do remember the subject, which means I was taught how our government is organized: the separation of powers, the bicameral legislative branch, how the number of representatives is calculated, why senators have a 6 year term and representatives only a 2 year term, how the Electoral College works. All of that (at the time) was boring material, but which, as it turns out, was incredibly important.

And I learned about the process of impeachment.

Although the current blanket wave of news coverage likely makes it unnecessary, here’s a quick recap of how impeachment works. Many people mistakenly confuse impeachment with removal, but it’s only the first step on a path that may or may not lead to the removal of an officeholder. Impeachment is like an indictment. The House of Representatives, if it decides by a simple majority, can impeach a President, or a Vice President, or a Supreme Court Justice, or any civil office holder. In so doing, they have only accused that person of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In order to be removed from office, the Senate must then hold a trial (which is presided over by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS). In order to convict, the Senate must decide by a 2/3 majority that the target of the impeachment is guilty.

And there’s the rub. There is no doubt whatsoever that the Democratically-controlled House could vote to impeach Donald Trump. There is an equal absence of doubt that 2/3 of the Senate would never convict him, regardless of the quantity and quality of the evidence brought to bear on such a decision. The GOP in Congress has locked itself in a death grip with Trump, and there is no indication that they will relinquish that hold, ever. They have lashed their fates to the mast of his ship of state, and they will not even pretend to independence, even if the ship is plunging to the ocean’s depths. Why? They either live in abject fear of losing their seats in the Senate or the House, knowing that Trump’s base would turn on them like mad dogs should they oppose Trump. Or else they are complicit with Trump, and share his authoritarian “philosophy”, and are willing, even eager, to subvert the Constitution, the democratic process and the rule of law. Not to mention (and this applies to everybody) the chance to suck at the teat of unabashed corruption, on a scale not seen in this country since the days of Teapot Domes and the Whiskey Ring.

Nancy Pelosi has made noises in the last few days that this political reality makes the idea of impeachment a non-starter. Knowing that conviction is not even a possibility, she has said that impeachment itself is futile. “Donald Trump is not worth it.”

It is true that the political reality of a failed impeachment (ie, bring articles of impeachment, but fail to get a conviction, as happened with Bill Clinton) would likely strengthen Trump, at least with his base. And it would also likely weaken the Democrats, or that is certainly possible. Aiming the gun but not pulling the trigger could be ruinous. Failure to convict would be seen as weakness for the Democratic party, or even weakness of the case against Trump, although the truth would be that the Republican senators would never vote to convict Trump regardless of the evidence.

So it is difficult to see Pelosi’s aversion to bringing articles of impeachment as anything other than a purely political maneuver, an action grounded in fear rather than principle, and therefore no more defensible than those Republicans who fail to stand up to Trump out of fear of retaliation. But an impeachment of Trump is so clearly required, failure to do so is basically an abrogation of the Constitutional duty of the House. It must be done simply because it must be done. It is impossible to think of a President more deserving of impeachment than Donald Trump.

Consider the two instances where a President was actually impeached and brought to trial. In 1868, Andrew Johnson was impeached because he ignored Congress and replaced the Secretary of War in violation of the Tenure of Office Act. Basically, the whole affair was a squabble between Johnson and Congress. The Senate failed to convict by a narrow margin. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction, basically because of his actions in the Monica Lewinsky affair. The perjury charge was acquitted by a 10 vote margin, though the obstruction charge was basically a tie, which counted as acquittal.

Now compare the charges and actions of these two Presidents against the avalanche of corruption, obstruction, perjury and almost treasonous actions by Trump. The litany of wrongs, even those just in the public domain, is so vast and so overwhelming, that we have become essentially inured to drumbeat of his wrongdoing. Indeed, the sheer magnitude and frequency of his daily lies and misdeeds have served to come dangerously close to redfining “normal” for our nation’s expectations of “acceptable behavior”. It is so exhausting that it takes all we can do to simply maintain vigilance.

So impeachment is not only a moral imperative for this President, it should be regarded as absolutely necessary. But one has to admit that the timing is critical. No, Trump would never be convicted by the spineless Republican cowards in the Senate. But the investigation that would be part and parcel of impeachment proceedings would be the thing that could put the spear in the heart of a Trump re-election campaign. Mueller’s investigation is constrained by the warrant he was given: look for Russian interference in the 2016 election, and possible conspiracy with the Trump campaign. In the course of his investigation, Mueller has unearthed a treasure-trove of related corruption, and indicted and convicted key figures in Trump’s orbit. But the evidence brought to light have pointed to MUCH more than Russian collusion, including tax fraud, bank fraud, obstruction, witness tampering, and a host of other crimes.

Therefore, I agree we should not “dare to bring an impeachment”, at least not just now. Let the Mueller report be made. Simultaneously, let Elijah Cummings and Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiff continue to probe and investigate and subpoena. Hell, create a House Select Committee on Trump Corruption, like the House Select Committee on Benghazi, and dig even deeper. Bring as much to light as possible.

Then, in time to have the greatest impact on the 2020 election, so that the public can see it all laid out, impeach the motherf**ker. He NEEDS to be impeached, he deserves it more than any one in American history. Let the trial hound him right out of office and into the arms of whatever indictments the Southern District of New York has waiting for him. Let him and his family spend years in jail. Let justice be done.

That will be so much better than merely talking of Michelangelo.

Electors and Economics

Is the Electoral College a result of considerations about slavery by the Founding Fathers? I saw this idea posted on FB a few weeks ago. As I see it, there may have been an element of such a consideration in the establishment of the College (although the 3/5 clause, to the Founders’ shame, was certainly a more definite acknowledgement of slavery). I think the FB comment was in reference to the indirect nature of Presidential elections, and the factor of proportionality according to population combined with the “senator” count (ie, 2 per state in addition to the number representatives from that state). The senator component is likely what the commentor meant about a “slavery consideration.” As in the Congress, it gives extra power to states with less population; ie, (at the time) slave states.

But I’d like to think the Electoral College was much more a nod to Plato than anything else. Plato was absolutely opposed to “pure” democracy. The human tendency towards mob rule and “bread & circuses” was, and is, too obvious to ignore. I don’t actually favor the Electoral College, but I am not convinced that our species is sufficiently advanced, at least in this country, to avoid the siren lure of a demagogue, especially when the going gets rough. Beset by problems on all sides, too many people are eager to blame whomever the Demagogue Du Jour tries to blame: immigrants, the Left, the Press, etc. Note that our bicameral Congress (which also, at this moment in history, works against liberalism due to the slim chances of ever regaining the Senate) is equally a check against “tyranny by the majority”.

This begs the question of, if these institutions (the Electoral College and Congress) are not working to promote freedom and liberty, but instead seem slanted (at present) to promoting autocratic tendencies, what governmental forms would do a better job? It would be nice if a political Einstein appeared on the scene who could fabricate a new arrangement or form of government that did accommodate and tame both of these warring tendencies in human beings; ie, the desire for rational, responsive government vs. short-sighted temporary fulfillment. Or put another way, the requirement that every person’s opinion (and vote) carried equal weight vs. the power of an angry, misguided majority to inflict its will on minorities.

If such a political genius did appear, I suspect she would begin with a guaranteed (and required) proper public education, since it is our vast, collective ignorance that poses the most fundamental obstacle to enlightened self-governance. Certainly the most influential framer of them all, Thomas Jefferson, believed in the absolute necessity of an educated electorate. He said, “Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.” An uninformed and ignorant population can always be easily swayed by someone willing to bend (or break) the truth in their favor.

And while I’m asking for a paradigm-changing genius to show up, I truly wish an economic genius could satisfy the warring forces in every human economy. On the one hand, unbridled capitalism requires an infinite capacity for growth; it only works over time if markets and profits expand without limit. But infinite growth on a finite planet that provides finite, limited resources, resources which are being contested for by 7 billion souls… that’s not possible. Marx’s “solution” was doomed to failure since it was predicated on behavior that is exactly the opposite of human behavior. No one is prepared to follow the idea of “from those of the greatest ability to those in the greatest need.” Humans are not wired that way, the altruism in our souls is not strong enough to overcome the greed, or even the need for self-preservation. Such an arrangement only leads to corruption whereby the bosses at the top of the Marxian ladder gather the profits that were supposed to have been shared.

But Adam Smith (and all his philosophical descendents) are also doomed in the face of the reality of finite limited growth. That calculus leads inevitably to runaway megawealth concentrated in the hands of a very small percentage of ultra-rich, the infamous 1%, while the middle class is squeezed out of existence. Basically the same outcome as Marxian economies.

And the most recent theorists (the ultra-capitalists, led by Koch, Friedman, Buchanan, etc) are now convinced that democracy itself is inimical to capitalism, or at least the way they envision capitalism. The concentration of the world’s wealth into the hands of an infinitesmally small segment of the population is not enough for them. They believe in a completely unbridled capitalism, with no government regulation whatsoever, neither in finance nor in environmental nor safety standards. And of course, that is what they are effectively now getting from the Trump administration, combined with equally unbridled corruption. These are people who fundamentally believe that an unlimited franchise to vote is a bad thing, because if EVERYBODY votes, they will naturally vote to provide for themselves, voting for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, public education, roads and bridges, all things that these ultra-capitalists believe should be gotten rid of. This, by the way, is the real force behind the recent upswing in voter suppression. The Koch brothers have been funding such efforts for decades.

And so we need TWO social geniuses to appear. The one, to tweak republican democracy so that it responds to the will of the people while ensuring that will does not run roughshod over those with less power and little voice. The other, to balance economy so that the billions of humans can work and improve themselves, while still operating within the constraints of dwindling global resources.

It probaby occurs to anyone thinking on the matter, that these two geniuses would be providing solutions to what is basically the same problem: how to elevate the human spirit so that it naturally seeks this balance. While simultaneously guarding against the predatory nature of powerful greed.

Not the New Normal

There is a worrisome hint of an idea that seems to be pervading the news and commentary since Michael Cohen delivered his public testimony last week. That testimony, as damning as it was to Trump and those closest to him, natually never moved the needle of public opinion, or, more specifically, the opinions of Trump supporters. They simply don’t care what Trump says or does, and they never will. They are the very definition of blind loyalists.

But it was not so much the testimony, or the reaction to it, that is worrisome. In the selfsame time frame, the meme that appeared was the suggestion that Mueller’s report was imminent. This was especially troublesome, coming as it did one week after Barr was sworn in as Attorney General. The timing was suspicious at best; it seemed unlikely that Mueller was coincidentally ready to wrap everything up. And especially in light of the flurry of legal activity surrounding Roger Stone. I am personally amazed that there seems to be no movement whatsoever toward indicting or accusing Don Jr., nor Jared, both of whom have been associated with flagrantly illegal activity. Nevertheless, Mueller’s subpoena pump seems to have run dry, with no indication that any more subpoenas are forthcoming.

This all seems to indeed point toward the strong possibility of an imminent Mueller report. Now, when we learn what’s in that report, I’m certain Democrats and progressives will feel vindicated in their expectancy: this horrible excuse for a President will not fare well in this report. There’s too much publically known that already shows that, and Mueller undoubtedly has much more to fill out the picture. But here is the worrisome hint of an idea that is making its presence felt: there will probably be no incontrovertible, obvious to everyone, clearly understood THING that anyone and everyone would immediately recognize as TRUMP IS GUILTY.

The Nixon tapes were straight-forwardly incriminating: there was Nixon’s voice, saying things that were illegal. But even then, the nature of those crimes were not clearly evident to the average Joe and Joan. To understand the legal ramifications, they had to see and hear the Congress and legal experts react, and that reaction informed them of the seriousness of the situation. There will be no such clear reaction to this report. Unless Mueller has evidence of a dead body somewhere, or videos of Trump doing dirty deeds, his followers will never admit that anything is wrong. And his GOP backers in Congress will never convict him. There will undoubtedly be undeniable grounds for impeachment in Mueller’s report. Hell, Trump provides undeniable grounds for impeachment on a daily basis. Clinton was impeached for a sex act in the Oval Office and a lie, and they impeached Andrew Johnson for how he addressed Congress. The litany of impeachable offenses committed by Donald Trump is too exhausting to even ennumerate.

And that is the most important point to be made. The sheer, overwhelming amount of damage Donald Trump has done to the Republic and to the office of the Presidency has exhausted us to the point of being (almost) comfortably numb. The 9000 lies, the kowtowing to Putin, the attacks on law enforcement, on the press, on the judiciary, on his enemies, on and on and on. It is so oeverwhelming that even the professionals in the media whose job it is sort all this out, even they cannot keep up with the constant barrage of outrageous corruption and criminality and indecency that floods us from this White House.

The greatest threat, in my opinion, is that we have been Robert McNamara’d into submission. (Those who do not recognize the phrase need to bone up on their Paul Simon). And by that, I mean that we are that close to accepting all this as “the new normal”. That having an immoral, vain, stupid, indecent, crass liar, criminal and cheating con man for our President is somehow “okay”, and what we should no longer feel shame and outrage for all his inhumane and selfish actions.

Because it’s just too tiresome to keep fighting. And because powerful men (and it is almost wholly men) in his party have completely abrogated their responsibility to the nation, and to the Constitution, and even to common decency in their decision to continue supporting and defending him.

Well, Donald Trump is NOT the new normal. And even a momentary lapse in rejecting him, his crudeness, his greed and his stupidity is a moment too long. We can never permit ourselves the luxury of fatigue, even in the face of this unrelenting onslaught of the nightmare he has unleashed on our nation. The stakes are too high, the risks are too great, the result of allowing Trumpian “politics” to be the new status quo are too horrific. Our children deserve better.

And so, stay alert. Stay informed. Stay outraged. Stay on track.

Growing up during the 60’s and 70’s, I never claimed to be, nor wanted to be, “normal.” I aimed for beyond normal, for Truth will a capital “T”, for enlightenment. That is still my goal. I will never accept an America defined by Donald Trump’s behavior as normal, new or otherwise.