“Today is only one day in all the days that will ever be. But what will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today.”[i] Hemmingway had a way with words. What can we do today to save our democracy for all the other days?
In its 250 years, the nation has worked through several periods of soul searching and searching for the soul. Lincoln spoke of the search for the better angels of our nature.[ii] It is surely time to do it again. Things just aren’t right, and the different seems wrong. It’s not just nostalgia rearing its head, but it is hard to imagine that the grandkids and the greats will refer to these as the good old days.
I work hard to whittle a moderate self when it comes to body politic; "On the rightward edge of the leftward tendency,”[iii] admittedly. I take pains to leave readers wondering if I am liberal or conservative, agree or disagree, to think about the issue themselves. Some take pains to tell me to tell them while others are pained by what they consider the obvious. As a member of Congress, neither side of the aisle would pay me heed. Solons on the right would consider me part of the enemy camp; too liberal. Liberals would consider me too conservative. Alas, moderates are the Rodney Dangerfields of politics, not extreme enough.
The extremes rule the day. They get upset if you call them extreme, but they don’t like you if you’re not. Until a few years ago primary candidates lured their base with extreme ideas. Once elected they governed from the middle. Now it seems they want to lead from the edges. I’m not sure that moderation, for all its virtues, will cure what ails us.
Shall we take off the gloves and bare-knuckle what needs to be said? It can’t be done with genteelness. Somehow we have to come out fighting for what is right, to say what needs to be said, what so many seem afraid to say, lest they be primaried, or say a wrong thing that will go viral on X or Instagram in twenty seconds.
The Greeks taught us that character is destiny.[iv] Dr. King told us that he looked forward to a time when people would be judged by the content of their character.[v] Meacham suggests that “What counts is not just the character of the individual at the top, but the character of the country.”[vi] Too many state and national leaders need an injection of character and too many of our fellow citizens support a past and potential leader lacking content of character. We are beyond the point where we can simply argue about the best process for building infrastructure, improving educational attainment, the border, or other policies of a general nature. We need to discuss the character of those who want to lead us.
We are a democracy. It distinguishes us from so many other countries of the world. We are a republic with a constitution that creates a democratic way of life. We are a people committed to the rule of law and to the institutions that bind us.
How should we react when a candidate for the presidency doesn’t support the rule of law, who says that in his first term, he never took an oath to support the Constitution or refused to cede the peaceful transfer of power at the end of his first term and encouraged followers to march on the Congress to stop the vote counting. Is that the content of character we should expect of our leaders? My moderately held response is “hell no.”
Our tradition says that political opponents can disagree with each other, strongly at times, but always with civility and an understanding that it is the policies with which they disagree. They don’t hate their opponents. Hating your opponents is how autocrats behave.
How should we feel about a candidate who praises Viktor Orban, the PM of Hungary, because of his tough approach to turning that democracy into an autocracy? How should we feel about a candidate who praises Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, who stomps on democracy and violates the established world order by invading a free and independent country, Ukraine, and annexing Crimea before moving inland? How should we feel about candidates who exchange “love” letters with the autocratic, nay dictator of North Korea, a person who had threatened to send missiles to the west coast of the U. S.? How should we feel about candidates who praise the Chinese government for their forceful takedown of democracy-seeking citizens in Tiananmen Square?
Former President Trump, at this juncture, is his party’s overwhelming favorite candidate for President. He has a full wind in his sails. He has said that when reelected he will find a way to fire huge numbers of civil servants and replace them with super loyal true believers in his way. This is against the law for one thing, and a first step to autocracy; ask the Germans. The civil service was implemented years ago as a defense against “To the victor go the spoils.” We should not go back. Yet, the Heritage Foundation’s Project 25 is screening thousands of candidates for federal jobs, using questionnaires that seek to determine the candidate’s loyalty to Trump and his policies more than skill-based questions.[vii] Their program includes over 20 videos used to train conservatives how to essentially take over agencies and reduce their effectiveness.
The supposed Republican candidate has said that he will
get even with all of the media who wrote articles against him, against his
claim that he won the 2020 election, or who reported on his attempts to take
over the Justice Department and to use the military to keep his power. He calls
it retribution. One might presume that his aids haven’t read the First
Amendment to the Constitution.[viii]
Where is the content of character in these efforts?
The former President tried to use his constitutional right to claim voter fraud and bad management of the voting process in state after state and local governments. His lawyers filed over 60 appeals in the state courts alleging voter fraud and voting machines programmed by persons in other countries to favor his opponents, and they were rebuked in every case.
The former President’s staff set up slates of fake electors in several states to submit fake election results to Congress on January 6, 2020. Several of them are now working their cases through the court system. Some have admitted that they knew it was a fraudulent act. There are photos of national Republican campaign managers attending meetings where the fake electors signed the fake certificates. The former President is charged, and not yet tried, with over 90 felony counts related to threatening voting officials, lying about voting practices, encouraging the insurrection against the elected representatives in Congress, and other related issues. In addition, he has been found guilty of business fraud in the state of New York. Is this the content of character that the nation deserves for its leader? Think about the content of character.
The question before us has nothing to do with policy. Let’s discuss healthcare at another time. We can postpone discussions about border security, and we can feign concern about foreign nationals being terrorists in the homeland. We can muster patience about nearly everything but the overthrow of our democratic way of life.
Winston Churchill supposedly said, “You could always count on the Americans to do the right thing after they had exhausted all other possibilities.” We still have folks who believe the last election was stolen, and that the mob break-in at the capitol was a bunch of tourists trying to be patriotic, so maybe we haven’t exhausted all possibilities, but we are close.
David French, raised as a religious Fundamentalist suggests that many who favor Trump over anyone else have three characteristics in common: certainty, ferocity, and solidarity. It explains how so many religious people support the “Don.” They are certain he will save our country from the chokehold of liberalism. Some call him god-sent. Once certain of that, everyone else is the enemy that must be overthrown ferociously. They are convinced that they are in solidarity with other like-minded people.[ix]
So let’s face the reality of today’s America. Let us put the character of the nation to the test. Let us put country over party, Let us put democracy over loyalty to an individual. Let us call out candidates who lack content of character. We have searched for soul before, let us do it again.
I’ll start. Donald J. Trump has demonstrated time and time again, even to this day, that he does not possess the content of character that we expect of a president. He is not qualified to be president! Let us spread that word with clarity, ferocity, and solidarity. If we don’t, we stand a good chance of losing our democracy. It is time to call for our better angels!
What will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today!
[i] Earnest
Hemmingway – For Whom the Bell Tolls - 1940
[ii] Lincoln’s Inaugural
Address
[iii] David Brooks
“What Happened to American Conservatism?” The Atlantic December 8, 2021
[iv] Heraclitus lived in Ephesus between 535-475 BCE. He
also told us that we could never step into the same river twice.
[v] Dr. Martin Luther King, January 20, 2013 – I Have a
Dream speech, Washington DC
[vi] Jon Meacham, The Soul of America, the battle for our
better angels, 2018
[vii] Heritage.org – Project 25
[viii] First Amendment – Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.
[ix] David French - Why
Fundamentalists Love Trump - New York Times, December 7, 2023 @ 10:25 AM
