It's That Time of Year!

 Everyone is telling you to be of good cheer. I’m trying. Before I forget, Merry Christmas.

And then there is Bah Humbug all around us. In a national address to the nation the other evening, the President told us that we had never had it so good. He told us we had the best economy in our history, and he implied that he might be a greater president than, well, Abraham Lincoln. And yet.

Our leader is an expert at the big story. It’s a standard strategy for those in power and those seeking power: tell the big lie because they are more likely to believe it than the small stories you could tell. So it is not unreasonable to think that a whole lot of people believe what they hear coming out of the White House.

The White House. Now there is something to be upset about. The home and office of the president are supposed to be simple, not grand like the palaces of Europe. We are a democracy, not a kingdom. Remember?

The Oval Office, that sacred ground of American power and grand simplicity, has been destroyed to the level of heresy. The desecration has reduced it to just another room. The mystic is gone. The symbol of world power looks like a decorator with no taste was let loose. It is gaudy, it is cliché, it is ugly. It proves money doesn’t buy class. It is embarrassing. 

The East Wing brings new fury, ripped from its connection to the White House. For what? For a ballroom bigger than the rest of the building, out of proportion to the rest of the site. It will take months to tear it down, if it ever gets built, after The Don leaves office. Could the place use a ballroom? Sure, but in proportion and without the glitz.

But back to the economy and stuff. If things are as good as we are told, why is the country in such a funk? We know that we have a pretty strong economy, but not the greatest. The polls are pretty much in agreement. The President’s numbers are in the toilet. Poll after poll indicates that the folks don’t think he is doing a good job managing the economy, the European war, the state of manufacturing, and most other issues. He does get reasonable marks for his efforts to reduce illegal immigration and close the border, but people don’t like how he is doing it.

We are not a country that sends masked men to pull people off the street and whisk them away in unmarked cars. We don’t put people on planes and send them to countries that will jail them for no reason. But we are becoming that kind of country.

Christmas letters are supposed to be uplifting, but too much is changing for the worse to be bright and shiny. We are paying too much for food, for gas, for entertainment, for basics like water and home energy. Too many will start the year with health insurance they can’t afford or no insurance at all. That is when the ER becomes the primary care provider, and our rates increase to pay for it.

There are three more years of this craziness before a term limit kicks in. My positive side says we will survive this. We survived the Civil War. We survived Teapot Dome. We survived other threats to democracy. We beat fascism in Europe, and we beat the Empire of Japan’s threat in Asia. We survived McCarthyism.

We can replace the new signs on the Kennedy Center and other buildings in DC. We can, with time, remove the Amazon-grade glitz from the Oval Office and the rest of the White House.

Based on what has happened this year, I shudder to think of what could happen in the next three. But there is hope for a better tomorrow. There has to be.

We still have great universities that are the envy of the world. We have local people trying every day to make their communities better and safer. We have millions of people in the streets across the country protesting the destruction of our institutions. When the people rise up, the people win. People can only wield power when we let them. So there is hope.

Let’s make our hope a positive force to help our democracy survive. Knowing we can do it gives me a much-needed brighter outlook as we end one year and begin another.

 

Happy New Year!!!

 

 

Hate!

 I hate America!

I didn’t know that until a few weeks ago. I didn’t come to it on my own, the Speaker of the House told me… I wasn’t singled out, mind you. It runs in the family, all four generations. Lots of my neighbors and nearly eight million others got the message at the same time. Speaker Mike Johnson told us that anyone who participated in a No Kings protest hated America. And you know me; I thought it was the other way around.

I don’t follow AOC on Instagram or Facebook; she is a bit progressive, you know, but she noted recently that calling someone who disagrees with your position on an issue un-American is the very definition of un-American.

On the other side, a young man slain for his beliefs, Charlie Kirk, garners thousands of chapters for his Turning Point organization that, in the name of saving democracy, spews views that are the antithesis of what America should represent.

A lot of what constitutes the new good is the opposite of what has defined America for generations. Affirmative Action is once again considered discrimination against white folks. A good education is no longer considered a worthwhile goal because we need more tradespeople. Why can’t we have both? Evangelical Nationalism, a growing segment of Christianity preaches the opposite of Christianity, calling us to turn to a theocracy instead of our tradition of advocating for the free exercise of any religion.

I’m registered as “No Party Preference.” I can speak out of both sides of my mouth. I’m usually just a bit left of center, but not enough to be called a leftie. I’m worried about our democracy. I’m told I shouldn’t worry about it; it’s what older folks do. Nobody cares, really. Worry about the important things, the pundits say, affordability, the new buzzword.

The recent government shutdown illustrates the dichotomy weaving its way through the country. While millions are worried about the price of health insurance, the lack of healthcare, and the price of food, other millions are worried about maintaining power and crumbling all the institutions that seem to be bothering them: universities, education in general, safety nets for the less fortunate, libraries, science research, gold-standard economic reporting, and even classic architecture. Have you noticed what they have done to desecrate the Oval Office and the White House in general?

The younger members of the Democratic Party are calling for new leadership. Those in their seventies and eighties have lost control of the narrative and ability to lead. They had the wind at their backs during the shutdown and blew it. They fought for affordability and gave in to easier flying schedules. They are a party with no discipline and no cohesive or catchy message aimed at the younger generations, arm wrestling against a supercharged and highly organized party of zealots.

The national movement to return to an affordable but democratic nation has begun. Prodded by young people and supported by folks of all ages, the nation is starting to awaken to the travesty thrust upon them in the last several months.

The first nationwide No Kings rallies a couple of years ago attracted only a few million people. The rallies last June attracted about five million people. The protests in October attracted more than seven million people.

Erica Chenoweth, a distinguished professor at Harvard, has studied the history of anti-authoritarian movements around the globe. She found that movements that achieved their goal usually represented three and a half percent of the population of the country. That is a lot of people. If the trend continues, twelve million Americans protesting against the current regime isn’t hard to imagine.

If you are a pessimist, the chances of success for No Kings are slim to none. An optimist thinks it’s possible with a little effort. It will take a lot of effort, but worth a try. But it will fail if it doesn’t bring forth a highly respected national leader.

Today, it has an organizer, Indivisibles’ Ezra Levin, but no leader. The civil rights movement had MLK. The current effort to restore our democracy needs a national leader who can rally the populists to do what is needed and what is right.

How do we know when we are in trouble?

When a nation sends its army against its own citizens, democracy is lost. When a nation sends masked secret police against its people, democracy fades. When national leaders turn the Department of Justice into a personal law firm to prosecute political enemies, democracy is done. When a nation tries to tell its universities what to teach and how to teach it, democracy is history. America was once the model of a modern democracy. Why did we let it lose its way?

We are told that it is always the economy that drives people’s feelings and their votes. Recent elections around the country tell a mixed story. The people of the State of New Jersey and the Commonwealth of Virginia elected Democratic governors. They both ran on an economic agenda, but the President’s agenda was on the ballot as well.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania returned three justices to its Supreme Court despite the opposition of the President. The Vice President’s brother lost an election in the very red State of Ohio.

The most interesting election to me was California’s Proposition 50, which reconfigures its congressional districts to offset the redistricting efforts in Texas. Not one person was on the ballot, and economics wasn’t on the ballot; it was all about the future of democracy. It garnered sixty-four percent approval from the voters. That is what a mandate looks like. Why did millions turn out to vote on one issue? Because the President had asked the State of Texas to Gerrymander their congressional district to make it easier to elect five more Republicans to Congress. When California retaliated by designing districts that would likely elect five more Democrats to Congress, the President instructed the Department of Justice to sue the state because it was an unfair tampering with the system; audacious is an understatement.

One must ask if a few elections in blue states equate to a national repudiation of the current administration’s efforts to undo our democratic processes. Maybe not. But all long marches begin with the first step.

It could also be a wake-up call for the administration. It might just let them know that their methods for achieving their economic and cultural objectives are just too severe, or just not the way we customarily do things. Masked men whisking people off the streets into unmarked cars is not the American way. It is the way of Russia and Hungary, or earlier, Chile, or Argentina. We have an annoying history of insisting on due process, even for hardened criminals.

It could be a reminder that government officials who take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution ought to follow its provisions.

But we know that this administration has no intention of protecting and defending the Constitution. They told us during the campaign that they would implement the Project 25 programs. It was a nine-hundred-page outline for changing the country from three equal branches of government to a country with a strong executive branch. It was a plan for increasing the power of oligarchs and moving us toward autocracy with a strong military dispersed among the citizenry. If it succeeds, the country is lost. If it succeeds even a little, we will not see our greatness again.

 

I don’t hate America, but I am concerned about the current state of affairs. Nobody runs for office with the promise to change nothing,  but change must be done within the norms of our longstanding institutions and culture. But people should not live in fear. Parents should not be afraid that when they send their kids to school, they may never see them again. People who follow the rules and go to the immigration office as scheduled should not be deported for following the law. Our police services, who pride themselves on serving and protecting themselves should not be forced to wear masks and walk the streets with weapons of war. Members of Congress should not be prevented from performing their oversight duties at detention centers. I don’t hate America; I just want it to be America again.

 

We Have A Choice

 The conventions are over! We have the candidates. In early November we should know who won the election for the most important job in the world. How so? The President of the U.S.A. is the leader of the first democratic country in the world, the most powerful country in the world, and the most relied upon country to help keep the world peace.

The first duty a President assumes, no matter the political party is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. That is the sacred oath that they take. They don’t take an oath to a god, they don’t take an oath to support a person, but they do take an oath to support the Constitution. It is their job to protect our democracy and in this age to ensure that a democratic form of government delivers for the people.

The nationalist populism movement is afoot across the globe and many in the U.S. have been sucked into its beliefs. Populism contains two primary claims: “True people” are locked into conflict with outsiders, including establishment elites, and nothing should constrain the will of the “true” people.[i] Nationalist movements generally fall into three groups: anti-establishment, socio-economic, and cultural. We see the Nationalism movement led by Viktor Orban in Hungary, Recep Erdogan in Türkiye, Donald Trump’s MAGA movement in the U.S., and Evo Morales in Bolivia, to name a few. Just last June, Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party won enough seats in the Parliament to make a coalition government almost impossible. On September 1, the far-right Alternative Fur Deutschland Party won an election in the eastern states, the first time since the Nazis were ousted at the end of WWII. Nationalist Populism is a direct confrontation with our Constitution. But, because it is a worldwide movement and because MAGA has so many adherents in the U.S., we easily could lose our democracy and be subjected to an authoritarian administration that we elected, just as the Germans did in the 1930s. We expect our president to push back on these movements.

The second job of the President is to preserve and defend our alliances designed to keep the world at peace, and to fight against attempts of one country to invade others.

After World War II the U.S. led an effort to create the United Nations and NATO. Both were charged with keeping the world at peace and forming a new world order that included the notion that one country should not invade another. That world order was held until February 2014 when Russia invaded the Crimea. Again, in February of 2022, they pushed troops inland attempting to occupy the rest of Ukraine. Two years later they still hold only a small part of the country. Ukraine is receiving aid from most of the NATO countries even though it is not yet a member because if Ukraine falls, the rest of Europe is at risk of invasion. Article 5 of the NATO Charter states that if one country is invaded all of the other members will come to their aid. They came to the aid of the U.S. on 9/11.

The third job of the President is to uplift the people of the country, to be the adult in the room. They are asked to continue to build a more perfect union. They do that by supporting the institutions that weld the citizenry, which make us who we are. They uplift people by treating them with respect, by providing for the common good. And yet, even today we hear a candidate tout the axioms of the 1920s Klan boast that whites are “of this superior blood”… “upon whom depends the future of civilization.”[ii]

We are supposed to be that shining city on the hill, the beacon that beckons others, the glow from our torch invites even the wretched refuse of teeming shores[iii] to join our trek to a unified set of values. Those whom we welcome do not poison the blood of those currently living here.

If the sacred oath calls for the president to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, they need to do that. They can’t boast that they will be a dictator on their first day in office. They can’t ignore the non-political status of the Department of Justice; they can’t say they will use the armed forces to control the people who disagree with them or march in opposition to a government mandate. If they do any of those things they disqualify themselves from the position.

The U.S. is a traditional leader of the free world. Our treaties, pacts, and behaviors are designed to create a free world order where each nation respects the sovereignty of the other. A president should not say that they will ignore those institutions and encourage an enemy nation to do ”whatever the hell you want” to our allies. A person who would do that is not qualified to be president.

The nation's leader is responsible for at least trying to ensure that we are a united nation rather than trying to separate people, make them unhappy with others, heap scorn on civil servants, and try to upset the peaceful transfer of power and other institutional upheavals. If they can’t encourage us to experience the “joy that comes in the morning,[iv] why bother to run for the job.

We can stipulate that the price of groceries is too high and that gas prices are too high and that that makes making ends meet each month a difficult task. But those strains pale in comparison to what is at stake in this year’s election.

The Greeks taught us centuries ago to reach deep into the soul of our leaders. Socrates would be appalled by the current state of affairs. No candidate is a perfect choice for president, so we have to decide by comparing what we see deep down in the candidates.

One candidate is a convicted felon, found guilty of sexual abuse, accused of trying to overthrow the government, falsifying business and personal information to secure loans as well as interfering with vote counting in the last presidential election. And yet, he has tens of millions of people who support his candidacy. Millions of people are buying into the Populism charade plan, a reflection of the gap in perceived equal treatment in this country, distrust of the “establishment” and dislike of immigrants and minorities. They have heard the same lies so often that they believe them. Nearly half the country is willing to vote against our democratic values and accept the torches of the far-right to better themselves. They are willing to vote for a man who could not pass the background check for a minimum-wage job.

National Populism flies in the face of everything American. We have seen its destructive power that nearly wiped out the “greatest generation.” We have seen how it tore our nation apart years ago in the time of the Robber Barons and in the McCarthy era. We have never in our history had a serious candidate for president who was awaiting sentencing for felonies and awaiting trial for more offenses against our government. 

We have a choice.

---

[i] Populists in power around the world, Institute for Global Insights, 11/17/2018

[ii]The Klan of Yesterday and of Today – Proceedings of the Second Imperial Klonvocation Held at Kansas City Missouri 1924, Hiram Wesley Evans

[iii] “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” Poem on Statue of Liberty – Emma Lazarus, 1885

[iv] Psalm 35.5

Autocracy Blinked!

 There was one thing on the ballot in last week’s elections – Democracy.

Yes, there were real people seeking office, but they were stand-ins for the real issue. The candidates represented two very divergent views about America’s future, our way of life, and our institutions. In the end, we are still a much-divided nation on many counts, but more united about the importance of our democracy.

The U.S. Senate is split 50/49 with a run-off election to follow in December for the remaining seat. The House is nearly evenly divided, with leadership still in question. It may be another week before all the election results are tabulated.

 

In nearly every election, even in the “battleground states,” the losers called the victors and publicly conceded defeat. Civility returned to our election process. Sometimes the small things matter.

 

In the “battleground states” every “election denier” who ran for Secretary of State was vanquished. Republicans, Democrats, Progressives, and Independents, divided on so many issues, united to keep our election processes fair. Democracy prevailed.

 A couple of months ago the Supreme Court overturned a basic right that we believed had been settled fifty years ago. The court ruled that the Federal government did not have the authority to enact a law that allowed abortions because that right was not enumerated in the Constitution.

New voters registered by the hundreds of thousands across the country and then expressed their anger at having a basic right torn from them. In five states, voters approved state constitutional amendments and other laws that make abortion legal.

 Dobbs v. Jackson did more, however, than overturn perceived freedom. Two justices suggested that they would support overturning other non-enumerated rights based on the 14^th Amendment. That may suggest the possibility of overturning the right to gay marriage, contraception, privacy, and other freedoms we take for granted. It foretells a possible reworking of the Federal government’s relationship with the States.

Dobbs also puts stare-decisis into question. Our entire legal system is based on the idea that precedent is the compass for judicial rulings. What now?

Thirteen states passed antiabortion laws that took effect soon after the Court ruled against Roe v. Wade. Those laws will provide full employment for lawyers for years to come. It took fifty years for antiabortion supporters to reach the point where the courts were filled with sympathetic judges and justices. and it may take that many years to reverse the trend unless Congress codifies Roe into a national law.

The court’s reversal of Roe raises this question: If a court can tell a person what not to do with their body, can they tell them what to do with their bodies, which is the antithesis of freedom, as we have known it. Italy tried that approach. Napoleon tried that approach. Both needed more men to fight their wars. Both attempts failed.

 Our country has been tossed and turned in a not-so-good way in the last six years. Respect for our institutions was obliterated, our standing on the world stage diminished, and party loyalty was made more important than the common good and a court that demonstrated that basic liberties can be erased ever so quickly.

 David Brooks, a NYT opinion writer, speaks of the start of an effort to build a wall around the Nationalists’ effort to bring an autocratic government to our country. The people voted against extremism. In California, for instance, the proposition to enshrine the right to abortion in the Constitution is winning in districts where antiabortion candidates are winning: democracy over party.

The stakes were exceedingly high in this election because it was about the future of our democracy.

 Democracy won.

 

 

Cognition?

I don’t know Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, but I’ve seen him on television news programs and Sunday-morning talk shows. He seems like a nice enough guy, but I seldom agree with his positions, on any subject. In a recent interview, however, he suggested that all older people in government leadership positions should submit to annual cognitive tests. The Senator is a medical doctor so that gives him some street cred. He is a gastroenterologist, which makes his gut feelings more valid than his musings about brain drain. But I think he is on to something. 

The Senator pointed out that we are a country led by old people. The President is 78 years old and the former President is 75 years old. The Speaker is 81 years old; the Senate Minority Leader is 79 years old, the Majority Leader is70 years old. Only 30 senators are under 60 years of age, only one is under 40 years of age. This is the oldest Senate in the history of the country. In the House 109 members are under 50 years of age; 30 are under 40 years of age. Depending on one’s party of choice, I suppose, the former president and/or the current president both exhibit cognitive problems.   

Just for comparison purposes, consider the following: in 1776 Jefferson was 33 years old, James Madison 25, Hamilton 21, Aaron Burr 20, and John Jay 29 years old. They go things done. They were on to something! 

The census bureau tells us that the average American is 38.5 years old. Why is a country of relatively young people led by septuagenarians and octogenarians? Where are the young leaders who can revive the national spirit? Where are the dreamers who see another Camelot as a real possibility? It’s been done before, so why not now? 

Teddy Roosevelt was 42 years old when he became President. John Kennedy was 43 years old on his Inauguration Day. A president is typically 55 years old upon taking office. I often suggested, in jest, that no one over the age of 45 should run for office. Now, I think I’m on to something. 

What if we amend the Constitution so that no one may run for president who will be over 45 years old on day one! I know, I know, constitutional amendments are hard to come by, so let’s just institutionalize it, make it part of our “American Way of Life.” 

An old axiom says that the military always trains for the last war. Politicians, it seems to me, want to take us back to the last three or four decades, to bygone eras. “Make America Great Again” and “Build Back Better” are just two examples. Why don’t we elect people who reach for the brass ring, and who want to take the speed governor off the merry-go-round of life? The 88-year-old senator from Iowa just announced that he will seek another six-year term. Why do we continue to elect people who can’t be effective anymore? The old-people cohort continues to grow each year and doesn’t seem to want any change, with a few notable exceptions. What if we elected young visionaries?  What if we, WE, wanted new? 

David Gergen served four presidents: Nixon, Ford, Bush, and Clinton. He knows what it takes to run a government, to motivate a populace, to inspire. In his new book Hearts Touched with Fire: How Great Leaders Are Made, he suggests that “One of America’s best hopes for the future is to pass the torch to a new generation of leaders – young people with fresh vision, a passion for change and a fierce dedication to progress.” I think he is on to something! 

Change doesn’t come easily to a nation as insular as ours is. Our institutions give credence and power to our elders. We characterize young movers and shakers as progressive, in a pejorative way. We put too much credence in the notion that if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I think it was Tom Peters who advises that if it works it’s obsolete.  NASA isn’t reaching for the stars anymore. They leave it to younger entrepreneurs who take people on joy rides into space. The old folks aren’t pushing for improved transportation systems. China has 23,000 miles of track for trains that travel at almost 300 miles an hour. France has 1,675 miles of track for the TGV, Italy 1,467 miles of track for the Alta Volocita. The US has 33 miles of track on which the engines might get up to 150 miles an hour. Why aren’t we building a train system that can cross the country at 300 miles per hour? Is it possible that our elders have turned us into a country that doesn’t dream anymore, that doesn’t risk greatness, that can’t even agree to fix the roads and bridges; that won’t support basic health care for everyone or that won’t even save itself from a killer pandemic? We aren’t third-world, but we may be slipping out of first-world. We can’t let that happen. 

I’ve heard said that the country is safest when Congress isn’t in session. I suppose that applies to city councils, county supervisors, school boards, and library trustees as well. All of these ruling bodies are, stereotypically, warm seats for the older folks who run for office year after eons of years. It makes a strong argument for term limits. 

Looking in the rearview mirror sometimes points to the failures of an electoral system populated by people on their way to octogenarian status. They fight so hard to stay in office that they don’t govern. Half the population devotes itself to keeping the other half from winning, frustration builds and people elect other old people who are afraid to govern. Are we really afraid of change? We could use some new blood in the Halls. 

Being in your 70s and 80s is hard work, in and of itself. Ask me! Adding the burden of governing in a world whose technology is moving so quickly that it is hard to understand is asking too much of older people. It does, however, make good fodder for SNL each weekend. The younger generation gets it. 

Try to pawn off a file cabinet to 20-year-olds and watch their reactions – why would anyone need a file cabinet, there is a cloud you know. Even the FED can’t figure out how to regulate cryptocurrency in a period when other countries are planning to stop using currency altogether. altogether. 

The younger generations are asking for good healthcare, family care, better and less expensive education, and good working conditions. They learned in the pandemic, the lucky ones at least, that work doesn’t have to be what it was; why commute to an office to work on a computer when you can work on a computer at home. Essential workers are demanding better pay and an end to overbearing production quotas. Young people want to invest in the planet, to be less militaristic in our approach to world affairs, to be congenial with our allies, and at least polite to our adversaries. They want the country they know it can be. They aren’t naïve, and I think they are on to something! 

America needs a revolution, not a violent one, but one that returns us to be the dreamers we once were, to a willingness to strive for common values, and to be repulsed by hate and division. Is that hoping for a return to what was? Maybe, but for the young people who should be yearning to lead us, that would be new. They have lived through the result of old people leading them and it is time for a change. 

It is hard to imagine, but I find myself agreeing with an ultra-conservative senator from an ultra-conservative state; just this once mind you. So yes, if you are over 55 years old please don’t run for office, but if you do, be willing to submit to an annual cognition test. We are really on to something! 

Written at age 82 years, a bunch of months, a few days, and … heck, I can’t remember.