Today is Sunday, which means tomorrow I report for pre-operative stuff at the hospital for the forthcoming operation on Wednesday to address the stenosis (blockage) in my left carotid artery that caused my recent stroke. While I have no intimations of forthcoming disaster, I will be undergoing general anesthesia, so I find it incumbent upon me to make certain arrangements jsut in case — writing down instructions of various sorts both in case of my demise or my being disabled and unable to function. That includes getting both an updated will and a new durable financial power of attorney signed, transferring most of my cash to my wife’s bank account (I usually lay all household bills including the mortgage) and so on.
Besides these somewhat “mundane” and also hopefully unnecessary endeavors, I similarly want to record certain thoughts and observations just in case I am in the near future no longer able to do so. Hence this posting, which admittedly will ramble across a number of disparate topics.
Now you perhaps have some idea of the remaining content, and can thus decide whether you wish to consider reading.
Sometime this week, most likely on Wednesday, the House of Representatives will vote to impeach the current occupant of the Oval. The result is not in doubt. Collin Peterson and Jeff van Drew will vote against impeaching, There may be 5-12 more current Dems joining them, but perhaps less as we increasingly see supposedly vulnerable new Dems going on record for impeachment. Only now former Republican Justin Amash will join them. although I wonder if that might change somewhat were filing deadlines for primaries behind us.
That brings us to the Senate and a trial. Or does it? McConnell and Graham have both made statements that bring into question not only whether they can legitimately take the requisite oath as jurors in such a trial, but also the essential fairness of such a proceeding at this point. The argument for nevertheless going ahead with such a trial is to force the Republican Senators in difficult races to be on record, especially after a clear presentation of the TOTAL evidence (which will likely be far more than already heard in public sessions on the House side). Of course, McConnell MAY be willing to distort that process to keep such testimony from being presented on television to the American people, and we need remember that it only takes 51 Senators to overturn a procedural ruling by the Chief Justice and there are still 53 Republican Senators.
Thus some posit that the House after impeaching should NOT (yet at least) make a referral of the matter to the Senate and to continue to investigate, only perhaps later presenting a more complete record to the Senate, perhaps AFTER filing deadlines for Senators up for reelection have begun to pass. Here it is perhaps worthwhile to look closely at a calendar with filing deadlines (which you can find here if you scroll down). By the beginning of next year deadlines will have passed in AL, AR, IL, CA, TX, OH, and NC. None of those are currently on the radar for people who might feel pressured to vote to convict except NC. Going forward, by the end of January we would add MS, KY, WV, and IN. Realistically, the only vaguely possible flip among current Republicans is an outside possibility of Dan Sullivan of AK if he were given cover by Murkowski (who after all did vote against Kavanaugh for SCOTUS). February adds IN and PA. Yes, in theory Toomey MIGHT be someone who could be persuaded on one current article (perhaps abuse of power) but that is unlikely. You would have to go to the end of March to really make a difference, adding NE, GA, MT, NM, OR, ID, IA, NV, ME, CO, UT, VA, NJ, SC, MO, and SD — this would bring in three currently vulnerable Republican incumbents in Gardner, Collins, and Ernst, but pushing that far might severely disrupt the Democratic primary process assuming that there is not a clear probable candidate. After all, at a minimum Sanders and Warren and possibly Klobuchar might still be competing,.
I happen to like the idea of postponing a little to give time for information both to be absorbed (it will NOT be during the holidays) and for more to be developed. For that reason I might not send over the charges before the end of January. This would allow for more development, and if Graham insists on calling Giuliani and others to Judiciary, I happen to think that will only increase support for removing the President. I don’t expect that to happen — the postponement — but it is what I think.
I disagree with those who think there should have been explicit charges on emoluments, or bribery, or even the abuses we have seen at the border. I absolutely believe that all of the actions in those categories warrant Trump’s removal, but I think they diffuse and weaken the impact of the charges already voted on by Judiciary, which can in the evidentiary presentation include the elements of each. As is the charges present the jurors / Senators with a stark set of choices. First, has the President abused the powers of his office for personal benefit? As the full picture of how far back the manipulation of things in Ukraine become clear, it will become increasinglym difficult to argue that was only one phone call or that the President had a concern with corruption. The contacts with the previous regine in Ukraine make clear that this was far more about Manafort, and to a large degree trying to ensure he did not turn on Trump, who after all told people that Manafort could take him down. Second, the charge of obstruction of Congress gives the prosecutors the chance to lay out a stark choice — will the Senate vote to abandon Congress’s role as a coequal branch andbn effectively create an unregulated executive branch that approaches a dictatorship? I would love to see that argument being made by articulate prosecutors, and here I can think of a number of Dems who could fulfill that task — Swawell, Schiff, Demings, Raskin, etc. etc. etc.
Beyond impeachment, I have thoughts on the Democratic primary process. I have not yet made up my mind whom to support, although there are those for whom I will not vote in Virginia on Super Tuesday (although with the exception of Gabbard, Williamson,and maybe Yang I would support in the general). As of now (and please note that qualifier) I would consider any of Warren, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, or Castro. Warren is at the upper age limit I would consider, in part because of what I have experienced with my own health and energy in recent years. I do hope that the remaining15 candidates can minimize anything personal in their challenges against their opponents, and I really wish their supporters and surrogates would do likewise.
I teach government to aroudn 130 seniors and one junior transfer. Some are not citizens (I have three young men from China, for example), others are totally turned off to politics (but this is a course required for graduation), and perhaps 1/3 of my students are Trump supporters, some extremely so. I have to challenge their thinking on everything — many do not consume political news at all, and for some the only regular source is Fox. For those, I point them at Judge Napolitano and Chris Wallace (and used to at Shep Smith). I wish I could get more dynamic discussions on implications of political opinions/expressions, and should Ibe able to return to teaching in the new year, I will try. I consider it my obligation not only as a teacher, but also as a citizen,
I think many people are totally misreading what just happened in the UK. Corbyn was a uniquely unlikely leader who only saw his party do well in 2017 because of how unlikable May was. His failure to disavow the anti-Semitism of some in his party was also a problem. But I think the real issue was a lot of working class and lower middle class whites wanting to blow up a system they thought had abandoned them. If so, then this election was less an indicator for the US next year but rather an echo of what happened here in 2016.
As I look forward towards November, I recognize there will be challenges, but as demontrated starting with decreasing margins in special Congressional elections in 2017 and the trouncing of Republicajs in House races in 2018, the mood in this country has swung drastically. It is true that WI will still be competive, but MI, IA, and PA are all moving strongly away from Trump, and AZ, GA, and NC are moving in our direction. So also may be TX, OH, and FL. I am still very optimistic about the Presidential next year, and somewhat optimistic about the Senate. I expect us to keep the House and to continue to pick up Governors and state legislative seats. There will be continued efforts at voter suppression, without which the current generation of Republicans cannot maintain power, but we have learned how to fight back, and Republican overreach is starting to backfire- think here of the horrible pardons just issued by Bevin on his way out in KY.
On a personal level, a few thoughts. I have not written here much recently, even before my stroke. I felt as if I had little of value to add. I can look around the world and perhaps be discouraged at much of what we see. But were that my only reaction, I would be abandoning my understanding as a student of history. What we may be seeing — and not just in our country — can depress and anger and frustrate us. But we are still not YET in the kind of global crisis that was erupting in the late 1930s, when despite the still fresh memories from the slaughter of the Great War the world yet again lurched towards global catastrophe. Outin is horrid, but he is not yet Stalin and there is at least yet no one of the world stage who approaches a Hitler.
The real challenge is less political as we have known it but rather ecological. And here the selection of a teen-aged Swedish girl as person of the year is totally on point, because if the world has any chance of avoiding the forthcoming disaster of catastrophic climate change it will be because young people take more control. After all, those of us in the leading edge of the Baby Boom generation will be largely gone from the earth by time the full impact of such catastrophes would be felt.
In about 72 hours or less, I will be under general anesthesia, undergoing a surgery. I have no intimations of death or being disabled, although I recognize both are possible. But then, both are possible each time I get in my car and head to or from school.
I live in a world with many problems, political and other. Anger, despair, frustration are all possible reactions. And yet I go on, trying to make a difference. Am I an optimist? In a sense that questio is irrelevant. If I did not believe a better future were possible my only choice would be to totally withdraw, to give up politics to be sure, but also teaching, which is itself a commitment to the possibility of a better future.
I will be with most of my students (our classes meet 3 times in 4 days) at least one more time, on Tuesday, when we will have shortened periods because we will celebrate a mass in honor of St John deMatha, who founded the Trinitarian order which runs our school and after whom it is named. I will thank each of the classes for the opportunity to teach them. It is not merely in case it is my last time with them. It is because I want to model something for them — to always be grateful for every moment of life.
And it is with that attitude that I wish to end this posting. I am grateful for the now more than 16 years since I joined this community over Thanksgiving weekend in 2003 while volunteering for Howard Dean in Laconia NH.
And as has often been my habit, I will end this with my usual salutation.
Peace.