Sunday, July 7, 2024

Sunday Reading

Divine Intervention — Brian Karem in Salon.

God got dragged back into the presidential race this week, but not the way you might think.

After sitting down with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos Friday night, President Joe Biden made two things abundantly clear: He still believes he’s the best man to run the country, or as he described it – being the most powerful man in the world. He also is fearful of what Donald Trump would do with a second term in office. “I convinced myself of two things. I’m the most qualified person to beat him, and I know how to get things done,” Biden said in the interview.

Those two things, combined with an obviously healthy ego, motivate him to continue to run for a second term even though it seems there is a growing number of Democrats who want to remove him from the ticket for fear that he is mentally deteriorating – thus giving Trump that second term all Democrats fear.

At least they have solidarity on that issue. The Democrats all want to beat a convicted felon in the general election this Fall, but some just aren’t sure if the incumbent president can do it. That is a sentence I never, in my life, thought I would write.

Unless you’re living off the grid or have been in a coma, you know that Biden’s perceived decline manifested itself in Atlanta during CNN’s recent presidential debates. Biden stunk. So did Trump. But Trump sounded like his usual delusional, malevolent and demented self. At the same time, Biden shocked people with blank stares, an open mouth and befuddled answers to questions that he should have easily answered. The GOP circled the wagons and defended a convicted felon. The Democrats circled the wagons to burn Biden at the stake.

Afterward, Biden hit the campaign trail hard to shore up support, met with his staff, told them to soldier on, and has been on the road making sure the donor class still supports him. This unprecedented quandary in American politics just keeps getting worse.

Meeting with Stephanopoulos was supposed to settle the issue about Biden’s viability, but it raised more questions than it answered – according to some large Democratic donors, while others said he “knocked the ball out of the park.”

Appearance is reality these days.

“I like the president a lot,” one West Coast donor told me. “I think he deserves thanks, our gratitude and our respect, but it’s time to step down.”

That question came up during the ABC interview. Stephanopoulos put it as politely as possible, but Biden would have none of it. So then he was asked, “And if you stay in and Trump is elected and everything you’re warning about comes to pass, how will you feel in January?”

“Long as I gave it my all,” the president said, ”that’s what this is about.”

No. It’s not. And Biden seemed to understand that later, saying “the world is at an inflection point,” and the next several years “are going to determine what the next six, seven decades are going to be like.”

Yes. And while Biden’s approval rating is dismally low, and the poll numbers show him slipping, he refuses to believe those numbers. And those who think he should step aside for Vice President Kamala Harris should also know that Biden steadfastly believes the poll numbers about her chances against Trump. “I’m the only one,” who can win, Biden reiterated. Trump also tells us he alone can atone for our sins.

“This was a very sad and weak interview,” one top donor explained. “I really hope he (Biden) steps down soon for the good of the country. He should step down right now and let Vice President Harris become President and she can run as an incumbent and she will win another four year term for the team.”

Harris supporters are much like Biden supporters; they don’t believe the poll numbers either – when it comes to her, but they do believe the poll numbers about the President. “She can easily win. Any candidate under 70 can beat Trump. And she is really great,” another donor explained.

But some Biden supporters ask an even more difficult question; “What if the poll numbers are right? What if Biden is the only one who can beat Trump. Harris is still on the ticket, and if, God forbid, something happened to Biden, she’s still there. So why should we change candidates?”

Biden on Friday was adamant about staying in the race unless there was divine intervention. “If the Lord Almighty came down and said, ‘Joe, get outta the race,’ I’d get outta the race. The Lord Almighty’s not comin’ down,” Biden said.

Maybe God did.

I’m reminded of an old joke: A man is standing in front of his house during a deluge. Record flood predicted. Dam will burst. A neighbor drives by and offers him a ride. The old man turns it down. “The lord will save me.” A little while later, with the waters up to his waist, a guy in a boat passes by. Offers the old man a ride. “The lord will save me.” Finally, with the water up to his roof, a helicopter flies over and drops a rope. “Don’t worry, the lord will save me.”

A short time later the old man drowns. He gets to heaven, meets God, and says, “Why didn’t you save me?” And God says, “I sent a car, a boat and a helicopter. What more do you want?”

Maybe the debate performance was God’s message.

Biden’s growing intricate explanation for “having a bad night” during the debate now seems more like an excuse – and his performance a definitive message about his viability. At least a number of Democratic politicians believe so – especially after looking at poll numbers showing several of them doing better than the president in their respective states.

Biden admitted he can’t “run the 100 in 10 flat” but insisted he was still in good shape. So Stephanopoulos reminded him, “I know you,” but Biden stuck by his claim. “Look I’m running again because I think I understand best what has to be done to take this nation to a completely new level,” the president said.

No Democrat, whether they want Biden to stay in the race or leave it, doubts that statement. Their concern is that Biden isn’t mentally or physically capable of handling the rigors of the challenge during the next four years.

And to that point, several Biden supporters said those calling for him to step aside miss the bigger picture.

“Trump is only three years younger. At the end of his next term, he’d be older than Biden is now. If you think Biden is a problem, imagine what Trump would look like. Who will be pulling his strings? What will be left of the country when they’re done cutting it apart? The leader of the Heritage Foundation is calling it a revolution that could “remain bloodless” if we just step aside. That’s insanity.”

While some Democrats, like Senator Mark Warner, are publicly trying to assemble a group of senators to talk Biden out of running, many wouldn’t speak on the record about the debate or the ABC interview. Publicly most Democrats say they still love Biden. Behind the scenes, they’re eating their own — in a scene so strangely reminiscent of the 1968 Chicago Democratic convention as to be frightening. Even more frightening was Biden’s response to one of the questions Stephanopoulos, who by the way did much better than the CNN moderators in asking questions, aimed at the president; “If you’re going to lose the House and the Senate if you stay in, what will you do?”

Biden would not answer. “I’m not going to answer that question. It’s not going to happen.”

Pride comes before the fall. Biden doesn’t know the future any more than anyone else does. His pride is what got him into this mess. All he had to do was show up in public in the Brady Briefing room and show himself to the world on a regular basis and he could have quieted much of the criticism – and he could have prepared much better for his debate with Trump.

But he did not do that. He has no one to blame for the perception that he’s befuddled other than himself. Now he has to face the consequences of his own decisions. That sounds an awful lot like Trump.

Finally, Biden says it takes character to run – especially because of the recent Supreme Court decision giving Presidents unlimited immunity for “official acts.” It’s going to take extraordinary intestinal fortitude to keep from manipulating the government with these newfound powers. He’s absolutely right. But I would like to hear that the President has more to offer on this subject – including expanding the court to better balance justice.

At the end of the day, as strongly as Biden remains entrenched, and as stubbornly as he has defended his entrenchment, the decision can still be reversed.

The next few weeks may yet find him stepping down.

Pandemonium is the new normal.

American politics remains chaos in a blender.

And Trump is laughing all the way to the White House – he hopes.

Doonesbury — When stars collide.

Saturday, July 6, 2024

Friday, July 5, 2024

Fifth of July

Fifth of July is not just a date, it’s a play by Lanford Wilson. It opened off-Broadway in 1978, then, after some revision, on Broadway in 1980. It’s also the play that was the starting point of my doctoral studies and the subject of my doctoral thesis in 1988.

In 1985 I directed a production of the play at the Nomad Theatre in Boulder with a great cast.

Fifth of July Nomads March 1985

The cast of Fifth of July at Nomads Theatre, Boulder, Colorado, March 1985

In the course of my studies I became friends with Mr. Wilson, and the director of the productions, Marshall W. Mason. So ever since then, I have marked the 5th of July as a special day for me and my love of theatre.

“Matt didn’t believe in death and I don’t either…. There’s no such thing. It goes on and then it stops. You can’t worry about the stopping, you have to worry about the going on.” – Sally Talley, Fifth of July.

Thursday, July 4, 2024

The Glorious Fourth

I have posted this sentiment every July 4 since 2005. This is the first time I have felt that our country is in real danger of losing its way and this could be the last time these truths are self-evident. We will soon find out.

Flags in the Rain 07-03-14When I was a kid I was very outgoing in putting up displays for the holidays — Memorial Day, Christmas, the Fourth of July. I liked the flags, the lights, the stuff. It was cool to make a big splash. But as I grew up I grew out of it, and today I don’t go much for things like that. I don’t have a flag to fly on national holidays, and the most I’ll do for Christmas is a wreath on the door because it has good memories and the scent of pine is rare in subtropical Florida.

I suppose it has something to do with my Quaker notions of shunning iconography — outward symbols can’t show how you truly feel about something on the inside — and more often than not they are used to make up for the lack of a true belief. This is also true of patriotism: waving the flag — or wrapping yourself in it — is a poor and false measure of how you truly feel about your country.

There’s an old saying that there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. As Benjamin Franklin noted, no country had ever been formed because of an idea. But when the Continental Congress met in Philadelphia in 1776 and passed the resolution embodied in the Declaration of Independence, that was what was being done: create a nation not based on geographical boundaries, property, tribalism, or religion, but on the idea of forming a new government to replace the present form because the rulers were incompetent, uncaring, and cruel. The American Revolution wasn’t so much a rebellion as it was a cry for attention. Most of the Declaration is a punch-list, if you will, of grievances both petty and grand against the Crown, and once the revolution was over and the new government was formed, the Constitution contained many remedies to prevent the slights and injuries inflicted under colonialism: the Bill of Rights is a direct response to many of the complaints listed in the Declaration.

But the Declaration of Independence goes beyond complaints. Its preamble is a mission statement. It proclaims our goals and what we hope to achieve. No nation had ever done that before, and to this day we are still struggling to achieve life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness goes on with no sign of let-up.

That is the true glory of America. Not that we complain — and we do — but that we work to fix those complaints. To put them right. To make things better than they were. To give hope to people who feel that they have no voice, and to assure that regardless of who they are, where they come from, what they look like, who they love, or what they believe, there will be room for them to grow, do, and become whatever it is that they have the capacity to be. It’s a simple idea, but the simplest ideas often have the most powerful impact.

This nation has achieved many great things. We’ve inspired other nations and drawn millions to our shores not to just escape their own country but to participate in what we’re doing. And we’ve made mistakes. We’ve blundered and fumbled and bullied and injured. We’ve treated some of our own citizens with contempt, and shown the same kind of disregard for the rights of others that we enumerated in our own Declaration of Independence. We have been guilty of arrogance and hypocrisy. But these are all human traits, and we are, after all, human. The goal of government is to rise above humanity, and the goal of humanity is to strive for perfection. So if we stumble on the road to that goal, it is only because we are moving forward.

I love this country not for what it is but for what it could be. In my own way I show my patriotism not by waving a flag from my front porch but by working to make things work in our system and by adding to the discussion that will bring forth ideas to improve our lives and call into question the ideas of others. It is all a part of what makes the simple idea of life, liberty, and that elusive happiness so compelling and so inspiring, and what makes me very proud to be a part of this grand experiment.

Go forth!

Photo: The Avenue in the Rain by Frederick Childe Hassam 1917.

Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Up To You, Joe

More from Charlie Pierce:

As reluctant as I am to join the general scrum that resulted from the president’s desultory performance in last Thursday’s debate, the shebeen does have certain public responsibilities. However, let me say that rarely has my profession behaved so badly, and rarely has my low opinion of the Democratic party’s essential backbone been so thoroughly justified. Exhibit A on Point One: On his way to a fundraiser in the Hamptons, the president was greeted by six people carrying signs urging him to resign. Within minutes, at least five respected members of the political media—and you know who you are—leaped onto the Xwitter machine to share a picture of these pasty jamokes like their presence meant something.

Exhibit B on Point One: Too many pundits of the elite political class hand-waved the barrage of easily debunked lies laid down by a vulgar talking yam. Some of them excused this malpractice on the grounds that, what the hell, everybody knew the guy was a fountain of falsehoods anyway, so let’s talk more about the president’s raspy throat and halting delivery. When journalists downplay the truth in favor of performance skills, we’re in the very tall grass.

Now for the Democrats. There is legitimate cause for concern; when Jamie Raskin speaks, I listen. But there hasn’t been a presidential campaign in my lifetime in which the money boys didn’t panic over something. The consulting class—from the old Obama hands to, God help us, James Carville—all sit around being smarter than everybody else because they once hit the lottery with a genius-level politician. The pundit class needed grist for the mill, and I hate to say I told you so, but our stalwart new friends, the Never Trump Republicans, fairly stampeded to the lifeboats. The late Lowell George called it back in 1971.

Okay, so here’s my take. The president is the candidate as long as he wants to be the candidate. If he takes himself out, then Vice President Harris is the candidate. Period. Full stop. Over and out. She’s the only one who can deploy the money that the Biden campaign has raised, and the only one with a legitimate claim on the political infrastructure already in place. Passing her over for Johnny Perfect Candidate guarantees a bloody nomination battle and the loss of a big chunk of one of the most important parts of the Democratic base.

The Brokered Convention is a glorious fantasy for people who cover politics and know absolutely nothing about political history. The 1924 Democratic convention in New York, to name just one example that’s been bandied about recently, was a four-star political calamity. It took the party 103 ballots to nominate a faceless lawyer named John W. Davis, largely because William McAdoo, a prohibitionist backed by the revived Ku Klux Klan, and New York governor Al Smith, the Catholic and a “wet,” couldn’t get out of each other’s way. Thus did Calvin Coolidge win his own full term as president. Imagine all that with social media and television. On second thought, don’t.

The president is the candidate if he wants to be. If not, Vice President Harris is. All else is chaos. Don’t believe, no, don’t believe, don’t believe everything you hear…

It was another elderly president with memory issues who said “Stay the course.”

Tuesday, July 2, 2024

Stay In, Joe

An excerpt from Jay Caspian Kang in The New Yorker:

At this moment, Biden’s odds of winning the upcoming election don’t seem great, but I also think that Trump comes with his own chaos and that it might just be better to present the most stable and well-known option, which, unfortunately enough, is still Biden. Democratic voters should be furious about what certainly seems like a manipulation of the public’s trust and the arrogance of an Administration that tried to push a diminished Biden into a campaign season in the vain hope that maybe they would just get lucky and all the highest-profile moments would magically line up with his good days. And, if people want Biden to step down because he has betrayed the voters who put him in office, I think that’s a justifiable argument. But, if the point is for the Democrats to figure out their best shot at defeating Trump, we should realize that the duplicitousness, incompetence, and arrogance of the Biden Administration and Democratic Party leadership is actually a case against a seismic shift. These are still going to be the same people who decide on the process for a successor. Do we actually trust them to get it right? And are the chances they can field and support a new candidate higher than the chances that Biden has a series of better days and can regain some of the trust he has lost?

I don’t think it’s possible to clearly say one option is much better than the other, but I would argue, almost by default, that acting in a rash manner without a real contingency plan tends to lead to bad results, especially when you’re dealing with inept actors. I would feel differently if there were one obvious replacement for Biden or even two but the task of whittling down a field of contenders in four months feels like a principled protest rather than a measured and pragmatic strategy. By the slimmest of margins, I find myself opting for the known bad candidate over the chaos of the unknown. The Democrats have to hope that Biden can keep giving speeches like he did in North Carolina and that the debate will become an unpleasant but fading memory. They have to believe the polls are wrong. They need Trump to remind the country why they rejected him in 2020. The situation is certainly dire, but the irony here is that the Party’s foolishness and Biden’s arrogance, stubbornness, or blindness, means that we are stuck with him. There is no realistic Plan B.

Given the choice, I’d rather have Joe Biden with all his flaws, than the convicted vulgarian.

Monday, July 1, 2024

Their Money’s Worth

Charles P. Pierce on the Supreme Court’s ruling turning over the country to the highest bidder.

Mr. Roberts has made his decision. Now let him enforce it. Goddamn this Supreme Court. It’s got me quoting the apocrypha of that genocidal madman Andrew Jackson. The carefully manufactured conservative majority on the Court, by a 6–3 margin, ruled that presidents—specifically, Donald J. Trump, because if you think this decision will apply to Democratic presidents, please tell me where you buy your mushrooms—have something called “presumptive immunity” for “official acts” they took while in office.

This is specifically designed to hamstring Jack Smith’s prosecutions regarding the insurrection of January 6, 2021, especially in combination with the Court’s earlier decision in Fischer v. U.S. that disallowed the use of an obstruction-of-justice statute under which a number of the rioters had already been charged and/or convicted. On top of that we have Chief Justice John Roberts’s ancillary ruling, which will make a complete hash of the discovery process in any prosecution of the former president*. Roberts wrote:

Testimony or private records of the President or his advisers probing such conduct may not be admitted as evidence at trial.

In the short run, of course, this whole case, on which the Court never should have granted cert in the first place, was directly aimed at delaying the prosecution of the former president* until after the November election and thence, likely, to the Twelfth of Never. It certainly has accomplished that goal. It’s going to take months, if not years, for lower courts to distinguish between “official” and “unnofficial” acts, and every attempt will be appealed, and then appealed again. The former president*’s go-to legal strategy, the one he used to put glaziers and gardeners on the rack until they ran out of money, now has the blessing of the country’s highest court. Jack Smith is just another New Jersey subcontractor who never sees a dime.

However, in the long view of history, this is a pivot point to rival Marbury v. Madison or Dred Scott v. Sandford. The carefully manufactured conservative Supreme Court majority, having earlier arrogated to the judiciary the power to decide specialized questions involving executive agencies, has now decided that questions of a president’s culpability in attempting to ratf*ck a free election are beyond an unambiguous decision. This is a recipe for chaos in government.

Only Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson seemed to grasp the epochal importance of the case. Sotomayor put paid to the notion that allowing Smith’s prosecutions to go forward would chill future presidents in the performance of their duties. She wrote:

…because of longstanding interpretations by the Executive Branch, every sitting President has so far believed himself under the threat of criminal liability after his term in office and nevertheless boldly fulfilled the duties of his office. The majority insists that the threat of criminal sanctions is “more likely to distort Presidential decisionmaking than the potential payment of civil damages.” If that is right, then that distortion has been shaping Presidential decision making since the earliest days of the Republic.

She also called out Roberts’s poisonous tinkering with the standards of evidence.

Imagine a President states in an official speech that he intends to stop a political rival from passing legislation that he opposes, no matter what it takes to do so (official act). He then hires a private hitman to murder that political rival (unofficial act). Under the majority’s rule, the murder indictment could include no allegation of the President’s public admission of premeditated intent to support the mens rea of murder. That is a strange result, to say the least. The majority’s extraordinary rule has no basis in law. Consider the First Amendment context. Although the First Amendment prohibits criminalizing most speech, it “does not prohibit the evidentiary use of speech,” including its use “to prove motive or intent.”

And Jackson outlined the fundamental historical and constitutional heresy that the majority had adopted.

It is indisputable that immunity from liability for wrongdoing is the exception rather than the rule in the American criminal justice system. That is entirely unsurprising, for the very idea of immunity stands in tension with foundational principles of our system of Government. It is a core tenet of our democracy that the People are the sovereign, and the Rule of Law is our first and final security. “[F]rom their own experience and their deep reading in history, the Founders knew that Law alone saves a society from being rent by internecine strife or ruled by mere brute power however disguised.” United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 308 (1947) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in judgment). A corollary to that principle sets the terms for this case: “No man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may set that law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are creatures of the law, and are bound to obey it.” United States v. Lee, 106 U. S. 196, 220 (1882). We have long lived with the collective understanding that “[d]ecency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen,” for “[i]n a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperilled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously.”

The carefully manufactured conservative majority on the Supreme Court is done with its work deforming democracy until October. One thing on which we can all agree is that it has been worth every dime that Leonard Leo, and Harlan Crow, and Paul Singer paid for it.

We are royally screwed.

Sunday, June 30, 2024

Sunday Reading

Democrats, Chill Out — Stuart Stevens in the New York Times.

As a former Republican who spent decades pointing out flaws in the Democratic Party, I watch the current Democratic panic over President Biden’s debate performance with a mix of bafflement and nostalgia.

It’s baffling that so many Democrats are failing to rally around a wildly successful president after one bad night. But it does remind me of why Republicans defeated Democrats in so many races Republicans should have lost.

Donald Trump has won one presidential election. He did so with about 46 percent of the popular vote. (Mitt Romney lost with about 47 percent.) The Republican Party lost its mind and decided that this one victory negated everything we know about politics. But it didn’t.

One debate does not change the structure of this presidential campaign. For all the talk of Mr. Biden’s off night, what is lost is that Mr. Trump missed a great opportunity to reset his candidacy and greatly strengthen his position.

Mr. Trump lost the popular vote by a margin of seven million and needs new customers. He could have laid out a positive economic plan to appeal to middle-class voters feeling economic pressure. Instead, he celebrated his tax cuts for billionaires.

He could have reassured voters who are horrified, in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s demise, by the stories of young girls who become pregnant by rape and then must endure extremist politicians eager to criminalize what was a constitutional right for two generations. But Mr. Trump bizarrely asserted that a majority pro-abortion-rights country hated Roe v. Wade and celebrated his role in replacing individual choice with the heavy hand of government.

He could have said he would accept the outcome of the next presidential election. He refused.

For 90 minutes, Mr. Trump unleashed a virulent anti-American rant. The America he lives in is a postapocalyptic hellscape of violence, with people “dying all over the place” — more “Mad Max” than “morning in America.”

Is this how Americans see themselves? When we watch the American flag carried at the Olympics in Paris, are we to feel ashamed, not proud? When Ronald Reagan was president, he believed that to be born in America was to win life’s lottery. Now, in Trump’s America, are we victims, chumps, losers?

I don’t think so. Mr. Trump has difficulty expanding his base because most Americans are still proud to be Americans. Most Americans do not wake up mad at the world, fearful to go outside their homes. What is it that you are supposed to hate the most — the record-high stock market or low unemployment?

At the Lincoln Project, we found that one of the most effective weapons against MAGA was asking voters, “Is this who you are?” Hold up a picture of Marjorie Taylor Greene, red-faced and screaming. Is this how you see yourself? Do you want to be the guy in the “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt storming the Capitol? Do you want your kids to think that being found liable for sexual abuse and being a felon are presidential qualities?

The Republican Party is at war with the modern world, and it is losing. What happened when Republicans attacked Nike for its endorsement deal with Colin Kaepernick? Nike made a fortune. How is it possible to get in a fight with Disney, the happiness company? This is a party that thought it was a good idea to go after Taylor Swift when it was already suffering from problems with female voters over the death of Roe. Seriously?

Before Thursday’s debate, the presidential race was about the past versus the future. After the debate, it is about the past versus the future. And so it will be on Nov. 5.

A bad night for Mr. Biden doesn’t change the fact that Mr. Trump opposes any mandatory vaccines for public school students. Do Americans really want to live through more polio, measles and whooping cough epidemics?

It’s easy to be for your guy on good nights, but it doesn’t mean much. The test is on bad nights.

Of all the Democratic pearl clutchers, the most disappointing and offensive are the Barack Obama insiders who can’t bring themselves to do what Mr. Biden did for their old boss: cover his back and fight. For them, politics is “Love Story,” that one true and pure love when they were young and the future stretched out before them in glorious possibility. Every non-Obama candidate will forever be like a fourth marriage, regrettable and unsatisfying.

Gov. Gavin Newsom of California showed Democrats how to fight after the debate: “You don’t turn your back because of one performance. What kind of party does that?”

Unfortunately, for the moment, it’s much of the Democratic Party establishment. Many of the same people wrote off Mr. Biden in the 2020 Democratic primaries after he was crushed in Iowa and New Hampshire. Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina refused to panic, stuck by Mr. Biden and helped save the campaign. Let his courage and steadiness be a model. My one plea to my new friends abandoning Mr. Biden is simple: Suck it up and fight. It’s not supposed to be easy.

Doonesbury — Next!

Saturday, June 29, 2024