tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373627100162419102024-02-20T03:34:29.398-08:00Thoughts From The MountainA social commentary from a spiritual and ethical perspective.Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.comBlogger289125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-77278063450972806332022-11-18T11:21:00.000-08:002022-11-18T11:21:59.542-08:00Listen To The Wave<p>Listen. Listen fully and deeply. Hear the deafening silence.
The near-total silence of the Big Red Wave. The Big Red Wave that did not
happen. Instead, listen to what else we can hear. The excuses. The finger-pointing.
The sounds of the blame game.</p><p>The voters listened well. To the lies. To the hypocrisies.
To the threats of violence. And the majority of those voters – whether labelled
as Republicans, Democrats, or Independents – said “No Thanks. Let us not go
down that road.” But are the politicians listening?</p><p>Democracy won on November 8<sup>th</sup>, even as it took a
week to confirm that victory. It thankfully survived another battle, gained
another day in pursuit of its unmatched gift to the human race. It remains
fragile in the face of those who would do it harm. But (so far) it bends, yet remains
proudly unbreakable. This is what a vote counts for. No extra, unneeded drama.
Block out the distractions. Just mark an “X” (or fill in an empty bubble) on a
sheet of paper. Along with millions other citizens. That is the true weapon of
choice against those who would subvert our Democracy, distort our proud though imperfect Heritage, disregard our Rule of Law.</p><p>The Big Red Wave proved to be the trickle of a small pink
stream. Label our recent past as an aberration in the course of our 600 year
journey that began in the tiny hamlet of Jamestown. Past is past. Move forward.
But who is listening? And to whom are they Listening? </p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2022<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 3;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-10625268996933102172022-10-19T13:35:00.001-07:002022-10-19T13:35:32.908-07:00Election 2022 Priorities<p> Another election is once again upon us: the non-presidential
midterm election of 2022. Historically, lacking the “star power” of a
presidential contest, midterm elections do not draw the attention or
participation of many voters. Hopefully, that will not be the case with this
midterm. This election is probably the most consequential midterm of my
lifetime, a needed referendum on the current state and future direction of the
country.</p><p>In a typical election, men and women run for office by
identifying various programs and priorities they promise to deliver – even
though the many levers of government preclude any one representative from accomplishing
much on his/her own. They are also likely to demonize their opponent as the
devil incarnate, while they alone can save the country from total collapse.
Buzz words (“socialism”) and sounds bites (“save social security”) will
dominate the political rhetoric; true debate or meaningful, constructive dialog
will be banished.</p><p>Election 2022 has a different call to citizens than picking a
list of political actions and programs. While these are important, there is a more
pressing need to (re-)affirm who our country is, what it stands for, and what
it values. Because we, as a country, have lost our best sense of ourselves, and
who we are about. There are two overriding issues we, the voters, need to
address in this election: 1) reaffirming our Constitution and its foundation of
the rule of Law that guides us; and 2) protecting, in fact enhancing, the accessibility
to, and power of, our vote.</p><p>In 2022, we need to clarify whether we will return to a
respect for Truth, Honesty, and the Law as fundamental to retain our
Constitutional Republic. We accept that politicians will stretch the truth in
order to benefit themselves. But over the last six years, outright lying,
obfuscation, and endless delays in accountability have become the standard.
“The Big Lie(s)” of unsubstantiated “facts” and opinion has made the most
implausible seemingly plausible; political posturing has replaced Integrity
within many of our American institutions. The bedrock principle that “no man or
woman is above the Law” has been shuffled out the door in favor of rampant,
unchecked illegality. The stability of Judicial Precedent has been shattered. “For
the good of the individual” is replacing “For the good of the Country” as the
basis for public service. The equal ability to partake in the country’s
economic, religious, and personal opportunities has become questionable. The
baffling, increasing violence that surrounds us daily is testament to our
division and frustrations. The discord reflects our continual difficulty in
trying to balance our Individual Rights versus our Community Responsibility.</p><p>As a result of our discord, Trust in our governmental
institutions and public servants is at an all-time low; Trust in each other is too
often non-existent. This lack of trust makes finding solutions to our many
problems near-impossible. We argue incessantly; we do not listen to each other.
We do not converse; we yell at each other. Hardened partisan speeches promote
our separation and a one-sided view of our Constitutional principles. Yet the
strong-minded men who wrote that Constitution realized that they were dependent
upon the practical tool of Compromise. Their lesson to each of us is that
without Compromise, there would not have been a Constitution. Without that
Constitution, there would have been no United States of America.</p><p>The right to vote, through which the right to have a say in
our government actions and the individuals selected to deliver the will of the
people, is one of the primary gifts of American citizenship. For nearly 250 years
that right has been expanding to include increasing groups within our
electorate. Yet over the last four years we have seen one of the greatest
assaults on voting rights since Reconstruction. At times, the right to vote was
limited by law: e.g. restricting voting to property owners, or only to men. In
other times, it was restricted by actions: e.g. paying poll taxes, requiring literacy
tests, subjected to violence and intimidation. With the 1965 Voting Rights Act,
most of the overt legal limitations were ended; thereafter, we chipped away at
ending the action-based limitations. What we see today are limitations that are
“tactically” based. These are the tricks misused to benefit one political
party/candidate over another. We see polling stations set up in intentionally
inconvenient locations with inconvenient hours; reduced time frames and/or sites
for early voting; more technical requirements for obtaining an absentee ballot;
restrictions on providing food or drink to people in long lines waiting to vote;
dubious challenges to voter rolls. These and other tactics are specifically designed
to discourage targeted groups from being able to make their voting intention
count. They are all justified as “needed steps to prevent voter fraud” – would-be
solutions to a problem we do not have in any meaningful or consequential quantity.</p><p>Preserving our democratic foundation, and protecting – and
expanding – our right to vote. These are reasons that Election 2022 is so
important. We should not be unduly fighting over specific policies and
programs; these will continue to come and go as they always have. Rather, we
should put our focus – and vote – on the character and integrity of our
candidates. Who among them consistently tells us the hard truths; speaks and
acts in the positive; is capable of playing well with others; is informed and
knowledgeable about the issues facing us; is consistent in their opinions yet
able to adapt to new information. Versus those who spout knee-jerk reactions;
speaks in the negative; does not play well with others; accepts and/or promotes
lies.</p><p class="MsoNormal">These are the overriding issues that we face. Over the last
decade, the American Ship of State has taken quite a beating attempting to
navigate its way through many stormy waters. The story is told that shortly
after the last session of the Constitutional Convention concluded, Benjamin Franklin
was leaving the Pennsylvania State House when he encountered one Elizabeth
Powel. Ms. Powel asked Dr. Franklin,
“Well, Doctor, what have we got – a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin is said to have replied, “A
republic, if you can keep it.” Can we keep it, as Dr. Franklin challenges us to
do? We need to vote accordingly, as if our future as a country depends upon it.
Because it does.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2022<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-55276985227884524422022-06-16T13:48:00.002-07:002022-06-17T11:21:09.226-07:00Supply And Demand Upended<p>As we drive around in our cars these days, one cannot avoid
seeing the large gasoline station signs that tell us – usually in large, bold,
brightly-colored numbers – what today’s gas price is per gallon. Inevitably, it
is a bigger number than the day or so before. We drive past, likely shaking our
heads in disbelief, discouragement, and a host of other thoughts and emotions
at yet another thing taking control away from our daily life.</p><p>Yet you know what we do not see? Plastic shopping bags
wrapped around the nozzles of the fuel hoses, accompanied by a cardboard sign
that proclaims “No Gas.” We are used to this scene because on various occasions
(e.g. hurricane destruction of refineries, Russian hackers blocking a major
gasoline distribution line), demand for gas temporarily exceeds supply. The
typical results are long lines at filling stations, different strategies for
locating which stations have gas available, refilling the car at every
opportunity, all while paying increases in price, And then, seemingly
miraculously, everything goes back to “normal” within a couple of weeks. The
refineries are back in production, the delivery trucks are making their rounds,
and truck and automobile drivers are back to their old driving patterns. All is
well.</p><p>This time it is inexplicably different. We have plenty of
gas for everyone. Big Oil says these double-digit price increases are due to
breaks in the gas supply because of the war in Ukraine and sanctions levied
against buying Russian oil. But the amount of our imports from Ukraine and
Russia is near-negligible, and we are drawing down significant quantities from
our Strategic Oil Reserves to help offset those losses. And the backdrop to our
story is that the U.S. has been a net exporter of oil the past two years, and
over half of our imports come from Canada – not Russia.</p><p>Do I over-simplify our current situation? Admittedly, yes.
But it seems that one must over-simplify to begin to understand the current rules
of the road we are driving under. We all understand the principle of “supply
and demand” in a free marketplace environment. When demand exceeds supply, something
is deemed “more valuable” and the price is raised to take advantage of that
scarcity. (I am not exactly sure why scarcity should drive price, but I accept
that that has been accepted marketplace practice for near-eons.) Yet some
societies have made exceptions to this principle by passing anti-gouging and/or
price control laws effective in times of crisis, thereby not allowing
profiteers to take undue advantage of the citizenry during short-term
disasters. Problematically, price gouging creates a “bandwagon” effect: one
store, one vendor, starts raising prices when there is panic in the streets,
and so another sees an opening to increase his/her profits, and so on and so on.
Pretty soon prices are exploding everywhere.</p><p>In the case of Big Oil, we have an extended supply chain of
links engaged in bringing gasoline to the pump. The original driller; ongoing
pumping at the wellhead; transport to the refinery; refining of the oil into
its varying products; transport of gasoline to a regional distributor;
distributor transport to the local filling station; sale of the gas to the
ultimate consumer – the automobile drivers. That is a lot of links in the chain
of transactions, starting from under the ground and ending in a car’s gas tank.
EACH link in that chain has its own cost and profit demands to meet. Each link raises
its prices <i>on top of</i> the prior link’s
raise, thereby creating a compounding effect on prices. Add up all these increases,
throw in price manipulations by commodities brokers and other financial hangers-on,
layer the cake with the demands of national economies who are dependent on oil
revenue (e.g. OPEC countries such as Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela), and you
have a marketplace that has little to do with the actual oil on hand. The current
record-breaking revenues for the oil giants, and all these other integrated inks,
confirm that their hunger is being fed quite well.</p><p>Against this formidable, multi-pronged and ravenous beast,
the individual car owner has little chance in affecting a resolution to this
current inflation crisis. Ditto the farmer, the school system, the emergency
responders, the truckers, the American family, etc. – all trying to survive these
new economic demands affecting their personal and professional lives. Lives built
upon a foundation of gasoline. But let us be clear. There is plenty of gasoline
in barrels to meet our fuel needs. Whether we are paying $2.50 or $6.50, there
is gasoline available to keep us moving. But if we are not careful, fulfilling
the price gouging pump will be at the bigger cost of losing our potential to
bring our economy back to a more normal, post-pandemic time. We do not have a
supply problem. We do not have a demand problem. We have a price and profit
problem. </p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2022<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-46487531754011035442021-10-13T14:24:00.005-07:002021-10-13T14:24:45.856-07:00Blog On Hold<p>Thank you for visiting this Thoughts From The Mountain blog
site.</p><p>Please note that, after 14 years of continuous writing, I am
temporarily not posting new essays to this site. Given the national and
international events of these past couple of years – cultural, political,
medical, and spiritual – I find myself in need of a break from my writing
commitment. For me, this is a time for reflection and renewal, a time to pause
and better absorb the words and actions that have gone down since 2016, better
understand their implication, and extract the underlying themes of what we have
witnessed. Only after this needed reflective time do I feel I will be adequately
prepared and qualified to resume the discussions to which this blog is
dedicated.</p><p>My Thanks to all of you for your generous support and
quality feedback over these years. Stay tuned – I will be in touch when
appropriate!</p><p>Randy Bell</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-47332531580877895532021-08-10T20:30:00.001-07:002021-08-10T20:30:00.257-07:00Generational Hate<p style="text-align: center;"><span style="text-align: center;">“</span><a href="https://www.azquotes.com/quote/804268?ref=living-in-the-past" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: windowtext; text-decoration-line: none;">Unreasoning
prejudices are bred out of the continual living in the past</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink" style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: windowtext;">.” </span></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: windowtext;">—Prentice Mulford, author and
philosopher</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Around 30CE, a council of Jewish high priests found Jesus of
Nazareth guilty of religious crimes and <span style="color: #202122;">blasphemy, accusing him of claiming to be the “Son of God” and “King
of the Jews”; thereby, a threat to their religious authority over the Jewish
community. At the council’s request, Jesus was crucified by the occupying
Romans as a potential disrupter and threat to the authority of the Roman Empire.
Over the 2000 years since, some people continue to saddle all Jewish people and
their descendants with permanent guilt for this act, subjecting them to unending
punishments of prejudice, discrimination, and cruelty. </span>Essentially, it was/is
a fight over power.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Muhammad ibn Abdallah was the founder of Islam. He defined
the teachings; defeated the powerful religious and secular leaders seeking to eradicate
his followers; ultimately, brought religious peace to both Moslems and
non-Moslems. Upon his death in 632CE, a contest arose over the selection of his
successor. Moslem elders picked Abu Bakr to lead the movement by election; Ali
ibn Abi Talib – Muhammad’s son-in-law and cousin – claimed the position by
family succession. Unable to resolve their differences, Moslems split into two
camps: Sunni (Bakr) and Shia (Talib). 1400 years later, the division, and the arguments
for supremacy, continue – oftentimes violently. Essentially, it was/is a fight
over power.</p><p class="MsoNormal">In
1533, England’s King Henry VIII sought to divorce his first wife Catherine in
order to marry Anne Boleyn, but Pope Clement VII refused to grant the annulment
required by Catholic law. Henry married Anne anyway, triggering his
excommunication by Clement. In retaliation, Henry named himself as head of the
Church in England. He appropriated the property and wealth of the Catholic
hierarchy into his new Protestant church (Anglican), while the population
divided itself into Catholic minority and Anglican majority constituencies. 500
years later, division and certain prejudicial limitations toward Catholic continue
(particularly as regards the monarchy), with tensions remaining very high in
Northern Ireland. <span style="background-color: white;">Essentially, it was/is a fight over power.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">In
1619, the first African slaves were brought to the English colonies. As a
slave, one’s conditions were totally controlled: inescapably tied to their
owner; no say in their future; no privileges of ownership, wealth, income, or
economic opportunity; no bond of family; no legal standing; considered “property”
to be used, bought, and sold at the sole discretion of one’s owner. It was a control
held in place through violence, both threatened and all too real, as well as by
the legal systems. 150 years ago, America’s most deadly war supposedly ended
slavery, yet it also created years of White Americans – overtly and/or covertly
– continually blaming and punishing Black Americans for the war’s outcomes. 400
years after that first slave arrived, Americans are still grappling with how to
permanently end racial discrimination and violence. <span style="background-color: white;">Essentially, it
was/is a fight over power.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">This
is a consistent pattern being repeated in our modern times. In 1947, British India
was partitioned into two parts: “India” became an independent Hindu-majority
nation, while a newly-created “Pakistan” was made home for Moslems. Millions of people were moved – some forcibly
– to enforce this religious demarcation. Political disputes, often marked by
violence, have continued ever since. A similar story occurred in 1948 when the
United Nations carved out an area in Palestine and designated it as “Israel,” a
new Jewish-majority state. Israel, and the Palestinians/Moslems who surround
it, have since been in perpetual animosity – often erupting in violence. After 75
years of continuous dispute, will we still be talking about these (and other
such) fracturings 200 years from now? <span style="background-color: white;">Essentially, it was/is a fight
over power.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">What
these examples demonstrate is how the development of human cultures and
relationships is often bound up within, and shaped by, long-term historical
moments. Decisions are made; events follow; perspectives are shaped; human
relationships are resultantly defined – often as “winners” versus “losers”;
institutions are created to give substance to those definitions. Over time,
that substance (including hate and prejudice) takes on a life energy of its own
– “The Culture.” It defends itself, enlarges its scope, exercises its power,
entrenches itself into the very fabric of the community. It </span><i style="background-color: white;">becomes</i><span style="background-color: white;"> the community. This culture is
reinforced and perpetuated by passing itself down generation thru generations.
Over hundreds of years, a society functions as it does based upon old decisions
and actions often long since forgotten. We observe the established rules simply
because they are “the rules,” whose reasons are very likely irrelevant to
current times.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">Continuing
to fight old battles long past cannot change our present. We merely change the
setting or the players, perhaps temporarily drive the conflict under the radar,
or hold the stage for never-ending violence and upheaval. It creates back and
forth winners and losers, carried out by deliberate acts of prejudice and discrimination,
economic supremacy, or at times, outright warfare. Insane? Yes. Yet even
against such intransigent hurdles, Civilization surprisingly continues to make
incremental progress toward a more just and connected world.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">It
is important to know the histories, both our own and others. There is much to
learn about what worked, what did not, and how we got to where we are. But when
we seek to avenge history long gone, we are living backwards, perpetuating
other people’s fights, living lives of people long dead rather than our own. We
do so at the cost of giving away life’s opportunities, no matter how noble we
may enshrine “our cause.” We give away the opportunity to simply start fresh
today with what is, what can be, what makes true sense, what is “right” in
simple human terms, without the old baggage. We need to know our past, but not
(re-)live our past. A conversation based upon a centuries-old foundation will most
likely lead to maintaining the status quo, reinforced by hundreds/thousands of years
of self-righteous finger-pointing and repetition. A conversation that instead begins
with today has the potential to lead to lives generously and properly fulfilled.
It begs the question: Whose life do we seek to live?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="text-align: center;">“While seeking
revenge, dig two graves – one for yourself.”<span> </span></span><span style="text-align: center;">—</span><span style="text-align: center;">Douglas Horton,
clergyman and ecumenicalist</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p align="center" style="background: white; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">©</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2021<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-37366491216776236742021-06-21T20:45:00.003-07:002021-06-21T20:45:43.230-07:00Confronting Our Secrets<p>“Great nations don’t run away [from their past]. We come to
terms with the mistakes we have made. And in remembering those moments, we
begin to heal and grow stronger.” —Joe Biden, 46<sup>th</sup>
President of United States</p><p>My hometown was a small border city in western Arkansas. At
the western end of the main downtown avenue is a bridge over the Arkansas River
that lands you in Oklahoma. From there, you could visit family friends on Oklahoma
lakes; purchase fresh-grown produce from the many farms located about; or most
importantly, make your way to a liquor store located at the base of the bridge
where –fake ID in hand – an underage teenager could illegally purchase beer,</p><p>The biggest treat was making the few hours journey to nearby
Tulsa. It was the oasis for sophistication and upscale living. Great shopping for clothes and household
items; fine restaurants; entertainment that was beyond our hometown local venues.
When I left my hometown to spend my adult years in Boston/New England, the
memories and impressions of Tulsa were good ones, even as they gradually faded
over the years.</p><p>Fast forward approximately 40 years. I was enjoying reading a
book consisting of stories of various lesser-known events from our past. One story
was about Tulsa, but it was not about the Tulsa I had known in my youth.
Rather, it was a new journey into a hidden, secret place.</p><p>This story goes back one hundred years, to May 31/June 1,
1921. It is an episode of racial violence unequaled in America’s continuing
struggle over our aspiration that “all [men] are created equal.” It begins with
yet another accusation that a Black man (19 years old) assaulted a White woman
(17 years old) – a scenario virtually guaranteed to lead to racial violence.
Following his arrest, hundreds of White Tulsans gathered at the jail,
threatening to lynch the accused. In turn, approximately 75 Black Tulsans
surrounded the jail to protect the accused. A shot(s) was fired, and (according
to the sheriff), “all hell broke loose.” Ten Whites and two Blacks were dead.
Word of the killings quickly spread throughout the city, unleashing an armed
mob of White rioters. The accused Black man was no longer the priority.
Instead, in their racial anger, the rioters were now intent on destroying the
prosperous commercial and residential Black community of Greenwood (nicknamed
“Black Wall Street”), one of the most prosperous, developed and stable Black
communities in the country. And destroy it they did. Over the course of the
night and next morning, the armed mob indiscriminately killed innocent Blacks
that they encountered, and looted and burned the homes and stores of Greenwood.
It was a violent massacre of destruction that ended only when the Oklahoma
National Guard declared martial law the next morning.</p><p>But the damage was done. Given space limitations, this
synopsis cannot do proper justice to this story of Tulsa. But the numbers help.
It has been estimated that 75 to 300 Greenwood residents were dead; 800 were
admitted to those hospitals that would take them in (given segregation
restrictions); 6000 Blacks were interred in large holding facilities; 10,000
were now homeless; property damaged was over $30 million (2020 dollars). Next-day
photos confirmed the scorched-earth destruction was complete: 35 square blocks
of a thriving community had disappeared into smoldering ruins.</p><p>In the aftermath, the Governor called for forming a grand
jury. The all-White grand jury attributed the riot to Black mobs. 85 people
were indicted, but not a single person was convicted or held accountable for
the deaths and violence. A group of city leaders was formed to rebuild
Greenwood, but promised funding never materialized. The area was instead
rezoned to impede rebuilding, and the Black community was forced further out to
the edges of the city.</p><p>President Warren Harding said of the event, “Despite the
demagogues, the idea of our oneness as Americans has risen superior to every
appeal to mere class and group. And so, I wish it might be in this national
problem of races ... God grant that, in the soberness, the fairness, and the
justice of this country, we never see another spectacle like it.” Yet soon the
wall of silence came down. Harding spoke often in promoting Black equality, but
died just two years into his term. National newspaper coverage of the initial
story faded away and disappeared. Local newspapers refused to talk about it for
generations afterwards. It never made it into the history books. It disappeared
from public, civic, and private conversation. Hidden behind the silent curtain,
it never happened.</p><p>When I finished reading the narrative held in my hands, I
was angry. Very angry. One, at the event itself, a reminder of the destruction
and indiscriminate cruelty human beings are still capable of towards their
neighbors. Two, angry at “the powers that be” that deliberately hid these
episodes from recognition, discussion, and accountability. It was a betrayal
from so many teachers I had trusted. Third,
angry that I had allowed myself be deceived about, and been blinded to, these
realities for so many years. All of those times spent in Tulsa, unknowingly looking
at a false façade. What else was I never told?</p><p>Walls of silence are intrinsic to many cultures – for the
individual, among family, and within the community. Do not speak “ugly” words, words
of bad things and bad times, unless you can remold it into a positive story
(e.g. “The Lost Cause” of Southern secession). By not speaking of it, it never
happened, and our life goes on undisturbed. Except that which is secret did
happen, and the conditions that caused it simply lie in wait to happen again.
Nothing has truly changed except on the surface in a pretend world.</p><p>These walls of silence we live behind are one of the major
reasons our national dialogs makes limited progress. We each live, think and
act from our individual frames of reference built upon our past experiences and
knowledge; frames that led us to this moment of time, place and thinking.
Silence creates great holes in that frame. But discussion can only become
productive when each of us can speak from a <i><u>common</u></i>
reference. How can one have a meaningful conversation with a White American without
knowing their stories of religious and economic persecution (“Irish need not
apply”) under the rule of myriad kings and the most very rich? Or with a Black
American without knowing their stories of enslavement, lynchings, economic
discrimination and legal injustice? Or with a Japanese American without knowing
their stories of forced removal to resettlement camps during World War II? Or
with a Mexican American without knowing their stories of invalidated property
rights and land seizures across the southwest? Or the stories from each of
these groups of voting and other discriminations since our founding? Too many
of our individual stories live within, unshared with others</p><p>America is a great country. Both the idea of it, and the
actualization of it, unique across the millennia. There are endless good
stories of accomplishment, innovation, creativity and community across
virtually every field of human endeavor. There are also many instances where we
have come up short in our human interactions. Those shortcomings potentially can
weigh us down and devolve into hatred and strife. Alternately, they can challenge us to face
them directly, change our direction and expectations, and do better in the
future. We certainly have many past accomplishments of change for which pride
is justified. But those changes only come from full disclosure of our past, airing
our dirty laundry in order to clean it. Unfortunately, there are those today who
claim that discussions of past troubles divide us, promote separation, and
denigrate the country. Therefore laws are needed to prohibit such airings in
our nation’s classrooms. Certainly a balance must be taught – the good stories
along with the not-so-good. But these initiatives
to continue to distort and silence selected pieces of our past realities should
be resisted.</p><p>There are so many stories waiting and needing to be told, stories
needing to be heard. It is in the light of day that things grow, including
societies. We cannot change what we cannot see. But what we can see is our
future.</p><p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2021</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-91390910316583135532021-05-03T17:00:00.002-07:002021-05-03T17:00:00.264-07:00Images Of Covid-19<p class="MsoNormal">It was 2500 years ago that a Chinese spiritual philosopher
famously observed that, “one picture is worth a thousand words.” The truth of
that insight has been re-proven countless times over the ensuing centuries.
Beginning with simple prehistoric cave drawings and basic stick figures, visual
art has evolved through changing styles, new tools, and emerging technique. The
images created by the painter, the sculptor, the woodworker, the photographer
can provide us with factual information, evoke a range of personal emotions,
and serve to document the life and times of moments of human experience.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Nowhere is that more true than with the work of the creative
photojournalist meeting the right moment in time, particularly in instances of
great national or historical significance. In the last hundred years, there was
Dorthea Lange’s portrait of the “Migrant Mother” that told the story of the
1930s Great Depression and the Dust Bowl infused in the tired, beaten-down,
exhausted face of Florence Owens Thompson surrounded by two of her seven children.
During World War II, there were the Marines hoisting the American flag over Iwo
Jima; the Soldiers fighting their way onto the beaches of Normandy in history’s
greatest coastal landing, surrounded by the deafening sounds of war and smell
of death; the emaciated bodies, walking skeletons, of the few survivors of the untold
millions killed in the Nazi death ovens. But there were also the images of
Rosie the Riveter working in the factories to support the war effort, and
citizens holding paper and metal drives, and living within rationing controls,
all illustrating the united cooperative spirit of the home front. Finally, Alfred
Eisenstaedt’s image of “V-J Day in Times Square” showing the spontaneous kiss
between an unknown sailor and a nurse conveying the joy over war’s end.</p><p class="MsoNormal">In subsequent years would come Viet Nam. Photographer Nick
Ut’s “Napalm Girl” showed young Phan Thi Kim Phuc running down the war-torn
street, screaming in pain and terror, her clothes entirely burned away by the
weapons of war. The image of the young college student, her arms extended as
she crouched over one of the four bodies killed in 1970 at Kent State
University while protesting the war, her tortured face begging the question
“Why?” – her pain in that moment echoing the pain of a country being torn apart
within. The true horror of that war was brought home into our living rooms.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Today, America – indeed the world – has been thrust into a
different kind of threat: a previously unknown, fast moving, highly contagious,
deadly respiratory virus. It is an extensive disruption of global society for
which the world has shown it was not prepared. Despite our recent progress, the
death toll has been horrendous, and many potential new victims are still to
come. A variety of forms of suffering inflict millions of our citizens, from
“long termers” recovering from the aftereffects of the illness, to those made homeless and/or jobless, to those
trying to hold families together against most difficult circumstances.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Twenty years from now, what will be the images that will
define this historical moment and tell its stories? Will it be:</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-A picture of doctors and nurses draped head-to-toe in
protective gear, hands in gloves, face hidden behind masks and plastic shields,
protecting themselves from the virus, but also attempting to cover the personal
frustration and emotional drain of losing too many fights against this virus?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in; mso-add-space: auto;">-Or a
picture of citizens gathered at government buildings, some armed with
military-grade weapons, protesting against the social, economic and health rules
instituted by public health officials to combat the virus and protect the
population?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of close-up portraits of faces, masked versus uncovered
– one a statement of public health and personal compliance, the other a
political statement or a statement of indifference?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of unmasked / un-distanced patrons crowded into bar
gatherings, and large beach parties?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of lines of people, “social distancing” 6’ apart, as
they wait in long lines to cast their ballot in spite of new health rules and voting
requirement obstacles?</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of coffins stacked in refrigerator trucks, because there
was no more room at funeral homes?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of older persons, alone, often isolated in nursing
homes, sitting by a window in order to see and wave to families separated
outside?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of a near-empty Times Square in New York City on New
Year’s Eve, sans celebrators?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of a barber shop with a defiant “Open” sign out front, a
restaurant with a “Closed” sign on the front door, or a small business with a
“Mask Required” sign in the window?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of college kids volunteering ad hoc help to farmers seeking
to donate their food that would otherwise rot in the unattended fields?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of long car lines at food banks, and at mass vaccination
stations, as citizens respond to both needs and opportunities?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or of teachers sitting in front of computer screens,
teaching their students online through Zoom connections, using technologies and
teaching methods created “on the fly”?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or, of the simple image of a vaccination needle inserted
into an arm?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or, that best sight of all, of a Covic-19 survivor being
wheeled through hospital halls, heading home, accompanied by congratulatory
applause from health care workers.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Or …</p><p class="MsoNormal">We have made good progress in this health fight.
Yet we could take a backward turn in a seeming split-second if we fail to see
this thing through. No one yet knows what havoc this pandemic will ultimately
have wreaked, what economic / social / political structures will have been permanently
transformed into some unknown New. Will we have been consumed by our arguments,
our differences, our personal self-concerns without regard for our impact on
others? Or will we have found new strength in our ability to work together and
share burdens, unity in our willingness to look out for and protect one
another? What images will we put into our history books for future generations
– our children and grandchildren – to look at as they ask us, “When called on,
what did you do in 2020-2021 to help protect yourself, your community, and the
Nation during that virus?” To what picture will we point? </p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">© 2021
Randy Bell https//:ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p> </p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-48749805369935182452021-03-23T20:37:00.001-07:002021-03-23T20:37:43.980-07:00Filibustering The Filibuster<p> Recently, Senate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
issued a threat to his Democratic colleagues. I.e if you eliminate the
filibuster (in which a 60% vote is needed to shut off debate and move a bill forward
to a vote), the Republican minority will pursue a “scorched earth” posture
towards all future Senate business.
McConnell went on to say that they would use all available Senate rules and
procedures to tie up legislation and drag out any proposed legislation as long
as possible, thereby rendering the Senate ineffective and unable to accomplish
any business or Democratic agenda priorities. (Unsurprisingly, the public’s
view of the Senate’s accomplishments and effectiveness is already low, at
best.) Further, when the time comes that Senate control flips back to the
Republicans (which it inevitably will at some point in the political ebb and
flow over time), Democrats will be shut out of any participation or
consultation in matters coming before the Senate. To further emphasize his
point, McConnell subsequently referred to the filibuster as “Kentucky’s veto.”</p><p>It all seems like a pretty scary and intimidating threat,
and typical for McConnell as a means for maintaining some level of control over
Senate business for his Party. Scary, at least until one looks at the intimidation
more closely and sees it to be essentially a hollow threat. In reality,
McConnell has already made good on that promise over the past six years since
Republicans gained control of the Senate in 2014. Since then, McConnell has de
facto exercised his own personal filibuster against virtually any
Democratic-sponsored legislation by personally refusing to allow any such
proposals even to come to the floor for a vote. Nor has there been any
meaningful “consultation” or input solicited, allowed, or accepted from
Democrats on Republican-sponsored legislation. To listen to Mitch McConnell
(and several other particularly egregious senators) protest about a “lack of
partisanship” in the Senate is at best irony, at worse just another example of
hypocrisy in the extreme that marks much of the political debate today.</p><p>The much-maligned tool of the filibuster was introduced in
its present form around one hundred years ago during the debate over the Treaty
of Versailles ending World War I. Ironically, the procedure (“Rule 22”) was
originally instituted as a means to END senate debate, which had heretofore allowed
unlimited speaking time for Senators. Rule 22 was therefore adopted to end
unlimited debate (and allow business to move forward) by a 2/3rds vote (now
3/5ths / 60 votes). In today’s time, the Rule has morphed into being a method
to CONTINUE debate, since it is virtually impossible to get 60 votes on any
measure – whether procedure or legislation. Additionally, an individual
choosing to execute a filibuster used to be required to stand on the floor and
speak continuously until they exhausted themselves or were voted down (think
the iconic Jimmy Stewart scene in the 1930s movie “Mr. Smith Goes To
Washington”). No other business could be conducted while the filibuster was
occurring and the senator was speaking.
Today, a senator only has to state off-camera his/her <i>intention</i> to filibuster and the mechanism is initiated – the issue at
hand is thereby tabled for an unlimited time. No “closure” vote is publicly
taken; no non-stop speeches are given. Meanwhile, other Senate business moves
on unabated and unaffected. No muss, no fuss, all virtually invisible to the
public.</p><p>It should be noted, however, that Rule 22 is not carved in
stone. Harry Reid, the previous Democratic Majority Leader, became frustrated
at Republican filibustering of Obama’s Executive Office and Judicial
appointments. So he changed the Rule to exempt Executive branch appointments, and
federal judges other than to the Supreme Court, to be exempt from the 60-vote
requirement. Predictably, Mitch McConnell went ballistic over this change and
the loss of his leverage. Hell hath no fury like a political leader scorned. Nevertheless,
when McConnell became Majority Leader, he was perfectly happy to not only
continue the policy for President Trump’s nominees, but to even expand the
exemption to include Supreme Court nominees.</p><p>We are now two months in with Joe Biden’s presidency. Biden
has spoken of a “big agenda” of change: the Covid relief package just passed;
renewed voting rights protection; immigration overhaul; climate change; major
infrastructure investment; etc. However, he is supported legislatively with
only a narrow Democratic Party majority in the House, and a 50/50 split in the
Senate. 60 votes in the Senate on anything looks every bit like wishful
thinking – stalemate for stalemate’s sake itself. Past history during Obama’s
presidency shows that Republican requests for “input and negotiation” in the
end have no meaningful substance. McConnell has demonstrated numerous times
over that his word is unreliable and not his bond. In the face of these
realities, what’s a President to do?</p><p>There are numerous calls from supporters of the Biden agenda
to eliminate the filibuster option. Or to exempt voting rights legislation (or
other categories to be identified) from its purview. Or to reinstitute the
requirement for speeches on the floor, and full-Senate votes for closure (or
not), so that voters can track the actions of their senators. Or contrarily, to
leave everything in place as is. Plus perhaps other ideas not yet identified.
What is true is that when you are in the minority, the filibuster is a precious
tool for blocking the potential extremes of the other Party. When you are in
the majority, it is the devil’s curse and a tool that prevents America’s
progress. And at some point in the fickle cycle of shifting political opinion,
today’s majority is destined to become tomorrow’s minority. Each side gets its
turn at the helm. That turn could easily happen only two years hence.</p><p>It will be interesting to see what procedural route(s)
Democratic senators take. Move cautiously? Or damn the torpedoes and move
forward while you can? As usual, easy answers can have hard, unintended
consequences. So think it through. In the meantime, political theater and
rhetoric seem to continue to be the drivers, while real solutions to our needs
await their turn.</p><p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2021</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-77330014770061224062021-02-05T10:05:00.000-08:002021-02-05T10:05:05.090-08:00Expectations Of A Biden Presidency<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">“Joe
Biden is as good a man as God ever created.”
—U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, R-SC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Shortly after the inauguration of Donald Trump as President
in January 2017, I posted an essay entitled <a href="https://thoughtsfromthemountain.blogspot.com/2017/01/">“Expectations of a
Trump Presidency”</a><span class="MsoHyperlink">.</span> The intent was to imagine
Trump’s four years in office, based upon what we had seen and learned from two
years of his campaigning. When I recently \reread that essay, I was surprised
at how prescient the conclusions proved to be. Four years later, we have now
inaugurated a new President – Joe Biden. It therefore seems appropriate to
similarly speculate on what we might anticipate from his next four years.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Given the events, conduct and outcomes of Trump’s four years
in office, one must necessarily insert a context to properly determine
expectations of a Biden presidency. Donald Trump drastically changed the
landscape of the Presidency and Executive Branch – indeed, all parts of the
federal government – as well as the interactions and perspectives of the
citizens that government serves. Therefore Joe Biden’s presidency will initially
be defined and driven largely by reacting to Donald Trump’s legacy, rather than
starting from Biden’s own aspirations and political platform. That reaction will
need to focus on <u>four</u> key areas:</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>TRUTH: We all know that politicians will at times stretch
the truth or a perspective in ways that will cast them in the best light. But
not until the last four years has lying become the given, the reflexive
response, with truth hidden away unseen in the dense forest of obfuscation. No thoughtful
decisions, no effective actions, are achievable in such a distorted climate.
The most fundamental priority for the Biden presidency is to restore the
telling of the Truth into the national dialog. Certainly there are times when
multiple truths can legitimately collide against each other. But only by facing
those truths can we successfully plot our course with a reasonable expectation
of achieving our objectives. Credibility is an essential foundation for
leadership.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>RULE OF LAW: Since the adoption of our Constitution in 1788,
our allegiance has been to that Constitution, not to an imperial king or queen.
Our government is subservient to that Constitution. Its elected and appointed officials are
subservient to the citizenry. The Rule of Law took a setback over the past four
years, as our president flagrantly ignored Constitutional principles, legal
requirements, and historical precedent and conventions. He exposed holes in our
operating structures that had never been seen or anticipated before, and defied
“legal process,” in an effort to convert the Executive Branch into a political
extension of his own making. Restoring
the Rule of Law as our guiding principle, strengthening the structures that
execute the Law, and rebuilding the trust of the citizenry in impartial
execution, is paramount.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>REBUILDING GOVERNMENT AGENCIES: The various departments,
bureaus, agencies that make our government function were decimated over the
past four years. Internationally respected offices were decimated by budget
cuts; staffing cuts and/or leaving posts vacant; wholesale closing of offices;
constant turnover in leadership positions, replaced by “acting” agency heads;
muzzling and/or blocking personnel from executing their job description. This
decimation was extended through politicizing agency missions by subjugating them
to a reelection agenda; appointing incompetent and untrained people – with
fealty only to the president – to leadership positions; obviating accountability
requirements by firing various Inspectors General and inflicting retribution on
(supposedly) protected whistleblowers. There is much for our government to do
in the days ahead. None of those things can get done until the workforce is
rebuilt – in quantitative as well as competency terms – and their missions are
reestablished, performed under an ethical apolitical umbrella. Government does
not function when the People do not trust that well-qualified people are doing
the jobs expected of them.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>WORLD LEADERSHIP: For most of its young life, America
adopted an isolationist stance, happy to go about its business with minimal
interaction and interference from Europe and with other countries of the world.
That changed when Pearl Harbor committed America to a new role of principal
leadership in global affairs, working in partnership with other countries in
formal treaties and ad hoc engagements, articulating the case for democracy. Our
leadership has not eliminated wars, but the world has become more mutually
intertwined, culturally and economically, to the mutual benefit of all. America
– by word, by deed, by its steadfastness – has been the linchpin for this
current stability. These relationships have been turned upside down and severely
tested over the past four years. Our adversaries have seemingly become new-found
“friends”; long-standing true friends have been pushed aside as new
adversaries. The America countries have depended upon for years has walked away
from its global opportunities and obligations; our word, and our participation,
is now suspect. At a time when the countries of the world are more connected
and interdependent than ever, America has become a minor player in world
affairs. These relationships demand to be rebuilt for the benefit of all.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Today, there is a laundry list of specific issues that
demand our attention. Most critical are the inter-joined issues of the Covid
pandemic and our crippled economy that have upended our daily lives. After that
come issues of climate change and the environment; of health care reform and
access; immigration reform / DACA / caged children; racial justice; the
continuing assault on voting rights; policing reform; livable wage / economic
disparity; etc. It would be great to attack all of these issues immediately and
concurrently. But that is not possible given the status our government has been
brought to. We first have to rebuild the infrastructure and capacity of our
government in order to address our national laundry list, else we will flounder
in the sea of good intentions not realized. We need to rebuild with the right people,
policies, clarity of mission. This rebuilding will require patience from a
citizenry whose patience runs very thin these days. But it is the first
priority for America before much else can be done.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Can Joe Biden accomplish this rebuilding task, especially in
these hyper-partisan times? I honestly do not know. I do know he will need wide
support to get it done. Support from people whose first concern is for the
Country, not their personal agenda nor their reelection prospects. Joe Biden is
not intuitively a big-picture thinker. A political moderate, he sees things in
much more of a “task to do” working-class mentality: here’s a problem, let’s
solve it, and use a hefty dose of common sense in the solution. We have witnessed
the damage an inexperienced “outsider” president can do through four years of a
pretend President who failed to understand and neglected the institution of the
Presidency. In contrast, Joe Biden’s 30+ years of experience in the federal
government gives us a president who should know his way across the playing
field of governance, operating with a genuine understanding of people’s needs
and with minimal malice in his heart.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Getting things done. That is what we need right now. The big
visionary dreams can perhaps come later. Made possible by a well-functioning
government in which we can have confidence and pride. Joe Biden likely will not
be a candidate for a future likeness on Mount Rushmore. But will he get this
very important core job done? If so, he could just be one of those right people
who shows up at the right moment for the right need. We shall see.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p> </o:p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2021</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p> </p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-25133893756473000982021-01-11T10:11:00.001-08:002021-01-11T10:11:10.181-08:00Constitutional High And Low<p>A written Constitution. Allegiance pledged to Constitutional
Law rather than a monarch. Governance decision-making by a Vote from the
governed. Adopted by a new, presumptuous little country strung out along the
shores of the Atlantic Ocean in a distant and isolated “New World,” these were
radical concepts in 1788 with no precedence among world governments. But they
became the principal gifts from the United States of America to the advancement
of human civilization. All too often, we take these special gifts for granted,
as though they always were and always will be. As a result, we fail to protect
them by stepping up to our responsibility to engage and exercise these gifts that
so many have given so much effort to ensure. Yet what we take for granted – the
power of the Vote – was on full display over 48 recent hours. A display that
showed the high point, and the low point, of the awesome privilege and responsibility
of the right to Vote as guaranteed by our Constitution.</p><p>HIGH POINT – TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2021: In a rare convergence
of circumstances, the State of Georgia found itself voting for both of its U.S.
senators in a special runoff election. To virtually everyone’s surprise,
Democratic Party candidates won both seats against the two incumbent Republican
senators (albeit by extremely narrow margins) – this in what has been a deeply
reliable Republican state. Simply winning these two election races against the
odds was significant unto itself. But the significance was magnified by its immediate
multiple domino effects:</p><p>-the U.S. Senate became equally divided at 50/50 senators from
each Party, changing from Republican to Democratic majority control due to the
incoming Democratic Vice President having the tie-breaking vote;</p><p>- all Senate committees will be now chaired and controlled
by Democrats, significantly improving (but not guaranteeing) the prospect for Joe
Biden’s legislative agenda, executive branch appointments, and federal court
nominees;</p><p>-Mitch McConnell, who has heretofore controlled the Senate’s
legislative agenda with a proverbial iron fist, will become the Senate Minority
Leader, with Chuck Schumer becoming Majority Leader.</p><p>Why does all of this constitute a Constitutional “high
point”? It is not because the Democrats won, or now take charge. Depending on
one’s own personal politics and partisan affiliation, “Democratic control” can
be a thrilling prospect or a cause for alarm in anticipating the next
two-to-four years of national governance and initiatives. Rather, it is a
“high” because it demonstrated the full power of the act of voting. Citizen
turnout set a record for a “special election,” and within the slim 1%+/- margin
of victory for those two senatorial elections, the national political landscape
was transformed. That is the power of the Vote: the power to make a statement
and effect a difference. It is why the right to Vote is so powerful and
precious.</p><p>LOW POINT – WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 2021: Yet less than 24
hours later, we descended into the low point of our Constitutional governance
and heritage. In the November election, the incumbent President lost his bid
for reelection. In the two months since, he has claimed on a daily basis that
the election was stolen from him by widespread voter fraud and illegal election
processes. He has sought to directly (and illegally?) intervene with election
officials and state legislators to overturn the results of the vote of the
citizens. Thousands of local Boards of Election, and various combinations of 50
state Boards of election, &/or 50 state Secretaries of State, &/or 50
state Governors, &/or 50 state legislatures said there was no fraud, and certified
the voting results. Over 60 federal and state lawsuits filed echoing the fraud
claim were summarily dismissed – including rulings by federal judges appointed
by the President. At no time during these certification and lawsuit steps was
one shred of proof of voter fraud offered. Yet the drumbeat from the incumbent
loser and his supporters incessantly carried on this “big lie."</p><p>The protest of the election result culminated in a call by
the President for a public rally in Washington on January 6<sup>th</sup> (“It
is going to be wild”) – the day that the votes of the Electoral College would
be ceremonially counted and formally accepted, as specified by the
Constitution. Thousands of supporters showed up and listened to several
speakers exhort them to march to the Capital building to protest the counting
and certification of the true election results. So march to the Capital they
did, and we all saw in real time what happened next. It was a scene unmatched
in our entire American history. A sitting President personally and publicly convened
a mob of insurrectionists, and exhorted them to attack the Capital building of our
federal legislature. And so this armed, lawbreaking mob did – forcibly breaking
into the building and preventing the duly elected Congress of the United States
from conducting their Constitutionally mandated business. They overwhelmed
Capital Police charged with protecting the integrity of the building and its
occupants. They broke into offices, into legislative chambers, vandalizing and
stealing property, putting the safety of its occupants at genuine risk, resulting
in deaths and injuries. Only after hours passed and law enforcement
reinforcements arrived at the scene were the insurrectionists finally pushed
out of the building.</p><p>There will be months to come of investigations and hearings
into what happened on this day, and how such an extreme security failure happened.
It is therefore not the intent of this essay to try to preempt such inquiries.
Rather, it is to note why this is a Constitutional Low in our nation’s history.
An incumbent President calls for a violent attack by his followers to prevent
the ongoing functioning of the Congress of the United States, based on a lie
about an election result. Yet in its own way, that is another demonstration and
affirmation of the power of the Vote. It is a power to fear if you are on the
wrong side of democracy by attempting to overturn that vote. And when you find
yourself on that wrong side, you are guilty of the high crime of Insurrection
against our government and the democracy it stands for.</p><p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2021</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-29280578349425590322020-12-14T16:14:00.006-08:002020-12-14T16:14:39.519-08:00The Never-Ending Election Ends<p> So, at last, it is finally over. At least officially. Six
weeks after Election Day; five weeks after the election was “called” and a
victor was proclaimed; through five continuous weeks of rejected lawsuits and
unproven claims of massive voter fraud; the United States of America finally
and officially has a new President-elect. A legally constituted Electoral
College did its job as prescribed in our Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court
tersely ended any and all attempts to have the judiciary overturn the Law and
the Voters. It is now on to Inauguration Day, January 20, 2021 to make the job
of our democratic election complete, and peacefully turn over the power and
office of the President. It is as the Constitution and the citizenry demands.</p><p>Donald Trump would most certainly have it otherwise. Over
the past six weeks, he and his band of unprincipled henchmen have pulled out
all stops to deny the electoral reality; attempted to interfere with standard
voting processes; spread false information about the voting process and the result; disrupted
voting-by-mail by dismantling USPS equipment and operating policies; filed and lost over 50 lawsuits to overturn the vote;
and directly ordered (with mixed success) state election officials, executive
officers and legislators to upend and reverse the vote. These actions culminated
with the Attorney General from Texas (himself under state and federal
investigations and an intra-office staff uprising over ethics and corruption
issues) petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to rule against four swing states
over their election processes and results.
The petition was joined by approximately 20 other Republican AGs, and
endorsed by over 120 Republican Congresspersons. To which the Supreme Court
rightly said simply, “petition denied,” prompting the Texas GOP Chairman to
propose that Texas secede from the Union! The Donald J. Trump political circus,
led by his ringmaster Rudy Giuliani, has proven to be a national (and
international) embarrassment for America – we the country that has previously
defined what “democratic government” means. Senator Mitt Romney had it right
when he called the whole affair “madness.”</p><p>Undoubtedly, in spite of the legal and political finality of
this election, the noise from Trump will continue. The cries of a “stolen
election” will be embedded in continuing subsequent Tweets and press releases.
The question will be how much air time will be given to these self-pitying
laments by the news media (other than Fox News and various right-wing talk
radio hosts). Ultimately, Americans do not tolerate whiners and sore losers.</p><p>Certainly every political candidate has a right to pursue
legal remediation when the accuracy or integrity of a vote is in question.
Richard Nixon likely had legitimate reasons to question the vote from Mayor
Richard Daley’s political machine in Chicago that gave Illinois to John Kennedy
in the close election of 1960; Nixon instead chose to forgo pursuing it “for
the good of the country.” Al Gore had a legitimate question about the vote in
Florida in 2000; the Supreme Court’s decision giving the election to George W.
Bush is still questionable in the minds of many.</p><p>If Donald Trump had EVIDENCE of impropriety in the 2020
voting, he certainly has had a right to pursue it accordingly. Except that after
multiple election recounts have been completed, and virtually every lawsuit
filed has been rejected, <i>there is no such
evidence</i>. His continual lie of voter fraud accomplished no change in the
outcome of the vote. Instead, it has served only to undermine the confidence,
faith and trust of many Americans in our national government. It also has
provided Trump with a misleading fundraising campaign resulting in a $200,000,000
haul for a personal slush fund donated by his aggrieved supporters. (As with
all things Trump, self-enrichment, not public service, is the dominating
motivation.) It is one more brick added to the wall of shame that is Donald
Trump, further proof (if needed) that his first/last/always priority is Donald
Trump – not his supporters, not the Country, not Democracy itself.</p><p>Meanwhile, the country will be left to pick up the pieces from
this most unique of elections. It will now fall to Joe Biden to try to restore
American government to its rightful place. Its place of decency in how we treat
one another. Of bringing competent, professional people back into government to
rebuild the hollowed-out shell Trump is leaving it in. Of fact-based
decision-making and deliberate planning instead of self-rewarding, whimsical
Tweets. Of acting within the legality and spirit of the Law, historical
precedent, and respect for the historical purpose and the many achievements of
America. The rebuilding of American government will take time and effort after
suffering the wrecking ball attack on it by Trump. It will most certainly
require installing the right new people into key, critical leadership positions.
It will also likely take longer than just one presidential term to accomplish.</p><p>Unfortunately, there will be resistance from those politicians
who believe that Trump’s way is the new way, a key to their political success. Out
of fear of Trump’s retribution and for their own political careers, they will
continue to voice support for the fantasy world Trump has invented to try to escape
the historical label of “1-term, impeached, loser.” Trump will not go quietly
into the night like previous ex-presidents. His continuous need for being the
center of attention will not allow himself to be ignored. It will still be
about being in the spotlight, making money, and demeaning and bullying his way
through anyone who gets in his way.</p><p>In the end, the institutions of American democracy have thankfully
held firm against Donald Trump’s assault. Now, the rest of us have a job to do.
To get through the pandemic decimation of the country. To rebuild those sectors
of our economy that have been hard hit. To help the many victims of the past
year recover their lives. This will not be accomplished on the golf course. It
will happen in a newly committed and staffed government focused on We, the People.
Let us get on with the real job at hand.</p><p>5 weeks to Inauguration Day.</p><p style="text-align: center;">© 2020
Randy Bell https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-31117764721512874622020-10-06T00:13:00.001-07:002020-10-06T00:13:38.316-07:00The Trumpublican Party<p>My father was a life-long Republican. Pragmatically, it was
not a particularly effective affiliation. We lived in the “solid South” wing of
the Democratic Party. For a hundred years, that party was home for moderate
working-class voters, as well as for post-Civil War Southerners enforcing Jim
Crowe segregation – the Dixiecrat wing of the Democratic Party. The Democratic
hold on southern political power was so complete that through the 1960s my
father’s Republican vote never elected a Republican to office.</p><p>The national Republican Party was founded just before the
Civil War. Anti-slavery was its main cause; Abraham Lincoln was its first President.
After the North won that war, the wealthy of the country took hold of the
Republican Party and never turned loose of it. Through the 1950s/1960s,
political and financial control of the Republican Party was predominately
located in the northeast, with a moderate Eisenhower its first president since
The Great Depression. But the times were changing. Party control was moving
westward; a new breed of conservative Republicans was emerging. Their political
leader was Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater; their intellectual leader was
Willian F. Buckley, founder of the National Review; their soul was given voice
by author Ayn Rand; its spokesperson was actor/California Governor Ronald
Reagan. Goldwater lost the 1964 presidential election by a landslide; the
movement succeeded with Reagan’s election in 1980.</p><p>Meanwhile, the party’s voter base shifted underneath its
leaders. Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act in 1965, thereby tearing
down the Jim Crowe voting barriers in the South. For the Dixiecrats, it was the
ultimate betrayal by their Party. In 1968, some found a new home in Alabama
Governor George Wallace’s segregationist 3rd- party presidential run; others
found it in Republican Richard Nixon’s “law and order” candidacy in the throes
of the Viet Nam War and civil rights protests. Over approximately 20 years, the
Democratic South migrated to become the new (and dependable) Republican South.
The weeds of anger and distrust of the American federal government – planted in
the post-Civil War Reconstruction period – were now rebirthed as the southern
wing of the Republican Party.</p><p>Following Presidents Reagan and Bush, Newt Gingrich was
elected Speaker after the Republican takeover of the House in 1994 after 40
years in the minority. Gingrich’s “Contract With America” was his declaration
of war on the old politics. No more bi-partisan government solutions. It was
now “our way or the highway,” either/or, me versus you. Republicans would now
run the show on a “conservative” (i.e. not “Democratic liberal”) agenda. Where
the Party had been built on a business-friendly / government-hands-off agenda,
it would now rebuild itself on the new base of Republican voters by adopting a
“social conservative” agenda tied to conservative Christian groups. Gingrich
also changed the political vocabulary, breaking the norms of respectful debate
by substituting personal insult and attacking opponents’ patriotism. Forced to
resign due to personal and political ethical issues, the legacy of his impact on
partisanship and negative speech in Washington remains today.</p><p>Gingrich left behind a new voter base firmly in residence in
the Republican Party. It was a base that felt left out of government’s largess
and political support, an unheard voice in the national conversation. The new
agenda was driven by a desire to return American culture to the perceived way
of life of the 1950s, which had been battered by the “progressive changes”
instituted over the ensuing decades. Changes from the civil rights movement,
women’s liberation, abortion, same-gender relationships, equal-pay and affirmative
action in the workplace, environmental regulation. In response, a conservative
agenda – and the politicians who would support it – emerged focused on issues
such as religious priorities (e.g. prayer in schools and public places; favoritism
on Christian religious observances); abortion; “traditional values” (including
traditional gender relationships); issues of moral conduct; hyper-patriotism; 2nd
Amendment gun rights. As always, there was the undercurrent of racial
segregation and bias, now pursued through “back door” legal or policy
mechanisms. Over time, this agenda expanded into two main themes: 1) a claimed
right to do as one pleases (a decidedly un-Christian view), regardless of law
and regulation promoting the common good, and 2) a paradoxical belief that all
Americans should conform to one cultural and legal point of view – this
conservative point of view.</p><p>This new conservative agenda was essentially held in check
during the George W. Bush presidency. But after the election of Barack Obama in
2008, who personified the progressive political force, the new conservatives
hit their stride. In 2010 the Tea Party Movement burst onto the scene, focusing
their efforts first on purging the Republican party of its “old guard” members
and replacing them with disciples of the new movement. These new-style
Republicans once again took back the House (which they had lost in 2006), and
subsequently the Senate in 2014. All that remained was to install one of their
own in the White House, to accomplish control of both the Legislative and
Executive branches.</p><p>Enter one Donald John Trump.
Compared to his 44 predecessors, never has one individual been less
qualified to be President. But Trump has several skills useful in the 2016
election campaign: an ability to make himself as the center of attention; an
absence of any core beliefs and principles; an ability to read people and play
to their self-interests. Once he decided to run for President – the biggest
center of attention of all – the new Republican base was just the vehicle he
needed. And they likewise needed him.</p><p>It was, and is, a marriage of convenience. Trump is willing
to present himself as whatever his voting base wants him to be in exchange for
their votes. In turn, that base is willing to turn a blind eye and tolerate his
personal and political life hypocrisies, his political incompetence, and his
untruths in exchange for giving voice to their frustrations and agenda. Trump
has their allegiance because no one else is speaking for them. In fact, it is
not so much that the base is devoted to Trump, they simply have nowhere else to
turn. Hence the intractable and almost inexplicable support given to him. Neither
does Trump have any other voter base open to him. Trump and his base are thereby
permanently wedded to one another.</p><p>So the Religious Right ignores Trump’s amorality in exchange
for his advocacy of their morality agenda. Business owners ignore his business failures
in exchange for his deregulation of economic controls and budget-busting tax
reductions. U.S. senators overlook and rationalize his illegality in exchange
for filling judicial vacancies with conservative jurists. Hate groups walk through
the open door of “respectability” offered by Trump in exchange for their
support. It is all about “making the deal”; each side gives and gets. Apparent
fealty to Trump is actually fealty to the agenda – the marriage lasts only as
long as Trump toes the line. If the line breaks, the fealty breaks. Each party is the oxygen for the other.</p><p>Today, the “Republican Party” is now unrecognizable from its
former self; the label “Republican” no longer has precise definition. It is now
the Trumpublican Party, defined by one man. The existing Party structure
provides the vehicle for Trump and his voters to carry out their political
operation. Traditional institutional Republicans have been forced to the
sidelines, or out of the Party altogether.
On the playing field sits the Trump Truly Faithful, reveling in the
euphoria of their new power, convinced that their campaign against “government
intrusion and failure” has finally come. In the cheering section are those who
cannot endorse Trump the man, yet see personal or political benefit to going
along for the ride. Then come the various hate and domestic terrorist groups
basking their newly-found “respectability.” This election will not only elect a President,
it will also define the fate of this Republican Party. If Trump wins, Trumpism and his coalition
will stand for years. If Trump loses, Trump will be a temporary blip in the
Party’s history. The Party will collapse into an inevitable blame game as a new
power struggle ensues. Who will win, who will constitute the Republican Party
in 2024, is a mystery waiting to unfold.</p><p>Early in the 2016 campaign, I said, “The real story here is
not Donald Trump, even though that is where the attention is going. He is
merely the mouthpiece, The real story that should be pursued is the Trump
voter.” That is still where today’s discussion should be focused. What are they
after? And why are they after it?” Four years later, we are still focused on
the man. We should be focused on his voters. What drives them to their agenda?
What is it that fuels their antagonism towards their government(s)? What
happened to my father’s Republican Party?</p><p>4 weeks to Election Day, November 3.</p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2020</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-46801562019098344512020-09-29T07:19:00.003-07:002020-09-29T07:19:29.261-07:00Trump's Campaign Strategy Revealed<p> September 23, 2020. A reporter asks the President of the
United States, “<span style="letter-spacing: 0.15pt;">Mr. President, real quickly, win, lose
or draw in this election, will you commit here today for a peaceful transferal
of power after the election?” The President responded … “Well, we’re going to
have to see what happens, you know that. I’ve been complaining very strongly
about the ballots, and the ballots are a disaster. <i>Get rid of the ballots</i> [<i>my
emphasis</i>] and you’ll have a very peaceful — there won’t be a transfer,
frankly, there will be a continuation. The ballots are out of control. You know
it and you know who knows it better than anybody else? The Democrats know it
better than anybody else.”</span></p><p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.15pt;">This statement followed a statement made earlier
in the day …“I think this [election] will end up in the Supreme Court. And I
think it’s very important we have nine justices. But I think it’s better if you
go [and confirm the Justice nominee] before the election because I think this —
this scam that the Democrats are pulling — it’s a scam, the scam will be before
the United States Supreme Court.”</span></p><p>There you have it: Donald Trump’s strategy for “winning” the
election. Spoken and filmed from the lectern of the White House pressroom, for
the record, for all to hear and see. For months, Trump has set the table for
this strategy by consistently claiming that the upcoming election is a fraud.
He has blamed the fraud principally on the expanded use of mail-in ballots
(which is how Trump will be voting in Florida). If he does not win by the
ballot counts of the 50 states, then tie up the election by burying it in
endless legal challenges. Move the legal challenges to the Supreme Court, which
will have a brand-new justice nominated and confirmed. With three
Trump-appointed justices on the bench (quid pro quo expected?), and a 6-3
“conservative majority,” they will declare Trump the winner. Election done.</p><p>Will the strategy succeed? Who knows at this time. Given the
unimaginable events of the past four years, anything remains possible.
Apparently, even in America. The first line of defense against this gameplan?
Go Vote. As soon as you can.</p><p><span style="background-color: white;">5 weeks until
Election Day, Nov 3.</span></p><p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2020</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-23539337326430661522020-09-22T12:56:00.003-07:002020-09-22T12:56:27.983-07:00Eligible, But Unable To Vote<p> Voting is essentially a simple concept. Yet in the
evolutionary journey of human civilization, it is one of the overriding reason
America came into being. It is also a relatively new concept in the timeline of
human civilization. In its basic form, there is a decision to be made that
affects a Community of impacted people. It may be a decision regarding future
direction, problem-solving, or ground rules of social order. Or it may be the
selection of an individual(s) to take on a responsibility, or an ongoing job,
on behalf of that Community. In either case, the mechanism is to bring the
Community together en masse; discuss the background and pros/cons/options
pertinent to the issue or selectee; then ask each person what they want to do
about it (i.e. “vote”) – each person having an equal say with one another. The
decision is determined by who gets the most affirmative votes. Done. Move on.</p><p>It is a straight forward basis for group decision-making,
albeit not always an efficient one. Dictatorial decision-making, where one
person decides for all, is certainly a far quicker process. In the right hands,
at the right moment, in the right circumstance, it can actually be preferable.
(E.g. in a foxhole while bombs are enveloping you is not a good time for
voting.) But in the everyday management of or lives, group-think leading to
group-decide usually works out best over time.</p><p>In a world history dominated by the rule of kings (and
occasional queens), voting had a few trial runs. The Senates of ancient Greece
and Rome gave a start at voting. They were somewhat successful, but the voters
were limited to just a few wealthy men. A thousand-plus years later, the
English took another step towards voting, adopting a Magna Charter which for
the first time limited the absolute authority of the King, out of which
gradually emerged a “Parliament.” Parliament consisted of a self-appointed rich
Nobles class, and the King was still the unambiguous authority-in-charge, but
Parliamentary consensus gradually grew in importance for the general governance
of the realm.</p><p>Ultimately, it would take the fledgling new nation of
America, drawing predominately from that English heritage, to make a “voting
public” into a reality. Building on its precedence of colonial legislatures,
voting in a decision-making body, and voting to select the members of that
body, became the basis of American governance. Though not everyone in the
Community was initially allowed to vote, the range of the population that was
allowed – including everyday workers and tradespeople side-by-side with the
rich landed gentry – was remarkable (and unprecedented across the globe) for its time.</p><p>In the ensuing 232 years since our Constitutional founding,
the right to vote has been enshrined as a fundamental definition, privilege and
responsibility of American citizenship. It is the right to have an equal say in
the decisions that affect us and the individuals who will carry out those
decisions. In these same 232 years we have gradually moved to include those who
were initially denied that right of citizenship, i.e. African-American former
slaves, women, Native Americans, naturalized citizens. That correction has been
long and painfully difficult. It took a civil war to free Black Americans from
slavery and then Constitutional amendments expressly giving them citizenship
and eligibility to vote. Yet it took another 100 years to pass the Voting
Rights Act to remove the twisted legalistic and violent actions that served as
barriers that continued to deny that vote. Barriers that included threats,
murders and lynching of would-be voters; poll taxes, requiring one to pay for
voting; literacy tests to keep supposedly “uneducated” voters (i.e. Blacks) off
the roles. It took another Constitutional amendment 132 years after our
founding to give women the right to vote; it would take another 50 years for
women to actually run for elective office in substantial numbers.</p><p>Notwithstanding the long and too-often painful road to voter
equality, the idea of the right of citizens to vote on the decisions that
govern them, and to have proven the case for that idea by 232 years of experiential
example, have been America’s gift to world civilization. Which is why current
threats to that Noble Principle is all the more alarming: the overt attempt not
to deny citizens their RIGHT to vote (as was our previous history), but an
insidious surreptitious effort to deny citizens the ABILITY to vote that right.</p><p>In 2018, we saw numerous “dirty tricks” carried out to deny
citizens’ access to voting. (See “Barricades Blocking the Ballot Box,” November
11, 2018, on this blog.) For example, we saw last-minute rule changes for voter
registrations; moving of polling locations; redefining precinct boundaries to
split voter turnout. Already in 2020 – complicated by the demands of the
Covid-19 pandemic – we are seeing major reductions in the number of poll sites;
attempted restrictions on access to mail-in ballots; deliberate acts by the
President and USPS leadership to slow down and undermine mail-in ballot
processing; interfering with people’s attempts to register to vote.</p><p>This is why vigilance will be required of all of us in Election
2020, regardless of our differing political views. Voting should be a
non-partisan function of government; the rules governing our voting should not
be made up as we go along to fit political party ambitions. We must be prepared
to respond with lawsuits in the courts, protests on the ground, and showing up
to vote in spite of the hurdles presented. And when we vote, we need to vote
out those who seek to take away this most precious of our Constitutional
Rights. We vote to affirm and protect our Constitution that so many have given
so much to bequeath to us. VOTE.</p><p>6 weeks to Election Day, November 3.</p><p><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2020</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-53434817783925543322020-09-08T01:00:00.001-07:002020-09-08T08:08:19.596-07:00Headlines, Not Conversation<p class="MsoNormal">This first week of election activity proved to be a series
of individual headline stories:</p><p class="MsoNormal">At a rally in North Carolina, Trump asked his voters to do a
mail-in ballot AND then go vote at the polls. It is illegal in NC to vote
twice. It is also illegal in NC to induce others to vote twice. He repeated the
request at subsequent venues.</p><p class="MsoNormal">The latest addition to Trump’s Covid health team is a Fox
News commentator who is a radiologist with no immunotherapy experience
whatsoever. He is recommending that we stop testing everyone who is not in a
“vulnerable group” (who isn’t in a vulnerable group?), so that “everyone else
gets it and thereby becomes immune.” Trump has endorsed the idea. Pandemic
solved?</p><p class="MsoNormal">Trump claimed that “94% of the deaths reported from Covid
were actually caused by “other reasons.” Not true – per Dr. Anthony Fauci and
the CDC.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">Two public relations officials were fired
from their positions at the Food and Drug Administration following Commissioner
Stephen Hahn’s decision to walk back his recent claims about convalescent
plasma being a treatment for Covid-19. The statement is medically unproven, per
the vast opposing outcry from the national health community.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">The CDC announced a change in their position on Covid
testing. They said that healthy and asymptomatic people “can choose” whether to
be tested after Covid exposure, but it is not necessary. After outrage from the
national health community, the CDC walked it back.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his running
mate, Kamala Harris, weren’t included on sample ballots provided by South
Carolina’s Election Commission. The sample ballots were intended to “prepare
voters for the coming November election.” An online version of the ballot has
since been corrected.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">Last March, Trump made an unpublicized
visit to Walter Reed military hospital, explained as a “delayed part of his
annual physical exam.” It was recently revealed that Vice President Mike Pence
was told to be on standby to assume presidential powers if Trump underwent anesthesia.
Anesthesia is rarely given during routine physicals.</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white;">In reaction to questions about this, Trump
tweeted he “did NOT have a series of mini-strokes.” Who said anything about
mini-strokes until Trump himself brought it up?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.15pt;">Trump has directed the Office of
Management and Budget to crack down on federal agencies' anti-racism training
sessions, calling them “divisive, anti-American propaganda.”</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">The Justice Department is preparing to
charge Trump 2016 inaugural Vice Chair Elliot Broidy with illegal foreign
lobbying. As an inaugural fundraiser, he sold to foreign clients his supposed
influence with future presidential decisions. Broidy is already under
investigation for payoffs he had made to silence his former Playboy mistress. Another
portrait added to the burgeoning rogue’s gallery of ne’er-do-wells.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal">Evangelical Christian leader Jerry Falwell Jr., a strong
vocal supporter of Trump on the Religious Right, resigned as President of
Liberty University due to 3-way sex scandal including his wife and her lover.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Donald Trump paid a visit to Kenosha, Wisconsin, scene of
street protests due to a Black American being shot seven times in the back at
point-blank range, now in the hospital paralyzed from the waist down. The
Governor and Mayor both asked Trump not to come – “like pouring gas on a fire.”
Trump came anyway, posed for a photo op in front of a burned-out store,
denounced street violence, and pledged to support “law and order.” The current
owner of the store refused to appear in the photo op. Joe Biden subsequently
visited Kenosha, visited with the victim’s family, and spoke to the victim on
the phone. He subsequently publicly denounced the street violence, while also
making the case for racial justice and police reform.</p><p class="MsoNormal">A litany of schools (K-12 and college) began opening for the
fall in response to political pressure. Just as quickly, they began shutting
down again due to rapid outbreaks of the Covid virus due to campus gatherings
(colleges), or the lack of planning and adequate resources to keep teachers,
staff and students safe (K-12). Parents are caught in the middle.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Meanwhile, Joe Biden began to come out of his Delaware
basement to criticize Trump on the street violence (“This is Trump’s America,
happening on his watch”), try to move conversation away from Trump’s “law and
order” theme and back to the pandemic failures, and link the failing economy to
Trump’s failure to first contain the Covid virus.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Michael Cohen’s book is being released, joining the recent
parade of insider tell-all books including one on Melania by her
once-best-friend, and niece Mary Trump’s insider family stories. There is at
least full employment these days for lawyers and book publishers.</p><p class="MsoNormal">Perhaps most significantly, a news article in Atlantic Magazine
quoted multiple unnamed sources accusing Trump on numerous occasions calling
military personnel, and specifically those who have died or been wounded in
service to this country, “losers” and “suckers”. Trump and the White House
strongly denied saying that. The story, however, has been corroborated by
multiple witnesses and news organizations.</p><p class="MsoNormal">What is wrong with this essay’s narrative? It is 90% about
Donald Trump and his cohorts. And what is the theme that emerges from this
litany of news headlines? That this is, and will be, the reality of the 2020
campaign. It will be a series of events, not a competition of ideas. The focus
of the events will be driven by Trump; Joe Biden, whether he wants it or not,
will be put into reactive mode, not proactive mode. Because that is the way
Trump wants it. Good publicity; bad publicity; it is all about PUBLICITY. (<span style="background: white;">“I don’t care what people say about me as long as they say
something.” P.T. Barnum.</span>) It is about being the center of attention,
illuminated by the spotlights of the headlines, dominating the news cycle in
any way possible. Grab a headline, good or bad, and the next day move on to a
new headline so nothing sticks. It is all about controlling the narrative.</p><p class="MsoNormal">This analysis is not about political partisanship, it is
about campaign strategy. A strategy by which 15+ Republican opponents were
steamrolled by Trump in 2016. The question is whether it will work again,
whether it will last with the American public, in 2020.</p><p class="MsoNormal">These are the times that we live in. All these headlines happened in one week. A month of news in
one week. And it was only just the first week of the campaign’s home stretch.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: white;">8 weeks until
Election Day, Nov 3.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="text-align: center;">©</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">2020</span><span style="text-align: center;">
</span><span style="text-align: center;">Randy Bell</span><span style="text-align: center;"> </span><span style="text-align: center;">https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain@blogspot.com</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"> </p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-983996606232243522020-09-01T01:00:00.005-07:002020-09-01T01:00:01.550-07:00Election 2020 Begins<p> The two major political conventions have ended. The
candidates and their running mates have been selected. The Party platforms have
been adopted. (Well, at least for the Democratic Party. The Republican platform
literally consists of three paragraphs, and says “<em><span style="background: #FAFAFA; border: none windowtext 1.0pt; color: #101010; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 13.5pt; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-border-alt: none windowtext 0in; padding: 0in;">RESOLVED, </span></em><span style="background: rgb(250, 250, 250); color: #101010;">That the
Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the
President’s America-first agenda.” Fealty to the man, versus ideas and
specifics for the benefit of the people.) Now is the time for the Election 2020
campaign to begin in earnest.</span></p><p><span style="background: rgb(250, 250, 250); color: #101010;">I</span>n spite of our ridiculous four year election season in
America, in the end it all boils down to the final two months of
electioneering. Goals, promises and ideas will emerge to cover the political
landscape like wildflowers blooming in the spring. Charges, insults, and
out-of-context – if not absolute – falsehoods will travel high speed over the
various communication highways like the moonshiner driver predecessors of the
NASCAR circuit.</p><p>The one truth that stands out? Notwithstanding the seeming hyperbole,
this truly will be one of the most consequential and critical presidential elections
in modern memory. In Donald Trump and Joe Biden, we have two radically
different candidates for the office. One came into the job as the only
historical candidate with no governmental, military, or non-profit experience;
his only business experience was (is?) running a small family business. The
other aspires to the job after over 30 years of government experience,
including being the proverbial heartbeat away from actually holding the
position. In Trump, we have four years of actual observation in how he views
the Presidency, and his manner of executing that job. In Biden, we have his
record as a U.S. senator and his performance as Vice President as the basis for
imagining how he would perform. Donald Trump brings his lifetime background as
a one-man “decider” and a self-proclaimed “fighter” into his version of the job,
with little concern for American law, history, or governmental norms. Joe Biden
was steeped in the old-school politics of collegiality in political debate – a
collegiality seemingly long gone out of fashion – and respect for the
traditions of government service, ceremony, and collective decision-making. We
have seen the personal character of each man, character meaning “those things
that we do when no one is watching.” Character is those things we choose to say
about others; those ways we treat others; those ways we are truth tellers whose
word is our bond; those ways we practice the human values and principles we
have been taught for centuries.</p><p>There is much that could be said about these men, their
goals, ideas and ideals over these next weeks of Election 2020. There is much
that could be said about the kind of country America aspires to be. There is
much that could be said about the world in which we will live our future. But
as I have thought about all the potential topics for upcoming essays for this
blog, and look at the multiple drafts-in-process essays sitting uncompleted
(atypical), I wonder – does it really matter? At this point in our bitterly
divided country, is anyone still listening to one another? Does anyone have
even a minimum of genuine understanding what “the other side” thinks (“what is
the matter with those people?”)? Are we even
capable of explaining WHY we believe what we do, versus just echoing the
popular headlines and bumper stickers of our time? Are we only capable of
arguing about which one of us is “right” versus which way we – and our country
– will move forward?</p><p>At this point, I do not know if there are many truly
“undecided” voters left. What remains to be said or seen in order to make up
our minds? After being bombarded with all the words, mailings, TV ads, and
social media histrionics to come, will that many minds be changed over the next
two months? There will certainly be nothing pretty to see, little informative
learning from the upcoming non-discussions. So the sooner it ends will perhaps
be for the better. Perhaps the only real remaining unknown will be the question
of engagement: how many, and who, will show up to make the judgment, the
decision, about our collective future? And what will they ask for that future
to be? We may choose to tune out the noise. But we still need to show up. Vote.</p><p>9 weeks to Election Day, November 3.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-14326214988396067252020-08-18T00:00:00.001-07:002020-08-18T00:00:00.730-07:00From Riggee To Rigger<p> They said it could never happen in America …</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>In 2016, Donald trump claimed that the republican primary
campaign was “rigged” against him by the Party establishment. (The first in a long line of claims unsubstantiated
by any proof.) Yet he won that Party’s nomination. The charge of rigging
suddenly disappeared. It “just went away, like a miracle.”</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>In the general election of 2016, Trump was expected to
guaranteed lose to Hillary Clinton. So once again Trump pulled out the “rigged
election” card to provide a face-saving way to buffer himself from that loss.
Except that he once again won. And with that, the charge of rigging suddenly
disappeared once again.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>It would be later that the FBI, the Mueller investigation,
and the Senate Intelligence Committee would each conclude that Trump had more
than a little help from the Russians to achieve his victory (“Russia, if you
are listening …”). The cry of “rigged” then moved to the never-ending mantra of
“hoax,” with four continual years of Trump attempting to justify the legitimacy
of his election in spite of losing the popular vote of the country.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p>Now we come to Election 2020, with the full power of the
presidency to support a “no holds barred/no tools unutilized” campaign for
reelection. This effort is happening on two fronts: 1) foreign interference
once again, and 2) domestic voting. Trump revealed his openness to foreign
assistance in his well-documented attempt to solicit Ukraine’s negative
involvement in Joe Biden’s campaign, along with his public call in a White
House lawn press briefing encouraging China to do the same, plus his interview
with George Stephanopoulos which he declared he would welcome negative campaign
information from foreign powers (despite the illegality of such an action). And
by using Russian operators from his buddy Vladimir Putin to once again spread
misinformation through U.S. social media outlets.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Meanwhile, domestically Trump is pushing the election levers
to try to prevent voters from voting – specifically targeting likely Democratic
voters. At the moment, this is predominately focused on blocking increased
turnout through the expanded use of mail-in voting during this critical
pandemic period, turnout which is expected to work against Trump and Republican
candidates in general.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">First, Trump mounted a propaganda campaign that expanded
voting by mail would expand the likelihood of voter fraud – once again without
offering any proof whatsoever and disputed by bi-partisan state Secretaries of
State who conduct these elections. In fact, sates have been using
voting-by-mail for years – for military personnel, U.S. citizens living abroad,
and ill and disabled voters – without significant (non-existent) fraud issues.
Even Trump, and several of his White House team, have voted by mail, and Trump
has already requested a mail-in ballot for his Florida residency. Nevertheless,
his “fraud” campaign continues on unrelentingly.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">All of this propaganda campaign is on the front end of the
mail-in voting battlefield. On the back end is an insidious effort to disrupt
the mailing process itself, and thereby raise doubt about the reliability of
the United States Postal Service to potentially deliver the ballots. Toward
this end, Trump installed yet another unqualified loyalist minion and
mega-donor named Louis DeJoy to be the new Postmaster General. Among DeJoy’s
first executive acts – under the guide of cost-cutting needs – was to cut the USPS
budget, overtime scheduling, and staffing levels, which immediately began to
slow down delivery service. This was followed by the “Friday night dismissal”
of nearly two dozen senior USPS executives and department heads, with no
replacements made, thereby leaving himself in one-man charge. Next has come the
unannounced removal of public mail drops, the dismantling and removal (and
destruction) of million-dollar mail sorting machines, and new scheduling
procedures which has mail trucks departing while unsorted mail is left behind. Then
the announcement that all political mail, including ballot mailings, would
henceforth be reclassified from automatic “1<span style="font-size: 13.3333px;">st</span> class mail” (a
priority) to “bulk mail” (low priority). Ultimately, in his usual arrogance
that he can get away with anything he does, Trump declared publicly that this scenario
is in fact intended to block expanded mail-in voting.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Constitutionally-mandated USPS is a critical component
of our economic, communications, product delivery, financial transaction
infrastructure and way of life which Trump is willing to ignore in his
self-focused drive to be reelected. The specter of a diminished USPS, during
this Election 2020 is blatantly visible. And who is standing up to defend us
against these near-criminal acts? Lawsuits from coalitions of state Attorneys
General and/or Secretaries of State? Do we need to request that the Carter
Center, which specializes in monitoring elections in 3<sup>rd</sup>-world
countries, gear up to do the same here?
Certainly not our ineffectual Congress, who just left town on recess.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We have open, full-scale visible attempts by Donald Trump to
rig the election. Incapable of articulating a persuasive political argument; a
disastrous absence of leadership in defending America against a pandemic; an
approval poll rating falling each week – the man who claimed to have been “rigged”
has now become “the rigger.” We must therefore be prepared for more Trump
maneuvers to come. When they do, we must be prepared to resist such challenges,
be flexible in our personal responses, and find our own creative ways to ensure
that our ballots are received and our votes counted. Regardless of our
political party affiliation, our passion for any particular candidate or
policy, this action by Trump is a substantive threat to the ideas and
principles of democracy itself who should be resisted by all Americans.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">They said it could never happen in America … But it is
happening. Here. Now. In America.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">11 weeks to Election Day, November 3<sup>rd</sup>.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-25821426546764014072020-07-14T01:35:00.000-07:002020-07-14T01:43:55.696-07:00Constitutional Right To Covid-19<br />
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
“Thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">—</span>Judaism</div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
I am getting really tired of those people that are protesting against wearing
facemasks, social distancing, and avoiding large gatherings. They make inane
statements such as, “I trust my immune
system to protect me,” or “this whole Covid thing is an overblown hoax,” or
“this virus won’t affect me / my age group” (actual quotes!). Then, in a moment
of ignorant defiance, they say some version of, “It is my choice to decide what
to do, and my Constitutional Right to decide
what risk level I am willing to take.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
I will most certainly concede that it is every adult American’s freedom of choice
to determine how they will respond to a potential danger – as long as the
consequences of that risk decision stay only with that individual. That said,
one does not have a right to such a unilateral decision if that risk also
becomes my risk without my permission. In reality, all Constitutional Rights
are granted with the obligation of Constitutional Responsibility. (We have a
right to drive a car, but not when we Drive Under the Influence that puts other
innocent drivers and pedestrians at risk. We have a right to possess a firearm,
but not after we have committed a violent crime.)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;">“A man obtains a proper rule of
action by looking on his neighbor as himself.” </span><span style="text-align: center;">—<span class="3l3x">Hinduism</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
With
Covid-19, if one contracts the disease, it is virtually guaranteed that s/he
will infect numerous others, who will in turn infect more others, ad infinitum,
regardless of whether symptoms are apparent or not. One’s voluntary risk
decision thereby becomes the involuntary and unknowing risk decision for family
members, friends, and strangers. As well, one is adversely impacting the
efforts of numerous inadequately-supported health care professionals and
emergency responders trying desperately to keep alive an overwhelming number of
seriously ill people.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;">“… practicing virtue in order to
benefit others, this man alone is happy.”
</span><span style="text-align: center;">—Buddhism</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
So
you can choose to rock climb with no rope; hang glide with no parachute; canoe
over Niagara Falls with no helmet or life preserver; or do a solitary hike
across the war-torn Syrian desert. Exercise your Right to choose your own risk.
I may have a concern about your well-being, but you are free to be as stupid or
smart about your life as you see fit. But when your claim of a Right of Risk
attempts to negate my Right to Life and Liberty, you are required to surrender
your Right of choice to a Responsibility to the Community that nurtures and
sustains you.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;">“</span><span style="text-align: center;">No one is a believer until he
loves for his neighbor, and for his brother,</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">
what he loves for himself.” —Islam</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
Wear
the mask. Keep your distance. If not for you, then for your parents,
grandparents, siblings, spouse and children. Even in this independent-minded Land
of the Free and Home of the Brave, it is not always about just us. It is also about
our responsibility to others. Maybe, just maybe, in meeting that responsibility,
we might even inadvertently benefit ourselves, and thereby avoid becoming yet
another one of the very real statistics with “I Showed Them” or “I Should Have
Listened To Them After All” carved on their tombstone.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
Caring
for one another. It is the challenge given to us that is shared by every major
religion. It is such a simple challenge that we inexplicably continue to make
so difficult to achieve.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;">
<span class="3l3x" style="text-align: center;">“… that you love one another,
even as I have loved you.” </span><span style="text-align: center;">—Christian</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-12821185615842650812020-06-26T03:00:00.000-07:002020-06-26T03:00:16.248-07:00The Burden Of Our Heritage
<br />
Heritage. A small word packed with the breadth and depth of
many meanings. It represents multiple ancestral lives, people with many
backgrounds and experiences melding into one resultant individual. It includes stories
from times past, often with little regard for accuracy. It is a hand-me-down
litany of beliefs, conclusions, and “truths.” It nourishes, if not inflames,
old wounds, unresolved grudges, bitter animosities. It glorifies that which has
been ennobled – from the vantage point of the ennobler. It evolves from legacy
into the cornerstone of one’s culture.<br />
<br />
“Our Heritage” provides a bulwark against attempts to tell
an old story through contemporary eyes. When difficult questions are asked of
us about our view and understanding of past times, or how those past times
reemerge in our current life, “It’s Our Heritage” neatly obviates a need to
answer rationally or from one’s own fresh critical self-analysis. The past
simply remains frozen in time, unmoving, unchanging, unassailable. As a result,
WE remain frozen in time, unmoving, unchanging, our perceptions unassailable.<br />
<br />
Nowhere is this idea of heritage more visible than with
Southern Culture. It is an idea, an institution, currently under great scrutiny
during this latest struggle over racial equality and justice, particularly as
regards the African-American community. While virtually every ethnic group in
America (except for the English) can point to a legacy of discrimination and
intolerance in their American heritage, African-American heritage holds a
special distinction in their story. Unlike other immigrants, African-Americans came
here <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">in</i>voluntarily – by kidnapping
and thereafter into the bondage of slavery. 245 years of the structural buying
and selling of them as merely “property” was followed by 155 years (so far) of
de facto continued enslavement and 2<sup>nd</sup>-class citizenship. This is a
current reality that needs to be, must be, changed. But “It’s Our Heritage” is
one of the biggest obstacles to making that change.<br />
<br />
A pause for full disclosure. I am a white Southerner by
birth and my first two decades of upbringing. (I am now finishing off my last
decades relocated back in the South.) I was born into a family and culture
steeped in the Old South, including the Daughters and Children of the
Confederacy organizations. It was a culture that operated within the “legal”
Jim Crow restrictions and separation pervasive in those times. All the while, I
was virtually oblivious to the racial segregation which surrounded me; “it was
just the way things are.” I asked no questions, while my eyes (and mind) were
shielded from what was standing right in front of me.<br />
<br />
I was a voracious student of Civil War history in my youth.
Like any good Southerner, I came to idolize the names and places and artifacts
of that War – “the heroic war to defend the right of our state and its (white)
people to live without outside interference (i.e. ‘Northerners’).” The
destruction of that way of life by that war, combined with the forced redefinition
of the South’s legal, political and economic structures, was a bitter pill to
swallow. So when the hated ten years of Reconstruction ended, and the
opportunity then presented itself, everything was moved back to the way it had
been. Slavery was effectively reinstituted by disguised legal barriers, social
isolation, educational disadvantage, and economic exploitation. To make this
restoration of ante-bellum Southern life truly work, though, required
“justifying” – i.e.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ennobling – the War.
And the way to do that was to ennoble not the War, but the men who fought in
it: “the patriots” – the husbands, sons and brothers of Southern families – who
gave of themselves in service to their state and family. And so the statues and
shrines went up across the South to honor “the men,” rather than slavery and
the slaves, emblazoned with the adornment “Lest We Forget.” The statues served
to cover over the continuing horror and maltreatment of Jim Crow domination of
the “freed” slaves.<br />
<br />
My great-great-grandfather was one of those ennobled heroes.
As a teenager from Tennessee, a non-owner of slaves, he likely enlisted more
out of peer pressure than a real conviction on his part. Nevertheless, he saw
the War to its end, and I have no doubt that he fought valiantly and served
honorably. After the War, he became owner of a general store, raised a large
family, and ultimately wound up in California – a normal, unremarkable life far
away from the War and its legacy. Samuel Carroll Lee is part of my personal and
Southern heritage, and I honor his legacy as part of the family ancestry that
created me. But that does not require me to honor the Cause that he fought for.
It was the wrong Cause to fight. It is today the wrong heritage to honor and
celebrate.<br />
<br />
The South lost the Civil War. As it should have, as it was
destined to do. Yes, there was a legal and philosophical argument about the
rights of the States versus the Federal government. But men do not go to war
over philosophical arguments. They go to war over power and wealth. Slavery
represented Southern wealth. The South lost the war due to Northern
over-powering manpower and armaments, and the lack of the right side of a moral
and patriotic justification. Human slavery is a reprehensible concept, and the
fact that it existed in world history for thousands of years did not justify it
in America in 1860. It is an institution that cried out for redressing in the
evolution of human civilization, and America was unforgivably one of the last
to let it go.<br />
<br />
My great-great-great-grandfather David Baggerly, Jr. from
North Carolina also fought in a war as a teenager – the American Revolution
that created this great Nation. However one might try to dress it up, Samuel
Carroll Lee fought to undo David’s work, and to split this country into two
parts. There is a word for the action of a citizen who wages war against our
Nation: Treason. However right he thought it to be at the time, whatever was
the call from his community, if one takes up arms against these United States
we would appropriately charge them with treason, and/or designate them as an
internal terrorist. I may feel compassion towards my ancestor(s) for doing what
he thought was right at the moment, but he was wrong. And the consequence of
his wrong-ness is not to ennoble him for that wrong, but to de-glorify his
decision. Which means de-glorifying the statues and memorabilia we have erected
and perpetuated over the last 155 years.<br />
<br />
As history has shown us, great things can happen when a
defeated country separates from its wartime misadventure and begins its future
anew (e.g.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>post-WWII Japan and Germany),
rather than stagnates in “what was.” It is long past due that we Southerners
move on from the stranglehold that “It’s Our Heritage” has trapped us under. “It’s
Our Heritage” freezes us into a time and circumstance that is long past. That
freezing prevents us from seeing the Truth of the past, and embracing the
legal, social and moral demands of the present. There is a reconciliation with
some of our fellow citizens that is right to do, and long overdue to do. We
need to consign the past to the museums and halls of study where it belongs,
that we might learn from our past, but not relive it. Honor our heritage not by
what we may have believed was right yesterday, but by doing what is right
today. We do this because it is right for African-Americans to finally
participate fully in the Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness to which
they have long been entitled. We also do this for us, because it is right to
finally free ourselves from our own self-imposed enslavement to the burden of
“Our Heritage.” We would do so in order that we may move forward and achieve
the best of who we are. This is how I choose to honor my ancestor, Samuel
Carroll Lee, in the true reality of the year of 2020.<br />
<br />
(If interested in an additional relevant reading, click on
this <a href="https://thoughtsfromthemountain.blogspot.com/2017/11/assessing-life-lived.html" target="_blank">link</a> for my previous blog essay “Assessing A Life Lived,” November 12,
2017.)<br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span> <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<br />
<br />
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-68783395667480150582020-05-25T02:00:00.000-07:002020-05-25T02:00:07.388-07:00The Challenge Of Covid-19
<br />
According to his official birth certificate, my Father was
born in 1905 in a place called “Indian Territory.” Four years later, that
Territory would become “Oklahoma,” the 46<sup>th</sup> American state, another
chapter in the closing story of the Old West. Even at his earliest age, my
father was cast into a lifetime of historical change that he could not have
possibly predicted.<br />
<br />
World War I (“The Great War”) broke out when he was 13. Too
young to serve, he could only read about what was to date this most consuming
war in world history. The death toll of a generation of young men the world
over, occurring concurrently with the Spanish Flu pandemic, would combine to take
millions of lives. Eleven years later at 24, the Great Depression hit America,
an economic disaster the scope of which was unknown before and thereafter. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Around 25% (13 million) of the workforce were unemployed
with no or limited income. Despite broad-ranging plans of response on various
fronts, the Depression lasted over ten long years (versus our current 3-month
shutdown from the Covid-19 pandemic). As a young professional CPA, my Father
survived economic disaster, even as he personally lost his father to divorce
and his youngest brother in a fatal automobile accident. Yet he could only
watch as family and friends packed up and headed west to California, hoping for
a better chance in life.<br />
<br />
The Great Depression did ultimately end, but only due to,
and replaced by, an even more deadly and altering World War II. Millions of
military and civilian deaths ensued, with Europe and Asia left in devastated
shambles. Too old for this war, my father fell in line with the new order of
the day: rationing of food, gas, supplies, and services; wage and price
controls; government mandated and directed manufacturing and economic controls.
With the dropping of the atomic bomb in 1945 to end the war, world civilization
and American life were forever changed. At that point, my father was 40 years
old, the normal midpoint of life.<br />
<br />
I have often wondered how those great international events
shaped the perceptions of my Father and his contemporaries. Age and events
precluded our conversation about such. Change, loss, uncertainty all combined
to mark the first half of his life. How did he react? How did his thinking
change? What conclusions did he draw about life’s challenges and how to respond
to them?<br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"><br /></span>
“How will we
respond?” was the challenge given to my Father’s contemporaries, and respond
they did quite decisively and successfully. But it was a series of long-term
demands that required patience, commitment, and cooperation. Today, America and
the world are going through a shared pandemic called Covid-19. An invisible
threat to our physical life, causing great upheaval in our comfortable daily
routines. With Covid-19, our contemporary world did not see this threat
arising, and we have found ourselves ill-prepared to respond to it.<br />
<br />
In my Father’s time, political, military and health leaders
defined their respective threat clearly, created a well-thought out plan of reaction,
and marshalled the resources needed to achieve the plan. Within that focused
framework, the American people were able to unify their individual efforts, find
his/her slot in which to contribute, and share the burden of making the plan
work.<br />
<br />
In today’s America, however, there is no overarching
top-down plan of response, no organized division of labor integrated into an
effective whole, and therefore no unity of action. State-by-state, we are
fighting fifty desperate and different wars against this public health attack.
Meanwhile, our national government lurches from one scattershot hot idea to the
next on daily basis, while the “leader” continues to disavow the plans of his
own advisors. Amid all of the structural confusion, our citizenry is fractured,
emulating the fractured response of our government to its own oft-changing
directives.<br />
<br />
We see the images of empty streets as people cooperatively
stay at home to avoid infecting themselves or others. Or we see protestors
armed with military assault weapons threatening local officials, state
legislators and governors over their right to get a haircut or drink a beer.
Somehow, the right to sit on a crowded beach, or attend a dining establishment,
is deemed some kind of “constitutional right,” a demonstration of hallowed
American freedom. Somehow our 1<sup>st</sup> Amendment right of religious
freedom is distorted by some arrogant religious leaders’ belief that this
includes a right to congregate inside a church building and risk infecting
parishioners, as well as those with whom they later come into contact. (I
suspect that such dubious claims of hardship and sacrifice would be quite a
shock to George Washington, who had to watch his troops suffer a bitterly cold
and ill-equipped winter at Valley Forge to secure those freedoms.)<br />
<br />
Over many years, my Father and his contemporaries made
commitments, endured genuine sacrifices, and worked together to survive –
indeed triumph over – true threats to the American way of life. Millions of
Americans today are trying to do the same, and their success stories are
exemplary. Nevertheless, all of their efforts are threatened by bands of
renegades that believe their individual desires trump a far greater community
need. Yet it is sustained commitment to sacrifice for others that is the only
path to defeating this virus and preventing its recurrence.<br />
<br />
Our local Mountain Express weekly newspaper has been running
a series of articles about life in Asheville NC a hundred years ago, gleaned
from newspaper articles of that time. An article entitled “The Selfish and
Selfless” quoted Dr. Carl V. Reynolds, the city health officer in 1919, saying
regarding the Spanish Flu pandemic: “I have no desire to frighten Asheville or to
create any unnecessary alarm. But I do feel the public should get a warning of
the danger of failing to take steps to prevent a return of influenza here. The
man who ‘takes a chance’ now by permitting himself and the other members of his
family to disregard the opportunity to secure immunization against pneumonia
will be, in my opinion, directly responsible for any deaths that may occur
among his family group from influenza’s complications … Reynolds also stressed
that fighting influenza required every citizen to be selfless. Too often, he
proclaimed, ‘individual forgetfulness of … fellowman [drove people to fulfill
their wants] at any cost, even risking self [health] and endangering others
[so] that a selfish desire may be obtained.”<br />
<br />
100 years later, we seem to be revisiting a similar experience
with Covid-19, having apparently learned little about serious versus trivial
sacrifice, and the need for shared responsibility for each other as the key to
our mutual survival. We need to feel great compassion for those small business
owners, entertainment / hospitality workers, and manufacturing employees
working without proper safeguards. They are trying to survive through this
heath and economic crisis, and need our full assistance consistent with public
health needs. We need feel no such compassion for people complaining about not
getting a haircut, or being able to dine out, or play beach volleyball.
Complaints such as these are purely the arrogance of self over respect and
consideration for the health and wellbeing of family and neighbors. There are
times when Life is properly about “me”; these are the times when Life is
properly about “us.”<br />
<br />
A recent Facebook posting observed, “The ‘Greatest
Generation’ of World War II sacrificed their lives [storming the beaches of
Normandy and Iwo Jima] to defend America. We are being asked to sit on the
couch at home. We can do this.” On this Memorial Day of 2020, we remember and
honor those many who gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect this country.
Surely we can make our own commitment to respond – with far less sacrifice<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>– to what is now being asked of us. Yes we
can.<br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">© </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https//:ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<br />Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-62674566502213457222020-04-22T05:58:00.000-07:002020-04-22T06:10:00.895-07:00A Covid-19 Kind Of Day<br />
And so another day begins. The morning get-up routines have
been completed, breakfast has been eaten, I am all dressed to meet the day. But
what kind of today awaits me as we move through month two of a Covid-19 redefined
existence?<br />
<br />
Each today looks very similar to yesterday, and the now many
yesterdays that came before. One of the normal life changes that occurs in
“seniorhood” is that one’s schedule is less dictated by external requirements
and institutions versus our own created calendar. There is a certain great
freedom in that, but it is also an easy slide into a sameness routine – less
distinction from one day to the next. “What day is today?” becomes a more
frequently asked question. Covid-19’s stay-at-home requirement exaggerates that
sameness even more. How does one fill the time, nurture one’s spirit, and generate
enthusiasm in such a context?<br />
<br />
We catch up on a thousand little household and personal to-dos
that have been awaiting our attention for months (years?). We discover reading
again, though the closed libraries and bookstores inconveniently thwart our
intentions. Gasoline is cheaper than ever, but there are few places open to go
to. A good time to start a new hobby – if you have the materials that you need.
How many homes are good entertainment and educational respites for engagement,
versus now relying on external venues for amusement? It is a good time to catch
up with friends and family, though it must now be done digitally. It is less
satisfying through technology, but it breaks up the easy slide towards
isolation. The afternoon walk becomes the high point of this new adventure:
sunshine, movement, nature, fresh air are all good, encapsulated in an
unfamiliar but newly found “quiet” (relatively speaking). Sitting on the front
porch, one greets the many neighbors (and often their pets) going by, most of
whom having been previously unfamiliar faces. As I watch the day pass, I remind
myself that I am a card-carrying member of the higher-risk Covid-19 age group;
I am cautious, but not paralyzed.<br />
<br />
That said, other people have a very differently filled day,
even if they also experience a similar sameness. Some people are classed as
“essential workers” employed at “essential businesses.” Generally these workers
are: 1) those inadequately-supported health care workers fighting Covid-19 on
the front lines (e.g. doctors, nurses, maintenance staff in hospitals / nursing
homes / care centers; emergency and first responders; pharmacy employees); 2)
those that are keeping our infrastructures open and functioning so the rest of
us can stay home (e.g. food chain workers and servers; municipal service
workers; home / transportation / financial servicers). Without them, our defensive
systems would collapse. While they may be thankful to have employment, and an
income to help support their families, it comes with an ever-present awareness
that they could easily move from defender to patient with little warning. Yet
they continue on, their personal worries tucked under their collective hats –
save those occasional moments of desperately needed mental and emotional
release.<br />
<br />
Another group is the cadre of “at-home” workers. For some,
this is a totally new experience which may or may not prove comfortable. Some
people can be quite productive in this environment. Others are too easily
distracted by the temptations of the home; some may react badly to the
isolation and miss the “social” element of working in a central office with
colleagues; some may find it difficult to do all work and communicating through
technology tools. Perhaps they are also part of a family with children who must
be homeschooled, entertained, or overseen. A family that is usually dispersed
during the day may now find themselves suddenly together 24x7. It can be a
combustible mix requiring a creative deftness instituted on the fly. But at
least some employment and income can be continued, and thereby some commercial
activities can be conducted for the community. The white collar workplace may
be forever changed.<br />
<br />
Which leaves another group of people living in limbo. For
them, working at home is not an option. For employees, the job is gone; for
small business owners, the building is shuttered. Yet unstoppable bills still must
be paid, food must be bought, prescriptions must be filled, but “$0” only
stretches so far. Many have minimal-to-no financial cushion to absorb this
blow, have no idea when – or<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>if – jobs
and businesses will return. Their paycheck-to-paycheck life is now a day-to-day
decision about how to survive. The one-time $1200 stimulus check is helpful,
but is only an already insufficient month’s pay for a minimum-wage worker; an
even shorter timeframe for a previously higher-paid worker. They may spend
their day on long lines at the food bank, while farmers dump milk and plow
under crops for lack of market reach. They file unemployment insurance claims
and applications for small business loans, but those offices are overwhelmed by
the volume of millions of filings happening concurrently. So the checks are
slow to arrive, if at all. And the next dinnertime comes all too soon.<br />
<br />
Alongside this on-the-fly societal reinvention stand the
Covid-19 deniers. It is a group that considers the whole pandemic an overblown
phenomenon (if not hoax), blown out of proportion by the “fake news” media in
search of a story filled with necessary villains. They quote statistics
suggesting the Covid-19 numbers are less than other typical cyclical causes of health
crises. Or they point to small numbers of cases/deaths in rural areas where
they live so the probability of their being infected is assumed to be minimal. (It
is unclear how many more than 800,000 Covid-19 cases / 40,000 deaths they
require to qualify as an epidemic.) Or they protest the shutdown / stay-at-home
program that is the only thing with hope of protecting them – or their
neighbors.<br />
<br />
I recently saw a Facebook post arguing that that America was
simply overreacting to an everyday medical problem. That by giving into this
disease by shutting down and staying home and not reopening the economy,
Americans had become “soft,” or more specifically, had become “wimps.” I would
suggest that that writer speak directly to some of the medical personnel and
first responders who are showing up each day to tend to the sick. They fight
everyday feeling as if they are carrying a sophisticated automatic rifle, but
have only one bullet to use; they wait desperately for the cavalry to come to
their rescue, but they never show. The “success” of their efforts is no longer
measured by the number of people cured, but instead by how many less people died
today. They are some of the most courageous people I know of. Or speak directly
to some heads of families with no job and no income trying to hold mind and
body together, but who understand why they are home. They are some of the most
courageous people I know of. Or speak directly to the millions of Americans who
are quietly cooperating with the social distancing and stay-at-home orders not because
it is easy or convenient, but because they do it for their own good and for the
good of others. They are some of the most courageous people I know of. Most
importantly, speak to one of the sick or dying Covid-19 patients, alone in a
cold institutional health facility, devoid of family or friends, trying to get
through the day not knowing if they will survive this experience – 40,000
Americans have already died in just six weeks’ time. Theirs is a very different
Covid-19 kind of day. They are truly some of the most courageous people I know
of.<br />
<br />
These are among the best of our citizens. All told, there’s
not a wimp among them.<br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<br />Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-4466015556107129722020-04-10T06:26:00.000-07:002020-04-10T06:26:00.064-07:00Two Commentaries On Covid-19 Responses
<br />
<span><u><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">COMMENTARY 1</span></u></span><span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">:</span></span><br />
<span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Lieutenant General Todd Semonite.</span><span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">
Remember that name. Imprint it on the very front of your brain. Why? Because he
is the commanding general of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps that
moves stuff, builds stuff, puts it exactly wherever it is needed, on a short
timetable. When they don’t have exactly what they need, they improvise –
American ingenuity on display. That is their job, every single day. I have seen
General Semonite interviewed twice now. A no nonsense, old school kind of guy.
If you can be clear about what you need (as some governors and mayors are), he
is totally focused on just getting the job done. “No” and “can’t be done” are
not part of the vocabulary.</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Thanks to General Semonite and his
extended team, there are temporary, makeshift, and converted facilities going
up as hospitals all over this country to respond to the Covid-19 onslaught on
our medical centers. Convention centers, dormitories, and vacant hotels
converted to overflow hospitals. Tent hospitals built on football fields,
parking lots, any open space that can be used. Usually completed in less than a
week. It is what the Corps does. And thereby, they demand our respect and
admiration as part of the best of America.</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">This is what you get from true
leadership in times of crisis. You turn to someone who has experience in
getting done what must be accomplished. Who has a clear understanding of what
is needed, what has to be brought to bear, what has to be done, and in what
sequence. As President Lincoln turned to General U.S. Grant to defeat the
Confederate Army and end the Civil War. As President Roosevelt turned to Dwight
Eisenhower to end World War II in Europe; “Ike” then turned to General George Patton
to spearhead the allied drive to push the Nazi army back to Germany. Whatever
issues of personal character might legitimately be questioned about Grant and
Patton, they were singularly focused on getting their assigned job done – no
excuses, no distractions. General Todd Semonite appears to have all those
similar qualities of leadership (without the character baggage). The leadership
needed in these times. What do we get to fight this “war” against Covid-19? We
get a responsibility-denier President who still thinks he is running a tiny
family-owned business in Manhattan. He in turn appoints his son-in-law (Jared
Kushner) to be our Covid-19 point man in background charge of the federal
response – notwithstanding that he has NO experience in logistics, health and
medicine, pandemics, crisis management, or running a multi-organizational
operation.</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">The art of leadership is all about
finding the right person (people) at the right moment to fit the right demand.
Clearly defining the results expected, putting those people fully in charge,
and then getting out of their way. We do not have anything close to that “right
person in charge.” What we have got instead continues to be amateurs at the
top, the skilled professionals below. As a result, many people are and will
suffer in a variety of different ways. Some will unnecessarily die. Why?</span></span><br />
<span><u><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></u></span>
<span><u><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">COMMENTARY 2</span></u></span><span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">:</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">On Tuesday April 7, Wisconsin held an
election. Other states that had originally scheduled their elections for March
and April long ago rescheduled them to May or June in response to the Covid-19
pandemic. The Democratic Governor of Wisconsin, together with the state Public
Health Director, tried to postpone the election, but the state’s Republican
legislative leaders sued to overturn the postponement. They won in the state’s
Supreme Court and the federal Supreme Court. So the election went on.</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Why the big push? Because on the ballot
was one seat on the state’s Supreme Court, and the Republicans were pushing
their conservative candidate to win it. At all cost. And the calculus was that
a low voter turnout would favor their candidate. So the election went on,
combined with other voter suppression tricks that have been employed in the
2016 and 2018 elections: reduced early voting days/hours; no expansion of mail-in
/ absentee voting; no extending of absentee voting deadline; moving or reducing
polling sites – especially in Democratic-leaning Milwaukee. Nevertheless,
voters turned out, many enduring average wait times of 2-3 hours. Putting
themselves at personal health risk, standing six feet apart where possible,
covered in masks where available, many of them senior citizens most-at-risk for
vulnerable to Covid-19. Doing what they needed to do to exercise their right to
vote. Mocking this risk, the Republican leader of the Wisconsin House posted a
video claiming that “it is absolutely safe to go out and vote,” spoken while he
was covered head-to-toe in full PPE gear.</span></span><br />
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;"><br /></span></span>
<span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-size: 10.0pt;">Once again it was demonstrated what
lengths some Republican Party officials will go to in order to win by
manipulating the rules of game, rather than winning on the strengths of the
candidate or the soundness of one’s political argument. Except this time it was
not just about winning or losing an election. It was literally about risking
one’s life in order to vote. This episode is yet another example of our
longtime values, our respect for one another, being thrown in the trash can in
favor of one’s selfish, personal, or political benefit. We are absolutely
losing our collective minds as a Country.</span></span><br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<br />
<br />Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-36953886241029133252020-03-21T05:15:00.000-07:002020-03-21T05:15:19.090-07:00A Virus Unleashed
<br />
Coronavirus. It is the dominant word of our time. The
centerpiece topic of politicians and government administrators, medical and
public health officials, and business owners and entertainment providers. It
has swallowed up most all of the media attention, leaving other issues of
importance near-voiceless. The major events just past – impeachment, weather
catastrophes, election primaries, border wall immigration – seem years ago.<br />
<br />
There is also the general public messaging, which similarly
dominates space in the non-social media platforms. Typically, many (not all) Americans
are aligning in polarized opposite camps of opinion. On one side are the
doubters. For them, the whole coronavirus issue is simply overblown. Statistics
are quoted comparing current/projected low coronavirus cases and deaths with
our substantial cancer, heart disease, and “winter flu” (influenza) numbers.
They dismiss – if not ridicule – people’s “herd mentality” and concerns as
being out of proportion to “the facts.” Given this perspective, they report
making minimal changes in their daily life due to this virus threat.<br />
<br />
On the other side, people are expressly fearful, based on
images seen and stories heard across the globe. Face masks, mandatory home
confinement, deserted tourist venues, overloaded hospitals and medical
facilities, empty grocery shelves. Charts with ever-growing, spiking numbers.
In spite of other countries’ experiences, America wasted two months doing
little to prepare for this eventuality. We had a “see no virus / hear no virus
/ speak no virus” phase; followed by no information, conflicting information, or
inaccurate information; infused with misstatements, fantasy scenarios, and
future promises (versus current actions). Few have been reassured, leaving
people feeling on their own, dependent upon varying initiatives of individual
state/local governments and officials left driving our response. In the midst
of such confusion, fear set in.<br />
<br />
As America finally begins in mid-March to truly gear up for
this public health issue, there are several elements we should keep in mind in
developing our perspective.<br />
<br />
1. While statistics about other killer diseases are
important to keep in mind, they are essentially irrelevant to this current experience.
These other diseases are largely known items. We have years of study and
mountains of data about them; they are generally predictable as to how they
proceed; protocols for successful treatment – including some vaccines – are
known or are continually emerging. Coronavirus – more specifically this
Covid-19 strain – has none of this. It is a totally new sickness, with no track
record, no data, no protocols, no “facts” of where it comes from or how it moves.
We have no built-in antibodies, no vaccines, no known treatments. The real
danger is not what this coronavirus IS, but what it COULD BE. It is this
unknown-ness that is our real crisis, which means we are forced to “wing it” in
the short term with educated guesses between worst case / best case scenarios.
We are not just fighting a disease; we are fighting an unknown enemy – the
hardest battle to fight and the hardest to organize against.<br />
<br />
2. That said, data is coming in rapidly, and we are sorting
through it as quickly as possible. Each day we know more, but it is an elusive,
moving target. China and Italy give us a starting point of experiences – IF we
elect to learn from them.<br />
<br />
3. Are we overreacting to the significant closures and
social distancing being rapidly introduced? It may seem so, especially in
geographic areas (like mine) where there are (as yet) no confirmed cases. But
Covid-19 is a stealth contagion. Once infected, it can take up to two weeks to
show itself. It may even show no symptoms at all, but in that invisible state
can still infect others. As it travels on its human host, this insidious
disease is unknowingly transmitted to an increasingly wider audience – a
sleeper cell that results in the sudden spiked curve of cases as seen
elsewhere. Because one is “not sick” does not mean one is not contagious.<br />
<br />
4. What is clear is that the relatively low number of
current Covid-19 cases is statistically meaningless as a basis for projection
and planning. We do not know the true number of cases because we have still not
adequately tested our population – in spite of the early warnings we had. This
is a collective failure of federal government (mis-)management. It reflects a
lack of timely preparedness, collective organization, effective leadership, with
scattershot solutions focused more on avoiding blame than solving problems. As
of this writing, we are still well behind the demand for testing, analysis,
planning, and delivery of needed resources to where they are needed. Planning
accurate strategies to fight this virus is highly difficult when one lacks adequate
intelligence about who the enemy is.<br />
<br />
5. Much more could be said about this public health case
study. The “lessons learned” post-crisis debriefing and analysis will be
important to do. But the immediate conclusion for each of us is that we are in
unknown territory here. We are fighting blind with inadequate knowledge and
insufficient resources. Once again we face the age-old American conflict of
values: do I do what is right for me, or do I do what is right for the
community of which I am a part? If I think I am fine – even though I might not
be – do I ignore the guidelines and go about my business? Or do I consider
those who might be far more vulnerable to, and potentially injured by, my
singular action? That is the moral question each of us faces.<br />
<br />
For now, responsible state and local political and health
leaders will continue to fight this battle as best they can – hopefully with
increasing resources and support. Six months from now, perhaps we will know
this virus more fully, and we can then judge how well we responded to this
crisis with what we knew. Depending upon our outcomes, we may never know
whether the Covid-19 threat was overblown, or our collective mitigating efforts
stopped it in its tracks (as our “victim of our own success” experience mitigating
the “Y2K” computer flaw threatening to shut down the world economy.) Knowing the
reasons for “success” can be as elusive as knowing the causes of disease.<br />
<br />
In the meantime, we need to remember our health
professionals and volunteers, and our service workers who are keeping our
country semi-functioning. They are seeking to defend us and provide comfort
during these times. We are obligated to do the same for them. Simultaneously,
we express our compassion to all the people being significantly impacted by
this crisis.<br />
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">©</span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-13998872559618603312020-02-26T06:37:00.004-08:002020-02-26T06:37:46.980-08:00Democratic Primary Strategies
<br />
The American constitutional ritual of voting has begun. Five
months of primary campaigning and voting will lead to a presidential nominee
for each of the major parties. The Republican nominee is presumed already
known. Yet in the crazy political world of Donald Trump’s daily turns and
surprises, who continually snatches defeat by stepping on his own victories,
anything is possible. (Future essays will discuss separately the Trump
candidacy.) On the Democratic side, the ultimate victor is far from clear. Who
the Party’s voters will choose, who the Party’s convention will select, can
still go a number of different directions – and will be subject to the same
currently-unforeseen twisting and turning events as Trump’s campaign.<br />
<br />
Unlike the few Republican challengers against Trump, the
Democrats started this campaign season with over two dozen candidates. By any
criteria, it was as diverse a pool as could be imagined: age, race, gender,
background, political / governmental experience, issue priorities, name recognition.
By the start of primary season in February 2020, that number has narrowed to
approximately six viable candidates: Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg,
Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren (with Tom Steyer in the wings).<br />
<br />
From the initial pool of diversity, the survivors include:<br />
-4 are aged 70+, 1 in her 50s, and 1 only slightly above the
minimum age of 35<br />
-4 are males, 2 are females<br />
-all 6 are white, with no minority candidate<br />
-4 are married, 1 is in a gay marriage, 1 has a long-term
life partner<br />
-3 are former mayors, 4 are current or former U.S. senators,
1 is a former Vice-President<br />
-2 are from New England, 2 are from the Middle Atlantic
states, 2 are Midwesterners<br />
-2 are former Republicans, 1 an Independent (making his 2<sup>nd</sup>
try), 3 are long-term Democrats<br />
-all but 1 are millionaires through mega-billionaires<br />
It is diverse, but hardly the expected resulting profile
from the original candidate pool.<br />
<br />
All candidates agree that priority #1 is to beat Trump in
November. But who is best qualified to accomplish that goal is not clear among
the candidates, the Party, and the voters, as each candidate has different
strengths and weaknesses to match up against Trump. Huge turnout is accepted as
the key to victory (as proven in the 2018 midterms). The ability to get that
turnout will likely depend on several strategy considerations:<br />
<br />
1. Hillary lost some key traditionally-Democratic states
(e.g. PA, MI, WI) by narrow margins. Those states were key to Trump’s win. Some
of that loss reflected Hillary’s neglect of those states and taking them for
granted in her campaign. Some loss was simply Trump’s appeal to a portion of
those voters. Then there was a large number of voters who were deeply opposed
to Hillary personally and voted against her. How do Democrats get these voters
back?<br />
<br />
2. “Bread and butter / dining room table” issues won for the
Democrats in 2018. While anti-Trump opinions were high, in the important
Midwest it was moderate candidates stressing these close-to-home issues who won
in previous Republican districts. They won enough to flip the House to
Democratic control, and in 2020 they need to win those seats again to keep
control.<br />
<br />
3. Some Democratic voters are passionate about achieving a
“radical change / big ideas” agenda on a quick timeline for America. The
changes include economic restructuring, income redistribution, social justice
and equality goals. Moderate Democrats also seek economic and social changes,
but on more of a building-block basis of accumulating changes. Revolution
versus evolution. Nether camp has sufficient numbers alone to win the November
election outright. How will these two camps reconcile their differences and
unify for November? In truth, all candidates agree on virtually all programmatic
OUTCOMES, but simply differ in their methods. For example, Democrats share a
desire for all children to receive needed healthcare, and there are multiple
good ways to accomplish that. Quibbling now over mechanics and details is not
helpful, versus demonstrating the leadership that will be needed to bring
America together to accomplish these things later.<br />
<br />
4. Each candidate has pledged to support the ultimate
nominee, whomever wins. But which nominee(s) can unite the party, bridge the
Left-vs-Moderate agenda divide, while still energizing an across-the-board
turnout? Will Sanders’ and Warren’s supporters follow a moderate nominee? Will
supporters of the four moderates follow a radical change nominee?<br />
<br />
5. All candidates acknowledge defeating Trump is Priority
#1. There are certainly many line-item reasons to do so. Who can most
skillfully make the case AGAINST Trump’s actions and words over the past four
years? Who can make the case to America FOR a Democratic alternative – a clear,
clean, simple, succinct , but cogent case?<br />
<br />
These are some of the overall strategy considerations for
the candidates, their advisors, and the political consultants to consider.
However, there are two overall dominating factors that loom over this election,
and what can then be accomplished over the next decade.<br />
<br />
First, the American public is tired. They are worn out and
exhausted from the endless national political arguing and chaos. The constant
Tweets, political maneuvering, personal attacks in lieu of serving
constituents. The negative changes in the essence, ethics, and conduct of the Presidency.
The dropping of yet one more bombshell shoe after another. The headline-dominating
daily conversations about “what did the President do or say today?”<br />
<br />
The vast majority of Americans are not looking to be so consumed
by political or governmental conversations. They are looking to live lives
focused on nurturing and providing for their families. Engaging with friends
and their communities. Pursuing their personal, professional, and recreational
goals. The “Washington Drama” is not where they want to put their attention.
They long for the politicians to take care of the necessary political business,
the government to provide the services promised, while the rest of us get on
with our lives. The “Theater of the Absurd” has simply gone on too long. And
Americans have always had a short attention span.<br />
<br />
Second, as important as such topics as healthcare, climate
change, immigration reform, economic fairness, and a host of other issues are,
they are necessarily secondary to an even greater priority. Before taking on
these notable issues, Trump’s replacement is necessarily going to have to face
the need to first rebuild the foundations and structures of our government
after all the change and damage that has been inflicted upon them. Trust in our
governing institutions, respect for the rule of law versus person, and the everyday
functioning of our governmental bodies and agencies – all carefully developed
over 230 years – have all been strangled or ripped apart in just four years. We
are now looking at a federal government hollowed out and decimated of
knowledgeable professionals, and the breaking or elimination of orderly
processes.<br />
<br />
Before any grand agenda of new policies and programs can be
put into place – no matter how seemingly desirable on their face – this
destruction must be reversed and rebuilt. It will be slow, unglamorous, detailed,
and painful work, requiring a steady hand. This work will likely consume the
entire next presidential term – a significant factor for Biden and Sanders who
would likely be a one-term president due to their age. (It is a transitional
role similar to that admirably performed by Gerald Ford following the “long
national nightmare” of Richard Nixon.) But until that reversal is done, and
pride and integrity are restored, and American confidence and leadership are
renewed, and our many competing groups find a way to respectfully talk and actually
WORK together – we will be stuck where we are. One cannot build policy and
program castles on a foundation of sand using broken tools with no workers on
hand to operate them.<br />
<br />
Until we restore America’s faith and trust in each other, along
with the mechanics needed to accomplish the next extraordinary dreams of
America’s story, talking about specific ideas and detailed programs is a fool’s
journey aiming at a brick wall. Measured against that true priority, which one
of those speakers on the Democratic debate stage can best lead us to our future?
Which one has best demonstrated an ability to be truly inclusive and join
people in working together? That is the important question for each of us to
thoughtfully answer.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
©<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<br />
<br />Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2937362710016241910.post-32233976932426942812020-02-12T04:32:00.000-08:002020-02-12T04:32:25.195-08:00Impeachment Recap And Reflections
<br />
At 4:32pm on Wednesday, 2/5/2020, the Constitution of the
United States was rushed to the Library of Congress and placed in intensive
care, suffering from significant assaults against its Principles and Values.
Concurrently, the spirits of the 39 Founders who signed the Constitution
gathered in an impromptu vigil, waiting to see whether or not the Patient would
survive its injuries. The outcome for the Republic is in doubt.<br />
<br />
There is much to take away from these past five months of
Impeachment and Trial. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The specific
takeaways will vary considerably depending on the lens of our varying
perspectives through which we view these events, shaped by our widely varying
life experiences. In many respects, our concerns are not over what was specifically
said and done. Instead, our greater concerns should likely focus more around
issues of “rules of law and rules of order,” new precedents being established,
and our basic assumptions about our government’s commitment and responsiveness
to “We, the People.” Space limitations of this essay does not allow for
in-depth discussion of these events; that will be left to the historians. Meanwhile,
perhaps the following reflections may be helpful.<br />
<br />
1. It is a violation of federal law to solicit or receive
assistance from foreign entities for a political campaign. All discussion
starts with that legal reality. Donald Trump admitted in the notes of his July
2019 call to the new President of Ukraine that he did solicit such election
help by demanding a foreign investigation of his primary potential election
rival. [Such admission was also consistent with his public call for assistance
to Russia in 2016 (“Russia if you are listening…”), his interview with George
Stephanopoulos in June 2019 expressing his willingness to accept political dirt
from foreign entities (“I would look at it and decide whether to use it…”), and
his 2019 request of China made on the lawn of the White House inviting them to
“also look into corruption by the Bidens.”] These public/confessed actions
broke the law. He reinforced his demands by acts of bribery/coercion in holding
up a White House show-of-support meeting, along with illegally (per the General
Accounting Office) holding up $250M+ of military aid appropriated by Congress. These
actions constituted Impeachment Article 1.<br />
<br />
2. The violation of the foreign interference law was not an
accidental, one-time event, but was a deliberate campaign authorized and
orchestrated by Trump that went on for nearly a year. It involved numerous
employees and non-employees of the government to either obtain the Biden investigations,
and/or to hide these secretive efforts. As was said, “everybody was in the
loop” –cabinet secretaries, department heads, and outside players. It significantly
included Devin Nunes (House Intel Committee ranking Republican) and Pat
Cipollone (lead counsel on Trump’s defense team) – two significant conflicts of
interest. Keeping these secrets hidden included a total refusal to comply with any
legal Congressional subpoenas for testimony by participants, along with
relevant documents. The defense argued that “there was no first-hand testimony
about the president’s actions,” yet Trump refused to let firsthand witnesses
testify. If Trump was truly innocent of these charges, why did he not flood the
Senate with witness testimony and documents that would rebut the prosecution
and prove his case? This, blanket refusal to cooperate with the House
investigation constituted Impeachment Article 2.<br />
<br />
3. The House Managers prosecuting the Senate trial were
well-organized in laying out the detailed course of events underlying Impeachment
Article 1. Their presentation earned compliments from a number of senators from
both parties. This was in stark contrast to Trump’s legal defense team which
never seemed to settle on a consistent line of defense.<br />
<br />
4. The facts upon which the impeachment charges were based
proved unarguable and uncontestable. This led Trump’s defense team to pursue an
evolving line of defense. First: he did not seek a “political favor” from
Ukraine. Second: well, he did, but what he did was not wrong. Third: well, his
actions may not have been the best to do. Fourth: well, he asked Ukraine for a
“favor,” but there was no quid pro quo – in spite of the substantial testimony
to the contrary. Fifth: well, he committed no actual crime. Sixth: well, yes,
he may have committed a crime, but it is a crime that does not rise to the
“High Crimes and Misdemeanors” level of impeachment. Besides, ultimately a)
Ukraine announced no prosecutions and b) they got their money. (Is the burglar
who doesn’t find the jewels therefore innocent of the break-in?) Various Trump
supporters tried to denigrate the significance of Trump’s solicitation of
political help from Ukraine (and Russia and China). But for the Constitutional
Founders, resisting any interference by foreign entities was a high priority
and concern.<br />
<br />
5. Twenty years ago in the impeachment trial of Bill
Clinton, Senator Lindsey Graham and constitutional professor Alan Dershowitz separately
argued that impeachment does NOT require the commission of an explicit
statutory criminal act. In this trial on behalf of Trump, they each reversed
course and said that impeachment DOES require a criminal act (an opinion
rejected by the vast majority of legal scholars and Constitutional Founders).
So which is it? Is legality based upon the law, or who the defendant is (and
what political party s/he belongs to? Founder Alexander Hamilton wrote in “The
Federalist” that impeachment applied to “the abuse or violation of some public
trust” and “injuries done immediately to the society itself.”<br />
<br />
Professor Dershowitz went on to offer a painfully
nonsensical legal argument that if whatever the president does is for what s/he
concludes is in the best interest of the country as s/he sees it, it is not
illegal or impeachable. This includes concluding that if s/he is the best
person to be president, then whatever s/he does to get elected is permissible. It
is a discredited reasoning reminiscent of President Nixon’s statement during
Watergate that “If the President does it, it is not a crime.”<br />
<br />
6. One example of how far integrity has disappeared from
Congress was the abdication of the Impeachment Oath. All one hundred senators
swore an oath to their god committing them to approach this senate trial, and
review the accusations and defense, from a perspective of “impartial justice.” Nevertheless,
some senators from both parties announced their decision and intended vote well
before the trial started. In particular, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell went
even further by stating his intention to shut down and dismiss the trial as
soon as possible, and that he was “in total coordination with the White House”
(i.e. Trump) as to how the trial would be conducted. Hypocrisy reigned supreme.<br />
<br />
7. To justify his decisions about the trial rules, McConnell
(and other Republican senators) claimed that this trial was following the same
rules as the Clinton impeachment. This was wrong. Clinton’s trial was based on
the findings of an “Independent Counselor” (Ken Starr, now a part of Trump’s
defense team) appointed by the Attorney General, who spent several years
investigating Clinton. Starr turned over boxes of his interviews and supporting
documentation – including sealed grand jury testimony – to the House, which
formed the basis of the House’s Articles of Impeachment. This was supplemented
by three witnesses called to the Senate. No such Independent Counselor or grand
jury testimony was allowed for the trial of Trump. Trump’s trial was the first
to include no witness testimony or additional documentation (though 70% of the
public supported such input).<br />
<br />
8. Some Republican defenders of Trump made the argument that
this impeachment “was a partisan affair from the get-go in the House, an
attempt to reverse the results of the 2016 election; the guilt/innocence of
Trump should be left to the voters in November.” First, if it was a partisan affair
in the House, would not the country be best served by rising above partisanship
in the Senate and conducting a demonstrably model impartial trial– instead of
tit-for-tat partisanship? Second, the Constitution assigns responsibility to
the Congress for determining whether a president should be impeached and
removed. It does not assign that responsibility to election day voters. Congress
needed to step up to the job rather than pass the buck. Third, the basis for
the Article 1 charge was that Trump sought to illegally tamper with the 2020
election. How does one defer his trial to the very process corrupted by his
guilt?<br />
<br />
In the end, this entire episode was not a proud moment for
an America that has been an aspiration and role model for democracy for the
world.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Trump broke at least two federal
laws, threatened the security of both a European ally and America, and then
tried to hide his actions from Congress and the citizenry. Virtually no
Republican senator disputed that Trump committed these actions; rather, the
trial was reduced to the subjective question of “how important” was it. The
Senate “trial” proved to be no trial at all based upon many Americans’
understanding – by their own experience – of what constitutes a trial. In the
process, the Senate effectively announced that: a) the President IS in fact
above the law; b) House and Senate Republicans will back Trump in virtually whatever
he chooses to do; and c) Congress has surrendered its oversight role over the
Executive Branch – access to testimony, documents and information will
henceforth be limited to only what a President allows.<br />
<br />
Where this takes us from here, and what Trump will now feel
free to do, is anyone’s guess. Now it is the People’s obligation to speak its impeachment
judgment at the polls in November. What will America’s verdict be in November
2020?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
©<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>2020<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Randy Bell<span style="mso-tab-count: 2;"> </span>https://ThoughtsFromTheMountain.blogspot.com</div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Randy Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08631385549094410645noreply@blogger.com3