Memories of quarantine, search for comfort today

This post was published in the March 28, 2020, Wilson Times.

Having experienced quarantine once before has not helped me through this pandemic we’re experiencing, but it has given me some perspective.

I was 3 or 4 years old when my older sister, four years my senior, was diagnosed with Scarlet Fever. County health department nurses came to our rural home and nailed a menacing-looking sign onto our front door, warning visitors not to enter the house by order of the local Board of Health. The seven members of our family were not allowed to leave. My memories are faint on this episode of my early life, but I clearly remember my mother opening the bedroom door just a crack so that I could see my sick sister in the bed. I was allowed only a brief look before the door closed.

I also remember my older brother, at the end of the quarantine period (typically 21 days, some epidemic websites say), tearing the quarantine sign from the front door when the quarantine expired.

Quarantines used to be issued for many diseases, including polio, smallpox and diphtheria. Vaccines and new treatments have eliminated quarantines as the standard response to several diseases.

What the world is experiencing now is not an enforced quarantine but a plea for sensible actions to reduce the spread of a disease, COVID 19, which has neither a cure nor a vaccine at this time. We are urged to stay home, to avoid crowds, to keep a six-foot zone between ourselves and other people. The rules have been especially hard on restaurants, churches, theaters, schools (now closed) and concert venues. Ceremonies, from baptisms to weddings to funerals, are being canceled or postponed. Streets are emptied as people stay home.

At a time we want to hold loved ones close, we’re told not to do that. Our need for human contact is genetic. It is as essential as food and water. We have found ways to work around the rules. Video chats are possible for people with computers (or smart phones) and internet service, and we’ve taken advantage of that, just as many schools have begun holding classes online and organizations have moved meetings online.

These changes, which are distortions of our basic need for human contact, are changing our society. The impact of this pandemic, however long it may remain infectious, will have a long-term impact. Already, isolation and restrictions are frightening people. We are accustomed to getting through darkness and dangers by sharing our worries with others. Limits on human contact make emotional recovery more difficult.

One of the times we attended church via the internet, the Psalm of the Day was the familiar 23^rd Psalm. “Yea though I walk through the valley of death …” seemed eerily appropriate during a pandemic. But I was struck by another phrase in that Psalm: “I will fear no evil, for though art with me. Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me …” Notice that the passage does not promise recovery from illness, safety from harm or death to viruses. Its promise is “comfort.” That should be enough.

My search for comfort in bleak times led me to a devotional by Episcopal Bishop Michael Curry, who read a poem by Lynn Ungar titled “Pandemic,” written March 11. She suggests that we treat our pandemic restrictions like Jews consider the Sabbath, the most sacred of times: “Cease from travel / Cease from buying and selling / Give up, just for now, / trying to make the world different than it is. Sing. Pray. Touch only those / to whom you commit your life.” The full poem is on her website, lynnungar.com.

COVID threat becomes clear in grocery aisle

This post was published in the Wilson Times March 22, 2020.

The grocery store parking lot seemed a bit more crowded than usual when I arrived to pick up a few items we needed last Sunday, but the crowding didn’t seem so unusual until I got inside and found the aisles jammed with shoppers pushing overloaded carts along nearly empty shelves.

I felt a bit unnerved and shocked by what I was seeing. As I took in the scene, I realized what was disturbing me. The jammed aisles and empty shelves reminded me of newsreels and movies from 1939-40 depicting desperate Polish and French refugees scrambling to haul away as many of their possessions as they could carry just ahead of the Wehrmacht. The only thing missing was menacing commands spoken in German.

There was no army chasing those shoppers in Wilson, but they seemed just as desperate, and their shopping buggies were piled as high as the Joad family’s decrepit Model T leaving the Dust Bowl in “Grapes of Wrath.”

I checked out and drove home, still discomforted by what I had seen. The Corona Virus pandemic had inconvenienced me before this incident, but I had not recognized this new virus as a global crisis until my mind conflated the scene of the panicked shoppers with the desperation of World War II refugees.

We should have seen it coming. The COVID 19 virus leaped across China into Europe, Asia and the United States. We knew the virus was going to disrupt the American way of life.

Schools are closing, the NCAA basketball tournament (“March Madness”) has been canceled along with other collegiate activities. Major League Baseball is delaying its season. The NBA has canceled its season. All gatherings of people (first 100, then 50 and now 10) are strongly discouraged. The stock market has fallen off a cliff. Recession looms. Congress and the White House are working on stimulus packages to soften the economic damage. The numbers of infections and deaths are climbing rapidly.

Even churches are feeling the impact, and many are canceling services or altering their worship to limit human contact. Handshakes are forbidden, as is “the sharing of the peace.” But Holy Communion, the central act of liturgical churches’ worship, cannot be dodged or moved online. My wife and I “attended” church in Salisbury via a live online link Sunday morning. Despite its limitations, it gave us comfort.

So we are hunkered down, avoiding interactions with other humans as much as possible. We are washing our hands far more often. If the stores were not all out of them, we’d be using sanitary wipes and hand sanitizer, too. We have food enough to survive for a few weeks, but if the infections continue to grow for many months, we’ll have problems.

One benefit of this crisis has been that we’ve talked to our adult children more. All three have called at least once to check on their parents and engage in long conversations. We enjoyed the calls and appreciated their concerns, but I couldn’t help envisioning bedridden elders being cared for by adult children and grandchildren. Yes, we are in the demographic of more vulnerable populations. I look at mortality charts for COVID-19 and cringe.

It is inevitable that this pandemic will change our lives. Vacation trips have been canceled. Sensible precautions keep us away from restaurants, lectures, worship services, theaters, schools, sporting events, celebrations of birthdays, weddings, anniversaries and so on. When this is over, will we be able to transition back to the way things used to be? Will we be able to hug our grandchildren again?

2020 election is as divisive as 1860 and 1876

This November 3 will mark the 17^th presidential election I’ve lived through, the 15^th (beginning in 1960) that I closely followed, perhaps the most unusual and volatile election ever and the most divisive presidential election since 1860 or 1876.

The Super Tuesday primary on March 3 clarified a lot of uncertainties about who would win the Democratic nomination. Although no one has the brass ring secured, Joe Biden appears to be clearly in the lead, perhaps with finality.

Well aged: A general election between Biden and President Trump will be a face-off between the two oldest party nominees ever. Biden will be 78 in November. Trump will be 74 on Election Day. Bernie Sanders, who might still gain the Democratic nomination, will be 79. Forty years ago, Ronald Reagan became, by far, the oldest person ever elected president. He was 70 when elected and served two terms; some of us worried whether he’d finish his term. Sanders had a heart attack in October and was released after insertion of coronary artery stents. Biden has a history of aneurysms. Trump proclaims himself healthy, but he looks very overweight and brags that he never exercises. His volatile temper indicates dangerously unhealthy stress levels. One of these septuagenarians will win what may be the world’s most complex and stressful job. A serious health crisis or sudden death of a nominee would throw the election into the worst turmoil ever.

Speaking of health: All of the candidates have histories that scare portions of the electorate. Trump has alienated many voters with his instinctive, no-consultation decision-making and incessant bragging and lying. His expectation of a boost from a strong economy might flop because of a corona virus that is spreading around the world and hurting economies. Trump second-guessed the scientists and physicians who worried about the new virus while he relentlessly downplayed its seriousness. He dismissed concerns about the impact of the virus and lied about a cure, a vaccine and progress of the virus, demanding that he get all the credit.

Whose party? Sanders’ promise to bring new, younger voters to the polls has turned up empty. Facing ever-increasing odds, Sanders should withdraw and endorse the party nominee, as any other Democrat would in the interest of party unity. But here’s the catch: Sanders is not a Democrat. He has never joined the Democratic Party and is officially an independent. In 2016, he declined to endorse her after Hillary Clinton had won a majority of delegates. His overly zealous supporters’ accusations could hurt the party in November. But it’s not Sanders’ party, remember?

Biden’s weaknesses: Biden’s performance in the early party debates was so pitiful that he lost his status of assumed nominee. His oral slips (blamed on a stutter) and occasional confusion left supporters deeply concerned. His delivery has much improved, but he still gets lost in sentences sometimes. He doesn’t have the comfort level or the maliciousness of Trump and could get rattled by Trump insults and cruelty. Biden has avoided a full accounting of his son’s cushy job with a Ukrainian oil company, Barisma, but Trump will almost certainly harp on the matter. Hunter Biden’s deal may be nothing more than the privileges of the electoral class — just a smidgen of nepotism (one of the Trump family’s traits) or just bad judgment.

Vice President: Tradition and reason would suggest that Trump will keep chief sycophant Mike Pence as his running mate, but Trump is totally unpredictable. Biden and others have suggested a black female would be a good running mate. Sen. Kamala Harris dropped her campaign after she spent early debates attacking fellow Democrats, especially Biden. She has now endorsed Biden, making her a logical VP. If she’s on the ticket, she will be a strong debater and rousing speaker. She might even swing the California vote.

Progressives: Democrats used to be called liberals, but some marketing study must have found “progressive” a more likable term, so that’s what they call themselves (except for Sanders, a proud “democratic socialist.”) Like liberals, progressives want to use governmental power to improve the lives of voters. Some are willing to “never mind” the impact on the budget deficit or national debt. The GOP used to worry about deficits and counter the progressives, but since the GOP’s 2017 tax cut, Republicans have pushed deficits and the federal debt ever higher.

Interference: The 2020 election will almost certainly be influenced by computer hacking, cheating, dishonestly edited videos and foreign interference. We might not know who legitimately won until well after Election Day, and both Trump and Sanders supporters might take to the streets if their guy doesn’t win.

Remember the curse: “May you live in interesting times.”

Corona Virus shutdown looks like an apocalypse

The NCAA has canceled March Madness? The NBA has canceled its season? The Atlantic Coast Conference has canceled its 66-year-old basketball tournament, along with tournaments and scheduled games in all other sports? Major League Baseball is delaying opening day? Colleges and universities are canceling in-person classes and replacing them with online classes? Broadway shows are being canceled? The Masters golf tournament has been postponed — The Masters!

If these aren't signs of the apocalypse, I don't know what is.

The NCAA basketball championship game was played nearly 40 years ago hours after a failed attempt to assassinate the president, who was still hospitalized and in serious danger at tip-off.

This Covid-19 virus must be truly virulent to disrupt American life so thoroughly. The World Health Organization has declared the outbreak of this new disease to be a pandemic — a disease that endangers the entire world.

Although some irresponsible individuals in and out of government have attempted to minimize the dangers and impact of the new corona virus, top scientists in U.S. health agencies have strongly urged action to avoid spread of the disease. Without such actions, the rate of infection could grow exponentially, ultimately overwhelming the health care system as hospitals run out of beds, equipment and medicines. Each infected person is likely to infect more than two people they encounter. It's not influenza, which has a much lower fatality rate.

Because of a slow initial response by officials, the United States still does not have adequate numbers of test kits for the virus, allowing the virus to continue its spread. Although "Quarantine" signs have not gone up on people's doors, as they did in earlier smallpox and polio epidemics, limiting contacts and practicing good hygiene are essential to preventing a far greater crisis.

Covid-19 is said to be especially hazardous for people 65 and older, especially those with heart or lung disease or a compromised immune system. As an older-than-65 man with a not-noticeable heart condition, I am paying close attention to this corona virus. I'm not panic-buying Clorox or toilet paper, but I am washing my hands more often and more carefully than in the past.

I am also hoping for government leaders to be more transparent, empathetic, honest, scientific, prepared and trustworthy in the future.
 

Sanctuaries for constitutional amendments? Really?

This post was originally posted in the Wilson Times on March 7, 2020.

The Wilson County Board of Commissioners has joined a number of other local governments in passing a resolution declaring the county to be a “Second Amendment Sanctuary.” Local governments in North Carolina and other states have passed sanctuary resolutions at the urging of a nationwide movement to declare the Second Amendment in need of sanctuary, refuge, haven, shelter, safety, protection (to list several of the synonyms for sanctuary in a thesaurus). This newspaper has weighed in with its support of the resolution.

I’m still wondering: Why?

The Second Amendment is, after all, a key element of the U.S. Constitution, which North Carolina ratified Nov. 21,1789. The Second Amendment has withstood 231 years without embellishment or special protections. Some county commissioners pointed out that they had sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution (including the Second Amendment).

If Second Amendment advocates are getting cities and counties across the country to impose a “sanctuary” status for one amendment, will fans of other amendments demand sanctuary for their favorite amendments? As a religious person as well as a long-time journalist and loudmouth, I am partial to the First Amendment. Does it need sanctuary? Well, why not?

The Second Amendment is pretty narrowly written. It protects the right to “keep and bear arms” because “a well-regulated militia” is “necessary to the security of a free state.” Supreme Court decisions of the past 50 years have pretty much ignored the militia clause and focused on the “keep and bear arms” alone. But this interpretation that broadens the amendment and extends the right to bear arms to those not in the militia. So why does it need sanctuary status?

It seems to me the First Amendment is in far more imminent danger than the Second Amendment. The president of the United States has declared journalists to be “the enemies of the people” and routinely calls respected news organizations “fake news.” Polls show that younger people, in particular, don’t think a free press or free speech is very important. They say it would be OK for the president to shut down newspapers he doesn’t like, the way dictators do. A lobbying group works to protect Americans “from religion,” instead of the First Amendment’s freedom of religion. Without the support of voters, freedom of the press is in real danger.

Maybe sanctuaries should be declared for the Third Amendment because, despite a surge in appreciation of military members and veterans, no one wants the government to quarter soldiers in private homes without the owner’s permission. The military is facing a housing shortage and lawsuits over toxic substances in military housing, so dumping the Third Amendment might seem sensible to Congress.

Fourth Amendment injunctions against unreasonable searches and seizures cause frequent controversies and criticism. Many are certain that accusal is tantamount to conviction, so why worry about how evidence was obtained?

This sanctuary city/county movement started in response to crackdowns on illegal immigration. Some churches offered sanctuary to illegal immigrants because ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) was reluctant to force its way into houses of worship to make arrests. Some cities went further. They refused to cooperate with ICE or allow agents to make arrests.

I thought the tragic war of 1861-65 settled the primacy of federal law over local and state statutes. The States’ Rights crowd lost that war, but 150 years later some cities are determined to defy the federal government.

Sanctuary for constitutional amendments do not violate the Constitution and aren’t likely to lead to war, but they are and would be redundancies and distractions from more imminent threats.

Advocates for these sanctuaries should remember, as I’ve written many times, that the rights enumerated in the Constitution are not absolute. Freedom of the press is limited by libel laws and privacy. Free speech is limited by laws against slander and inciting a riot.

Even the Second Amendment (with or without sanctuary) can be limited by the scale of “arms” one wishes to bear. The courts are not likely to allow people to “bear” an atomic bomb, a B-52 or a shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile. A local “sanctuary” won’t change that.

Democratic leader threatens Supreme Court justices

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer made a direct, premeditated attack on two members of the U.S. Supreme Court two days ago (March 4). Although Schumer has tried to "walk back" his language and claim that he was criticizing Republican members of the Senate and not the justices, his excuses fall flatter than a guilty kindergartner's forced apology.

What Schumer said was: "I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions." There is no way to say you were talking about someone else (GOP senators) when you have identified your targets by name. Nor is it permissible to excuse your threat by saying "I'm from Brooklyn; we talk that way."

Even a full, sincere, meaningful apology (which Schumer has not provided) can undo the damage he has done. Democrats and many independents are dismayed by President Trump's attacks on federal judges, but Schumer's remarks are, if anything, worse than Trump's. Has Schumer caught whatever viral meanness that infects Trump? Has he decided he needs to be tougher, so he'll threaten the lives of Supreme Court justices? Does he think attacking justices who might vote to allow abortion restrictions helps his party solidify the women's vote?

Schumer has to apologize — really apologize — to Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Wearing a hair shirt and flagellating himself would be appropriate. Begging forgiveness on bended knee might be helpful. He needs to do this not for Gorsuch and Kavanaugh; he needs to do it for the integrity of the U.S. Senate, for the independence of the federal courts, and for the rule of law.

Chief Justice John Roberts has twice in the past year admonished elected officials about improper and dangerous criticism of federal judges. Roberts' criticism of President Trump for his frequent attacks on judges and courts was not surprising. Roberts' calling out of Schumer was necessary after the minority leader's incredible breach of propriety.

Democracy battles against latest technology

This post originally appeared in the Feb. 29, 2020 edition of the Wilson Times.

Starting in 507 B.C.E. ancient Athenians created democracy, putting government in the hands of the people (demos in Greek). Democratic principles that began 2,500 years ago now are being ravaged by new technology that raises doubts about elections, the basis of democracy.

A generation after Ronald Reagan declared that democracy was ascendant and that autocrats’ authoritarian rule would be consigned to “the dust bin of history,” it looks like the autocrats are winning again. China, shrouded in the Communist Party’s absolute rule, has become the world’s second largest economy. Russia has recovered from its post-Soviet collapse and is reclaiming territory the czars had ruled. Authoritarian regimes only have to raise doubts about elections to delegitimize democracies.

One has to wonder: Can democracy survive in a world of social media, computer hacking, viral videos (sometimes faked), robotic social media posts, disinformation and unchallenged falsehoods?

When American democracy began in the 18^th century, it guaranteed freedom of speech and of the press. Voters kept up with public issues and candidates through newspapers and personal contacts. The Athenians’ democracy was direct — each citizen could present proposals and vote on them. The former British colonists of America created a representative democracy, a republic, through which the people chose others to lead the government and make decisions.

The internet and social media have made it possible for citizens to access nearly limitless information to help them make decisions, but not all information is accurate or true. Unscrupulous people and organizations have been quick to take advantage of the gaps in digital communications and spew misinformation, disinformation and lies to gullible people whose votes decide which candidates shall run the government.

U.S. Intelligence officials have concluded the Russian government used Facebook and other new media to help sway the 2016 presidential race. Intelligence now says the Russians are meddling in the 2020 presidential race, and other foreign powers may also be finagling with our democracy.

Some domestic parties have decided to adopt the disinformation campaigns of foreign enemies to aid candidates in elections. In the March issue of The Atlantic, McKay Coppins documents efforts by the Trump reelection campaign to mislead and misinform voters in order to sway their votes or to so confuse them that they don’t vote. It seems increasingly likely that both major parties will adopt disinformation campaigns using sophisticated data collections to aid their candidates. Falsehoods and misleading assertions will be part of these campaigns. Newspapers, which had tried to keep politicians honest by fact-checking their statements and revealing unethical tactics, are so weakened and the digital universe is so vast that news organizations cannot keep up. The media and reporters are also being targeted in campaigns aimed at sowing distrust of news media.

Meanwhile, election officials are worried that the voting process itself might be compromised. Touch-screen voting terminals are considered vulnerable to hackers and are being replaced by machines that produce a paper copy of votes, but even that might not be sufficient to stop a determined hacker.

If dishonest posts on social media and potential foreign computer hacking were not enough, our democracy also must deal with protracted primary campaigns with as many as two-dozen candidates on one debate stage — another gift of recent technology. Candidates abandon debate to viciously attack the integrity, morals and qualifications of other candidates, offering little information about candidates’ policies and abilities.

In the 2016 GOP debates, Donald Trump insulted and belittled other candidates, violating unwritten rules of decorum and decency. The party did nothing to stop his tirades, which were adopted by other candidates. It appears the Democrats are tolerating the same suicidal tactics this year.

Democratic primary advertising is for Republicans

 Democratic voters in North Carolina are receiving a lot of advertising touting one Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate against another Democrat. The persistent and frequent ads call on voters to choose Erica Smith as the party nominee to oppose Republican incumbent Thom Tillis.

GOP flier in Democratic primary

The ads praise Smith as a true Democrat who favors such programs as "Medicare for All" — a plan touted presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders — while attacking fellow Democrat Cal Cunningham for opposing the Sanders plan, which has been under attack for its lack of specifics and its extraordinarily high costs. Democratic presidential candidates are divided on "Medicare for All."

The flier shows a photo of Cunningham with the headline "ZERO" juxtaposed against a picture of Smith with the headline "HERO."

What Democratic voters aren't being told is that the pernicious ads are being paid for and designed by a Republican political action committee. The fine print says, "Paid for by Faith and Power PAC. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee ..." You can Google the PAC and confirm that it is a Republican super PAC (donors' names are kept secret) controlled by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

So why are Republicans surreptitiously supporting Erica Smith? Likely because they see her as a weaker candidate than Cal Cunningham, who is being supported by a Democratic Senate PAC.

Any Democrats who take the advice of the mail-out will be aiding the Republican Party in a classic case of election interference. Ms. Smith has denounced the GOP support, but she cannot stop their relentless campaign, which is not illegal under current law.

Both Democrats and Republicans should condemn tactics such as this one, but it looks like this is becoming "the new normal" unless Congress and the Federal Election Commission act to put a stop to dishonest political advertising such as this other-party interference in a U.S. Senate campaign.