All U.S. officers know government papers must be preserved

 The uproar over an FBI raid on ex-president Donald Trump's home and club in Florida has riled the loyal Trump fans, who sound apoplectic in their in their defense of Trump's removal of documents from the White House in violation of various federal laws. Presidential paperwork is the property of the United States government, not of any current or former occupant of the Oval Office. 

    As a former U.S. Coast Guard officer, I was made painfully aware of the importance of keeping confidential documents secured behind lock and key. The Officer Candidate School that I attended made sure that all of my classmates and I knew better than to leave a classified file on your desktop, or in your car or in your home. Confidential documents must be kept secure at all times.

    Failure to follow security  protocol could result in taking a seat at "the long, green table, as one colorful OCS instructor would remind every class. That table is a courts martial before a group of senior editors who would enforce the rules and the UCMJ, the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Most offices had a designated safe for the keeping of confidential records. 

    According to news reports and judicial documents, Trump took dozens of boxes of government paperwork from the White House and dropped them in various places in Trump's Mare Lago resort. Many of the documents The U.S. Archives asked for were classified or secret documents, which should have been taken directly to the Archives, which every president since Nixon has done obediently in accordance with the law. But Trump has again shown that he sees himself as more of a king than a president, as someone who is above the law. The Archives quietly reminded Trump and his staff that he was required to turn in any documents he had from his presidency. When he didn't respond to these reminders, the Justice Department followed up with a subpoena for the absconded records. 

    Although Trump and his mouthpieces tried to cast the FBI raid to retrieve the property as a Gestapo-style invasion of privacy. But the raid was approved, per ordinary practice, with a summary paperwork to justify taking the records that belonged to the government. A federal judge approved the search warrant, following the Fourth Amendment, which also applies to Trump, whether as president or as private citizen.

    Every U.S. officer, military or civilian, is bound by these laws, and, whether he likes it or not, so is Trump.

 

Journalists must publish the truth

 

I have followed and read James Fallows’ work as a reporter and a critic since at least the Carter administration. He has written for The Atlantic magazine for most of that period, but he has also served as a foreign correspondent, trying to understand China, and as a researcher looking for commonalities and conflicts among Americans from different regions and with different life experiences

In recent years, he has offered his perspectives at his own online subscription service, “Breaking the News.” He has recently written about the problems in America’s deeply divided electorate and elected officials. Politics has long been heated, but it has recently dissolved into insults, threats and violence. Fallows offered a number of reforms in government and at the individual level to calm the political storm and preserve America’s democracy.

America has become less democratic as restrictions on voting, including reducing the numbers and accessibility of polling stations, and gerrymandered election districts. The no-compromise, hate the other side attitude of many politicians and the willingness to dissemble and lie about issues makes already volatile political campaigns a witches’ brew that threatens the survival of American democracy.

I was surprised but shouldn’t have been that Fallows includes the news media among those institutions that need reform in order to salvage democracy.

His complaint is not about “fake news” or the demise of local newspapers. Fallows thinks journalists need to rethink the way they report the news. For most of the 20^th century, most reporters and editors followed an unofficial code of ethics that demanded absolute neutrality. Throughout my career as an editor, as I followed the ethics code, I demanded that reporters not participate in politics, beyond voting in elections. Journalists could not remain neutral if they ran for public office or if they worked on or advised political campaigns. This neutrality served journalism well for nearly 100 years, defeating the 19^th century system in which newspapers were openly partisan, even adopting a party’s name, such as the Arkansas Democrat.

The result, Fallows says, is a system that allows misconduct and outright lies to be used without any correction by the Fourth Estate. Reporters have been taught to report “both sides of the story.” This process has been extended to television interviews, where a panel of four or more commentators discuss an issue; the panel will be balanced, two on one side of an issue and two on the other.

But not all news stories come with two convenient sides. If a man is charged with kidnapping and child molesting and is convicted by a jury, would you need to call a psychiatrist to explain why the man is not really responsible? Similarly, if a political candidate declares before election day that if he doesn’t win, he will not concede and will accuse his opponent of voter fraud. If he then rejects the legitimacy of his opponent’s certified win and continues to claim his opponent cheated, even though a series of court decisions, in response to the aggrieved candidate’s claims, found no evidence of election fraud, journalists should point out the legitimate facts of election fairness.

With certainty that the aggrieved candidate has lied about election fraud, shouldn’t news outlets deny the suing candidate an implicit legitimacy by giving him/her an opportunity to tout his/her debunked claims?

Lax laws, powerful lobbyists make massacres frequent

How long, O Lord, how long?

The latest American mass shooting, which killed 19 children and two teachers in a school in Uvalde, Texas, has parents wondering and worrying over the safety of their children and the inability of our political system to do anything about it.

The May 24 Texas shooting followed by ten days the shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, N.Y. that killed ten. Less than halfway through 2022, America has recorded 213 mass shootings. America leads the world in mass shootings, which is a perverse way of "making America great again." Yeah, we lead the world in slaughtering children.

The usual hand wringing can be heard throughout Congress, but nearly all predictions show that the 90+ percent of the public who favor reasonable gun legislation, such as requiring background checks on persons purchasing a deadly firearm, but Congress can't seem to find enough members to even bring such legislation to the floor. 

The so-called Gun Lobby, led by the National Rifle Association, opposes any infringement on the Second Amendment, which was passed by our forebears in order to ensure the future of "a well-regulated militia." A gun lobby that allows mass shootings to continue is NOT a "well-regulated militia." Gun enthusiasts oppose all forms of restrictions or regulations on firearms. Even a simple registration and licensing system, such as is required nationwide for automobile purchases and use. Deaths by firearms have recently surpassed deaths by car crashes. Federal safety efforts have reduced the frequency of traffic deaths, but firearm deaths can't be considered by our "Congress For Sale" system as the NRA and other advocacy groups send millions of dollars to members of Congress who are willing to ignore the slaughter of American children.

Two years ago, I wrote about a proposal for a "We  the People Amendment," the gist of which is that America's sacred freedoms and rights should be reserved for America's people, not the corporations, associations, advocacy groups, or clubs. This simple amendment would put an immediate stop to the buying of Congress. Spoiler Alert: Congress will not pass a new amendment that hinders members' cash flow.

The First Amendment ensures a person's right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, but that right should not extend to labor unions, fraternal organizations, corporations, partnerships or clubs, only to living, breathing humans. Implementation of this amendment would stop lobbyists from controlling legislation. It would require individuals from both the left and right to do their own lobbying. And it would no longer allow members of Congress to ignore the will of the people in favor of lobbyists, the Gun Lobby, Big Oil, Big Pharma, and all the other pressure groups that have adjusted to the current system. The attack ads that take over television, Internet and social media each election cycle would rapidly wither away, banned from supporting the interests of organizations that are not human beings.

The "We The People Act" would not solve all the problems we face, but it would at least put the people on a level with the deep-pocketed organizations that oppose actions the general public — the humans — favor.

Politicians would have less reason to cuddle with the Gun Lobby and more reason to aid the grieving parents whose children have been sacrificed to the well-heeled Gun Lobby and other, similar non-human forces perverting the First Amendment.

Elephants, in memory and literature

Three days after the funeral for Ron Taylor, the New York Times posted an article that made me think of Ron, a church musician, amateur actor and playwright and fiction writer, who had helped establish the Wilson Writers Group. Perhaps the most significant accomplishment in the few years that Ron was part of the writers’ group was the publication of his children’s book, titled “The Day Buttercup Played Hooky From the Circus.” He said the idea of the book simply came to him, unbidden, one day, and he wrote it down. Often humorous, the book can appeal to adults as well as children.

My introduction to the Writers Group in 2017 included a presentation by  Dawn Reno Langley, a successful N.C. writer who offered advice to the aspiring authors in the public library’s assembly room. Ms. Langley’s book, “The Mourning Parade,” focuses on elephants in an elephant sanctuary in Thailand. Natalie DeAngelo packs up her life and heads to Thailand as a volunteer veterinarian, hoping to assuage her anguish over the senseless deaths of her two sons back in the United States. The novel portrays elephants as sensate, emotional creatures with highly developed social and familial organization.

The New York Times on Wednesday published an article about a video showing a group of elephants joining together in the wild to mourn with members of their herd, going so far as lifting up a deceased calf to carry to a place for burial.

The newspaper article certainly validates Ms. Langley’s view of elephants as sentient, wise creatures with principles of caring and group mourning similar to humans’ practices.

Ron’s children’s book is simpler than either Ms. Langley’s novel or the N.Y. Times’ fascinating report on elephant behavior. “Buttercup” is about a circus elephant who slips away from his handler. The little boy standing nearby becomes the elephant’s handler, and the two go on a mid-morning hike through town with hilarious results.

Ron would love to know that even the N.Y. Times agrees that elephants are intelligent, thinking, loving animals who have emotions much like our own. “The Mourning Parade” in Langley’s book title refers to the reaction of sanctuary elephants when an elephant died. Ron’s book was not based on hours or years of research; it was based on love and humor that came from his creative imagination.

As elephants disappear from circuses and zoos, leave it to writers like Dawn Langley and Ron Taylor, and the NY Times, to remind the world that these endangered, intelligent, and loving animals are sharing this earth with us.

        

Don't hesitate to share bad news

 

Let me make this clear: If you are seriously ill, particularly with a terminal illness, do not hesitate. Let people know. Especially let your family know. Don’t be shy. Don’t assume they would not care or would only have their lives disrupted.

 

Tell them. Don’t procrastinate. If the news is too painful to talk about, send an email or a text. Send a hand-written letter. Ask a family member to spread the news. Do whatever you must, but Let People Know.

 

I mention this because an unexpected phone call this week informed my wife and me that my brother-in-law was terminally ill with cancer. His caregiver said he’d been diagnosed a few months ago. We were not informed. Now he’s in unbearable pain most of the day and cannot receive visitors. His caregiver expects his death in a few days, maybe only hours. He lives a four-hour drive away.

 

We appreciate the call; we are glad someone remembered to let us know. We deeply regret that, because of his condition, we cannot offer comfort or sympathy with an in-person visit. We cannot reminisce with him. We cannot share a funny story with him, although our relationship over nearly 50 years has always been light-hearted as we shared jokes and humorous observations.

 

This pattern of not telling family members sad news, especially about illnesses, has a long history in my family. A dozen years ago, my sister-in-law was diagnosed with terminal cancer. We found out about it through a Facebook post, which was vague and unrevealing. Should we go to visit her (a day’s drive away) or not? We never got an answer to the question we were reluctant to ask. Only when she died did I receive a call from my grief-stricken brother.

 

Another branch of the family adhered to our mother’s family’s tradition: Be stoic, don’t complain, don’t tell people outside the family. When my sister received a frightening diagnosis eight years ago, she swore her husband and daughters to silence about her condition. They didn’t break the code, but one niece sent a message to my brother, saying only, “Call your sister.” When he made that call (and then I made a similar call), we learned that she had terminal cancer. As a result, we had few opportunities to talk to her, reminisce, and express love and thankfulness for her life. She died one month after diagnosis.

 

So, please, if your news is bad, that’s all the more reason to share it. There is nothing to hide and everything to gain. No one likes being the bearer of bad news, but bad news is better than no news at all.

 

This article was written June 9, 2021. I spoke by telephone to my brother-in-law three times and had "just like old times" conversations about music (he was an avid collector of record albums), our lives, times we spent together, and our mutual feeling of helplessness against illness. They were good conversations, and he told me twice, "you don't know how much this means to  me."

 

To both of us.
 

He died in October, and we attended a somber, empty-feeling funeral.
Let people know!

 

 

I've awakened in the wrong year

 

Ever wake up in the morning not able to remember what day it is?

It happened to me this morning, only I couldn’t remember what YEAR it is. Is this September 1939 or is it October 1962?

 

            The Russian invasion of Ukraine with images of long lines of tanks and other military weaponry brings memories of the black-and-white photos of German tanks carrying out the blitzkrieg that would end with the obliteration of Poland and the world’s most destructive war ever. The excuses of 1939 ("living room" for Germans and international acceptance of Germany's expansions) are similar to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s revisions of history in a speech earlier this week, when he claimed Ukraine wasn’t really a sovereign nation, only a benevolent creation by the Kremlin and “Mother Russia.” Ukrainians don’t exist, Putin was claiming; they are all Russians or Russian cousins, who should be glad to be defended by Russia’s cultural, historical, economic and legal protections.

 

            Sanctions levied by the United States, the UK and the European Union are imposing painful costs on Russia’s government, military and population. Russia appears to be behind cyber attacks on western countries and Ukraine’s government. Meanwhile, Russian tanks and weaponry remain in Ukraine, leaving me with the feeling I’ve awakened in the fall of 1939.

 

Or is it 1962, when all Americans feared for their lives and for the survival of their country. Russian ballistic missiles stationed in Cuba were capable of dropping nuclear bombs on the lower half of the United States. I was 13 years old at the time, and I can still feel the fear and anxiety I and my eighth grade classmates felt. “This is a day we will always remember,” one classmate told me over our lunch table. He was right.

 

In the case of 1962, President John F. Kennedy and the Soviet Union’s Premier Nikita Khruschev came to their senses and stepped away from a nuclear war that would destroy both countries and most of the rest of Planet Earth. In one sense, the 1962 crisis was more dangerous than the current one. Two nuclear-armed countries threatened to destroy the other in the 1960s term for hair’s breadth safety built on fear: MAD — Mutually Assured Destruction.

 

In 2022, we’re only concerned about one country, Ukraine, which Russia now asserts is not a country at all, as its tanks and other weapons shred Ukraine’s claim of sovereignty.

 

But it’s not just one country. All countries in Europe know the history of frequent wars on the continent for centuries. After World War II, Europeans, with assistance from the United States, put together strategies for avoiding future ground wars in Europe: NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, with each member nation pledging to come to the aid of any member nation that is attacked from outside NATO; and the European Union, which aimed to make European nations’ economies dependent on other European countries.

 

Putin despises NATO and the E.U. and would love to see both organizations collapse. Invading Ukraine and demanding that Ukraine would never join NATO feeds Putin’s long-term strategy: A weak, divided Europe that can be easily emasculated by Putin or easily invaded and annexed — a ploy that cannot be allowed in a civilized world.

E Pluribus Get Lost

 "E Pluribus Unum" was adopted as the motto of the United States in 1776 by a few men whose name you might remember: Franklin, Adams and Jefferson. The Latin translates as "From many, one." It's on money and on the Great Seal of the United States.

But is it still a true statement? These "United" States are anything but united, anything but one great nation "with liberty for all." The member states, spread "from sea to shining sea" are different in many ways — in population numbers, in racial and ethnic origins, in political affiliation, in wealth and natural resources, in religious beliefs or non-beliefs, in how they define key words such as liberty, justice, fairness, equality, personal responsibility, international relations, and so on.

Instead of speaking with one voice and belief in certain basic principles of government, the USA is not unified, it is as divided as it has ever been in its history. The founders of 1776 would expect today's leaders, the members of Congress and the executive branch, should be focusing their interests and time on reuniting the nation, making it Unum again.

But that is not going to happen. Both parties (George Washington warned us in his farewell address against the dangers of political parties) are pushing agendas to increase the power of their own parties.

Members of Congress hold great power, and the presidency is often described as the "most powerful office in the world." They should all be focused not on power for their partisan interests but for unity and common cause for all Americans.

This country is so divided that some citizens think the last presidential election is still undetermined a year after voting ended in that race. A former president keeps his divisive, disproven, litigated and found false claim of a "stolen" election. His constant repetition of his lies about election results endangers all future elections as segments of the electorate have come to doubt the honesty of all elections. Trust in elections is the beating heart of democracy, and this democracy can die if we let it.

 It can be argued that the political office holders, the public officials of this singular nation, are not the real power brokers. The 535 members of Congress (including the Senate) are not as powerful, some would say, as the hundreds of ultra-wealthy individuals and large corporations who "buy" influence on Capitol Hill. Their money makes possible the power of the members of Congress, who may spend half their time asking for money from donors. This makes the United States beholden not to the common good but to the narrow interests. On the most important of issues, elected officials willingly vote against the interests of the people who elected them and vote for the narrow interests of individuals and corporations who accept gun violence on the nation's streets, permit the spoiling of nature and ruining of our water and our atmosphere, and look away when huge numbers of Americans are addicted to drugs being distributed by giant corporations with full knowledge that the pain killers they manufacture are addictive and ultimately fatal.

E Pluribus Unum can only have meaning if Congress, legislatures and voters focus on what is best for everyone, not just the few who have grown wealthy from ignoring what is best for everyone.

Will anti-vaxxers be the death of us, or just of our children?

As public schools reopen  across the United States, there is more at stake than transportation and teaching. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have issued guidelines for schools reopening as the Covid19 pandemic remains a threat to public health and human life.

The delta variant of  the corona virus is rampaging through populations around the world. In the United States, a number of states are experiencing frightening new outbreaks of Covid19. Some jurisdictions are reporting infections among a most unexpected population: young children. The initial manifestation of this virus struck especially hard in elderly populations. As a result of that danger, the elderly have become the largest demographic of the vaccinated.

Young children have only recently been seriously endangered by the virus, which seemed to prefer older populations. The vaccines that have slowed the spread of this disease and have given confidence to vaccinated older residents. The vaccines are still not approved for children under twelve.

As schools reopen, local  school boards are deciding whether to follow CDC guidelines urging that face masks be required for students and staff in hopes of preventing a surge in Covid infections. Officials are deciding whether to require masks in K-12 schools or to follow the anti-vaxx activists who have never trusted vaccines despite the history of successful and miraculous vaccines such as polio, smallpox and influenza. The Covid vaccines could join this esteemed crowd if only the holdouts will stop blocking people from getting the vaccine because of conspiracy theories and outright lies about the safety and success of the Covid19 vaccines.

In North Carolina, school districts that have withheld support for the vaccine among the entire population are rejecting proposals that all students and staff wear face masks until the virus is brought  under control. Citing "freedom," some school officials prefer making face masks optional as a matter of personal choice. The Wilson County school board has narrowly approved a mask requirement for all students.

The freedom the anti-mask crowd  prefers is the freedom to let young children die. They are too young to be vaccinated, and thereby are helpless against the the spread of the virus. Yes, the children can wear their own masks under the optional mask proposal, but they cannot force others to wear masks. What the anti-vaxxers are overlooking is the virus' ability to leap from one child or adult to another, person, even an asymptomatic patient. One unmasked student could infect an entire classroom, and those children could take the  virus  home with them and infect family, neighbors and others. The best hope for all children and staff is to have everyone wear a mask, thwarting the virus' natural hunt for unprotected victims until enough of the population is vaccinated to produce "herd immunity," when the virus runs out of vulnerable people.

Until then, a "masks optional" policy is is not freedom; it is homicide. Don't make school a death trap.

Cooperation, planning made vaccination effort efficient

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Jan. 22, 2021.

 

            The path to COVID-19 virus vaccination began at home. We saw the notices about a mobile vaccination event at Fike High School Tuesday, Jan. 19. The question, “should we or shouldn’t we?” took a while to sort out.

            The organizers of the Fike drive-through vaccination plan were reassuring in their careful details for getting thousands of Wilson County residents inoculated against the virus that has killed 400,000 Americans in less than a year.

It was never a question of whether to be vaccinated. The debate, which continued to Tuesday morning at our house, was whether we wanted to spend hours and hours in line for a shot in the arm or postpone a vaccination and risk our health. Our children urged us to get vaccinated NOW.

            Our slight reluctance about joining the event at Fike was based, at least in part, on the four hours we spent waiting to cast our vote on the first day of early voting back in October. The instructions from the Health Department to bring water and snacks, as if you’re going on a very long hike, didn’t reassure me.

We discussed strategies for dealing with the expected long lines. A WRAL aerial video showing a long line of jammed traffic approaching Fike nearly scared us away. Later, we heard that someone, in his eagerness to get the vaccine, had had gotten in line at 3:30 a.m.

            Our tentative strategy for the vaccination clinic was to wait until the first wave of patients had time to get through the procedure. With luck, I thought, the first recipients of the vaccine would leave the Fike parking lot by 10 or 11 a.m. So we packed enough food and water to keep us hydrated and nourished through late afternoon.

            We left our house, less than a mile from Fike, about 10:30 and were pleasantly surprised to see that the expected traffic jams had not reached Nash Street. After a quick debate over the best route to Ward Boulevard, we fell into line behind a string of cars just past the traffic cones and the police directing cars to Harrison Drive.

            I kept a log on my phone that shows we reached Harrison Drive at 10:44. At 10:53, the line was moving slowly. I’ve seen worse traffic jams on I-540. Much worse. The car radio was tuned to NPR, which was interviewing a 12-year-old about how to heal America’s divisions. Really? I thought. (Please forgo your “OK Boomer” responses.) At 11, we reached the Fike property, and at 11:10 we switched the radio to 89.5 FM; the station provided helpful instructions to people headed to the vaccination clinic. The instructions were clear and simple.

            We put on our facemasks as we approached volunteers checking on participants .At 11:15, we had our first contact with the volunteers and public employees running the clinic. Each of us received a green wristband, signifying we would get the vaccine. We put on our facemasks. A volunteer in his fluorescent vest pointed to a discarded paper facemask on the sidewalk and made known his disgust for the litterer. At 11:20, we entered the parking lot and could see a beehive of activity ahead of us. At 11:30, our arms were checked for the wristband. We knew we were getting close, and we relaxed as we listened to an NPR story about F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel “The Great Gatsby.”

            At 11:40, we received our vaccinations. The only difficulty was in extracting my upper arm from the warm clothing I wore, having expected to be trapped for hours in a cold car. I wriggled free from three layers, and we continued on through the parking lot, following instructions along the way. At 11:55, we were checked for any negative reaction from the vaccine. None noted. We departed Fike onto Harrison Boulevard at noon.

            In October, we had stood in a four-block line to vote. It took about four hours. In contrast, we got our vaccines and were back home in less than two hours. The entire event was well planned and coordinated with law enforcement, the Health Department, EMS, and dozens of volunteers working together to make the clinic safe, efficient and pleasant. It’s amazing what can be accomplished when we all work together! Thanks to all who participated and made this much easier than I ever expected.

            We have appointments for our second dose in February. We look forward to more of the dazzling cooperation, efficient planning and helpful assistance we experienced with the first dose. It was easy to protect ourselves and others from COVID-19. I recommend it to all.

Frightening siege of Capitol stirs pleasant memories

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Jan. 15, 2021

 

            The frightening siege of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 left me feeling much the same way I did after the 9-11 attack — drained, grieving, angry, eager to punish everyone responsible. I wanted to gather my children — all gone from our home in 2001 and in college or at jobs. I could not pull them together and wrap my arms around them in a senseless effort to keep them safe.

            Last week’s insurrection made me feel the same way, but it also sparked a different reaction. The rioters on Jan. 6 desecrated the Capitol, the temple of American democracy, the globally recognized symbol of American principles and strength. The rioters, calling themselves patriots, did all they could to ruin that building for whom most visitors, including me, felt awe, pride and sacred respect.

            They paraded through the great Rotunda carrying banners and flags like barbarians laying siege to Rome and carrying weapons like a conquering army; they broke windows and doors, ignoring the historic value in the 220-year-old Capitol; they smeared chemicals or other substances on the statues of great national leaders in Statuary Hall; the chemicals they sprayed damaged magnificent, priceless paintings hanging on the Capitol’s walls; like pre-teens reveling in their immaturity, they live-streamed their haughty contempt for a republic that has stood for 240 years.

            Perhaps worst of all, they defecated on stone and marble floors of the Capitol, showing that they have no more respect or manners than wild animals. They laughed at the damage they were doing. The one positive was their insouciance. The videos and photos they took show them parading through a felonious crime scene. Law enforcement agencies are identifying and charging them based on the prideful evidence they left.

            When I worked in Washington 1972-1975, I visited the Capitol several times, took visiting relatives there, telling them it was my favorite building in D.C. I loved the grandeur of the building. In those quieter times, before the rise of international and domestic terrorism, the Capitol was pretty much wide open. You could climb the steps on the East Front or the West Front of the Capitol, go inside, marvel at the beautiful construction of granite and marble, the rotunda soaring to the Capitol dome, the huge paintings of events in the founding of the United States and other historic times.

            It was the most impressive and humbling building in the nation’s capital. The rise of terrorism in the past 40 years forced changes in access to the Capitol; a new underground visitors center made it possible to screen visitors and prohibit suicide bombers or gunmen, but visitors were denied the feeling of walking up those Capitol steps and entering the iconic building.

            The Jan. 6 insurrection and plans of some of the same groups to disrupt Joe Biden’s inauguration made me remember the novel “Guns of the South” by Harry Turtledove. His 1992 book combines historical fiction with science fiction fantasy. The book opens with the 1870 inauguration of Robert E. Lee as president of the Confederacy. The South had won the Civil War because some die-hard slaveholders found a way to time travel to 20^th Century South Africa, where they obtained AK47 rifles and the technology to make more of them. With this advantage, they defeated the United States and assassinated Lee at his inauguration, because he had endorsed freeing all slaves.

            Unless law enforcement does a better job of protecting the Capitol, Congress and the new president, we could have a challenger for Turtledove’s frightening fiction.

Use your stimulus check to do right, do good

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Jan. 12, 2021

 

Have you received your stimulus check? Have you spent it? Did you take the money and run, spending the U.S. Treasury funds on something too frivolous for hard-earned wages? Or did you carefully consider what to do with a largely unexpected windfall and choose something useful for you and the economy?

I admit that I was a little blasé about the checks from Uncle Sam. I wasn’t going to refuse it, but I was not especially eager to get it. The so-called stimulus check is not really a check for most of us. Those of us who paid taxes out of a checking account or who received a federal tax refund directly deposited in a bank account could simply wait to see the new money show up in our accounts. So it’s not a stimulus check; it’s more of an automated funds transfer.

Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman doesn’t like the “stimulus” moniker. The aim of this transfer of funds is not to stimulate the economy, he has written; its aim is to help the economy and many households recover from the ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic. This economic downturn is not a monetary problem like a housing crisis or a stock market collapse, Krugman says, it’s more like a natural disaster, such as an earthquake or a hurricane that devastates an area where the disaster occurred. Just as the federal government provides relief after a hurricane, it should provide relief for economic disasters, too, to prevent worse consequences.

One reason for my lack of eagerness about that check was the uncertainty about the government money. Long after the problem was recognized and legislation was drafted to allocate the money, Congress and the White House could not agree on the size of the stimulus (or whatever) checks (or transfers). And then President Trump, who had not been an active participant in the negotiations over the relief package, demanded $2,000 per person checks, not the $600 checks Congress had written into the bill passed by the House and Senate. So I wasn’t really expecting money when I saw it — $600 each for my wife and me, who file our taxes jointly, in the bank account.

What should we do with it? A relative recounted boastfully over the summer that he had spent the first stimulus checks approved in March by stimulating the economy. He spent all his stimulus money, plus some more, hiring local firms to make long-postponed repairs to his house.

Our stimulus checks will also go into the local economy, the nonprofit economy. Having worked for two nonprofits, I know what a struggle it is to raise money for good causes. Nonprofits have been hit hard by the pandemic. Some reliable fundraisers could not be held because of pandemic restrictions. Donors who were out of work or who were tightening their household budgets gave less during the pandemic. United Way of Wilson County suffered a $500,000 decline in donations this year. The Salvation Army has closed its Wilson branch.

My wife and I recognize that these nonprofits and their clients are more in need than we are, we’ll give away our CARES Act windfall and provide a stimulus to local and regional nonprofit organization.

If, like us, you have “enough” to see you through, spend your stimulus checks in the nonprofit sector where it’s really needed. Join us.

‘All enemies, foreign and domestic …’

 

All enemies, foreign and domestic ... Every member of the U.S. Armed Forces swears an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies. Don’t overlook the domestic enemies.

 

The storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 by an unruly but well rehearsed mob has shaken America’s trust in its institutions and traditions. Repeatedly, the scene of scruffy-looking insurgents breaking windows and doors to the Capitol and overwhelming understaffed Capitol police was described as similar to “banana republics”, former Soviet republics or struggling Middle East states. These were not the scenes Americans and allies have associated with the United States of America, the world’s oldest and most successful republic.

 

In only a couple of hours Wednesday, America’s pride in its successful foundation of free and fair elections, peaceful transition of power, and checks and balances among three branches of government was shattered by hundreds of people intent on disrupting the final certification of the presidential election.

 

Members of Congress and Capitol Hill staff were terrorized by the gun-toting, flag-waving, looting, furniture-breaking, disrespectful, smirking anti-American traitors. Some posed proudly for photos of themselves with priceless statues, artwork and furniture in the seat of America’s government. It was an attempted revolt, an unprecedented coup against the government. Damage to the Capitol was the worst since the British Army’s burning of the building during the War of 1812.

 

This insurrection was the direct result of President Donald Trump’s refusal to accept his defeat in the Nov. 3 election. Again and again Trump has claimed that the election was “rigged,” that his opponent cheated, that voting machines were manipulated against him, etc. He or his supporters filed more than 50 lawsuits in state and federal courts asserting his claims that he was the winner, “by a landslide,” but all of those lawsuits were rejected in state and federal courts, up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

Trump encouraged his blindly loyal supporters to go to Washington on Jan. 6 to protest the certification of the electoral vote. He held a rally near the White House and encouraged the huge crowd to walk to the Capitol, telling them falsely that his re-election had been “stolen” and urged followers to “fight” for a reversal of the election outcome. He declared (again) that he would “never concede.”

 

Thus inspired, the Trump followers went to the Capitol and pushed aside crowd control barriers, rushed an entrance, shoving aside the handful of Capitol Police and paraded through the most sacred parts of the Capitol, including the Senate Chamber. They had to be stopped at gunpoint from claiming the House Chamber. Members of Congress and staff were escorted to safety, but some were injured in the process, and one protester was shot and died.

 

Brave and determined, Congress chose to resume the electoral vote validation once the Capitol was secured, completing the largely routine action in the early morning Thursday. Most of the Trump sycophants who had indicated they oppose the validation changed their minds after being repulsed by the unruly Trump supporting criminals who terrified elected officials.

 

Several people have urged a strong, strict response to this breach of the U.S. Capitol, the most iconic structure in America. The people who broke into the building, destroyed windows and furnishings and mocked the sacred fixtures of this 228-year-old symbol of democracy. Security cameras throughout the Capitol complex should allow identification of the hoodlums who broke in. They should be charged with breaking and entering, theft, destruction of public and private property and any and all other appropriate offenses.

 

Prosecutors should make it clear that such wanton behavior will not be tolerated, and America will not allow rioting in government buildings. The enablers of these rioters, the senators who refused to consider impeachment charges against Trump, the members of Congress who bought into the frivolous election lawsuits and gave other support to Trump’s anti-American behavior should be shunned by Republican Party officials and by all voters. Let them pay at the ballot box.

 

Wednesday’s insurrection left me thinking about the 9-11 attacks. The Capitol was reportedly targeted by the one airplane that failed to complete its mission. The rioters did not do as much damage as the Arab terrorists would have, but the fact that these conspirators were fellow Americans makes the shock and pain worse.

 

Americans should also hold responsible those who misled gullible rioters, including those who follow wacky conspiracy theories such as QAnon. President Trump is largely responsible for stoking the flames of false claims about a stolen election, blaming Democrats and other “enemies” for Trump’s loss. Trump has repeated these lies incessantly and shows no restraint, no matter how many times courts and other organizations reject his lies. He should pay a penalty for his inflammatory lying that has endangered individual Americans and harmed democratic institutions.

 

Some members of Congress have suggested removing Trump as unable to fulfill his duties under the 25^th Amendment. Trump has only days left in his turn, so the timing would be tight. A better but perhaps more difficult solution is to impeach Trump — yes, again. His speech to the rioters before they stormed the Capitol seems to fit clearly the definition of inciting to riot. His earlier recorded telephone call asking the governor of Georgia to “find me 11,870 votes” is clearly an impeachable offense. The offenses are clear and recent, simplifying the process.

 

The timing will be difficult, but if Congress (with both chambers ruled by Democrats) could squeeze it in. If they don’t stop him via impeachment, Trump will likely pardon more criminal friends, possibly including himself and his family members. He also can issue executive actions that strike at the heart of democracy and the American system. The most important benefit of impeachment is that it would forever ban Trump from holding public office, ensuring that he will not be able to run in 2024. America cannot stand another Trump presidency.

The calendar turns once again

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Dec. 31, 2020

 

“______ New Year!” Well, we can hope it will be happy, but the only way for certain is to go ahead and live through it, happy or not so much. Surely, 2021 will be better than 2020; it can hardly be much worse than an unprecedented pandemic year.

Wilson residents will have to get used to a future without the landmark BB&T towers. The tower (just one at the time) was new when I came to Wilson 41 years ago. I got to marvel at the construction of the second tower about five years later and still later attended a meeting in the bank’s wood paneled board room on the sixth floor of the tower. The big windows provided impressive views of the city where BB&T began 130 years ago.

Although the towers ceased to be the bank’s headquarters, thanks to a 1994 bank merger that moved the executive suites to Winston-Salem, the landmark stood proudly as the tallest building along Wilson’s busiest street. Another bank merger completed in 2020 replaced the historic BB&T name.

Then a week before Christmas, the tallest buildings in town crumbled after controlled explosions turned the site into a salvage pile. Thanks you, city of Wilson, the demolition company and others who captured the impressive event on video. I shared videos with my children who grew up six blocks from the towers and with friends who had lived in Wilson.

People are eager to see what the Nash Street site will become when its revitalization plans are completed. A little farther east on Nash Street, a new Wilson Arts Center is taking shape in a former retail site. The Arts Council had earlier moved to the100-year-old BB&T headquarters, a beautiful but cramped space with more charm than practicality.

Nearby, the Vollis Simpson Whirligig Park came into its own in 2020, although the popular Whirligig Festival had to be cut back sharply because of the pandemic. 2021 could see the addition of more businesses near the park and a more vibrant downtown with residential living and expanding small businesses.

Every year, people around the world assess the world and their lives; many make new year’s resolutions, promising to do more, do better, accomplish more, help more, etc.

Resolutions are probably a good thing, but the Jan. 1 of each year is not a special date, from a scientific, religious or historic perspective. It does not mark an equinox or a solstice, which have astronomical meaning, or a historic event. It’s just a convenient date for dividing one year from another.

Dare I say it? Happy New Year. Let’s make 2021 better than 2020.

Winter Solstice, Planets Align, and Advent

 

America needs you to take vaccine

 This post was printed in the Dec. 18 edition of the Wilson Times

There! We got that taken care of. The United States and the world have a tested an effective vaccine against the COVID-19 corona virus that has disrupted our lives, destroyed our plans, ruined our vacations, increased our anxiety and caused mental health problems. And killed more than 300,000 Americans in less than a year.

            The first vaccine shots were given to health-care workers Dec. 14. Vaccine shipments are to be distributed to health care facilities across the country, giving relief from worries and renewed confidence for millions.

            But … there might be a problem. In a recent survey, 40 percent of American respondents said they would not take the vaccine. This is important because the goal of this vaccine is to create “herd immunity,” in which so great a portion of the population is vaccinated that the virus has no place to go, no new victims to infect.

            Herd immunity is achieved by having a critical mass of 87 percent of the population vaccinated. If 87 percent of the population is not vaccinated, there will be no herd immunity. Large numbers of the population will still get sick and some will die from COVID-19.

            One person’s refusal to participate in the vaccination program will affect the whole population. Attending school, going to work, going to movies and concerts, as well as church services and political/governmental events will remain risky without herd immunity. Essentially, 40 percent of the population can hold hostage 60 percent of their friends, kin and neighbors. Without herd immunity, the virus might not go away.

            Some people don’t want the vaccination because they’re squeamish about needles and shots; my late brother, for example. Diagnosed with pre-diabetes, he told his doctor, “just don’t make me take shots; I’d rather die first.”

            This is understandable, though extreme. The pain of a vaccination is usually not severe, and severe side effects are rare. Even vaccine-phobic people should be able to endure a shot. But in recent years, a people around the world have decided vaccines are dangerous. Measles vaccines were blamed for autism, although medical professionals said that was false. Still, enough parents refused to vaccinate their children that measles outbreaks returned. Some Muslim extremists in Pakistan declared polio vaccines unacceptable and violently prevented health care workers from vaccinating people.

            Wild rumors about the COVID vaccine have already begun, making it more likely that herd immunity might falter. Americans have become distrustful of federal agencies that oversee vaccine safety and myriad other matters. Public reluctance about the new vaccines is just the latest example of public distrust of government.

            Americans should be overjoyed with the distribution of the COVID vaccines. Don’t let this chance for herd immunity to a disease that has already killed 300,000 Americans be squandered.

            Think of the “common good,” the notion that some things benefit everyone and should be accepted and supported by all.

            Get your COVID-19 vaccination for your own health, for families and neighbors, for nationwide herd immunity. Just get it.

An Electoral College education

This post was published in the Wilson Times Dec. 11, 2020 

Early in my career as a newspaper editor, commentator, columnist and opinion sharer, I defended the complicated, bewildering presidential election system known as the Electoral College. My thinking was, after all, it’s been around for more than 100 years and has produced mostly unchallenged elections and mostly competent chief executives.

But this year’s presidential election has gone into double or triple overtime, and election officials have been exhausted, accused and threatened. This has led to a reconsideration of the arcane procedures set forth in the Constitution to unravel a disputed election, as well as a new look at the efficacy of the Electoral College.

The Electoral College was conceived as a way of preventing unsophisticated, perhaps ignorant, rank-and-file voters from electing the wrong man (female candidates were unheard of in those days). The Electoral College would protect the republic from a terrible mistake brought about by crass emotions. Instead of basing the election on what ordinary voters decided, an elite group of knowledgeable men (no women) would consider the vote results but then cast the only votes that really mattered, the Electoral College’s vote.

Attention to the Electoral College has been spurred by three recent presidential contests that installed someone other than the winner of the popular vote. One of the claims favoring the Electoral College in debates decades ago was the idea that the Electoral College vote forced candidates to campaign in states they might otherwise ignore. The claim was that a nationwide popular vote would ensure that candidates would spend all their time and attention on the most populated states — California, New York, and Texas, for example.

But, as former Jim Hunt aide Gary Pearce pointed out in a recent column, the focus on “battleground states” that swing the Electoral College has had the same effect, limiting the attention given to certain closely competed states. North Carolina, a “battleground state,” was one of 17 states that held 212 presidential election campaign events in 2020, according to a tally by the National Popular Vote group cited by Pearce. The other 33 states were ignored by the candidates.

The Electoral College also skews the impact of the popular vote because each state gets two Electoral votes just for being a state, regardless of population. That constitutional provision, assigning an electoral vote for each senator and congressman, inflates the impact of less populated states.

Both parties have some interest in eliminating the popular vote: Democrats have lost presidential elections despite winning the popular vote; Republicans see the popular vote as an effort to undermine the political power of traditionally GOP states.

But the Electoral College is embedded in the Constitution, meaning two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of all state legislatures would have to approve the change. I don’t see that happening any time soon.

Supreme letdown, democracy prevails

    "The  Supreme Court really let us down" was Donald Trump's reaction to Friday's U.S. Supreme Court decision rejecting an appeal led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, joined by 17 other states and 106 Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives, to invalidate the presidential election results in four "battleground" states. Twenty-two other states filed a brief challenging the premise of the lawsuit, asserting that Texas and its allies were attempting to disenfranchise voters in legally held elections in other states.

  The Supreme Court, including three of the nine members appointed by Trump himself, turned down the case, which Trump had declared was "the Big One," unlike the previous dozens of lawsuits challenging Joe Biden's election victory by a comfortable margin. Nearly all of the earlier lawsuits were dismissed by state and federal courts, often with harsh rebukes of the basic premise of the claims of election fraud, which were trumpeted without credible evidence.

    The unanimous dismissal of the "Big One" had to hurt Trump. After all, he nakedly expedited a Supreme Court appointment of a conservative Republican because he believed the Supreme Court would ultimately determine the winner of the presidential election. Only justices Alito and Thomas offered a concern, a conservative one — that the case should not have gone directly to the Supreme Court but should have been tried in lower courts. Neither justice objected to the dismissal of the case.

     It now appears likely that no future lawsuits will endanger Biden's claim to the Oval Office. Barring a military coup or armed insurrection by angry Trump loyalists, Biden will be inaugurated Jan. 20, 2021. The unnecessarily extended vote counting, appeals, recounts and partisan dismissal of legitimate voting results may finally be at an end.

    After the Supreme Court ruled, Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut declared on the Senate floor that Republicans who supported the president's election lawsuits and his support for efforts to delay or deny the results of a fair and free election should be called out for their anti-democracy actions. "You cannot, at the same time, love America and hate democracy," he said, adding that Democrats should hold the anti-democratic traitors accountable for their attempt to overthrow a legally elected government.

    If the Democrats are smart enough to follow Murphy's recommendation (an iffy proposition), they will make the actions of those who have blindly followed Trump's authoritarian, president-for-life strategy the theme of the 2022 and 2024 elections. That strategy, wisely delivered, would decimate the Republican Party.

A Christmas Season like none before

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Nov. 27, 2020

 

            This is the strangest holiday season of our lives. Thanksgiving had to be celebrated without the dining room full of family and friends. Rules imposed by a deadly pandemic limited our gatherings and our opportunities for travel. There were no group shots of all the family and guests gathered at the table or on the porch.

            The Centers for Disease Control has strongly urged people to stay home for the holidays, and some states have created obstacles to interstate travel, such as quarantine of people arriving from another where the pandemic roars. Air travel is down sharply. Who would want to confine themselves in a metal tube for an hour or more with dozens of strangers, not knowing whether they are infected?

            Christmas shopping in 2020 will be unrecognizable compared to previous years. Many people will limit their gift shopping to online only rather than search through malls and stores for that special gift. “Black Friday” sales still exist, but without large crowds jostling before displays and checkout counters. Masks are required, and social distancing makes the crowds less hazardous.

            Even Christmas’ religious roots will be challenged by this pandemic year. Churches that are usually packed for Christmas Eve services will be less crowded this year, if they are still offering in-person services at all. The pandemic has devastated churches as civil authorities imposed restrictions on crowd size. In a year when congregational singing is forbidden because of singers’ likelihood to spread the Coronavirus, will we forgo beloved Christmas carols? Will anyone “go a-caroling”?

            Many households, including mine, are curtailing Christmas decorating. The Evening Optimist Christmas tree lot, where I picked out and bought a tree year after year, is in business again but on a diminished scale. The Optimists are less optimistic about sales; they ordered fewer trees this year.

            In a year of dark pessimism, some people are fighting back with light. Daylight-Saving Time has just ended, and the earlier darkness hangs over us like a dust storm. Lights in windows, on trees, on porches, on tables, in front yards, in stores are an antidote to the bleak sadness of a holiday season lacking in brightness and joy.

            This Sunday, Nov. 29, is the first Sunday of Advent, a too-often overlooked season of the church year. It celebrates the birth of the Christ Child and offers a time of calm reflection before the excitement and stresses of Christmas Day.

            This year, Christmas gatherings will follow Thanksgiving’s pattern — canceled or greatly limited.

            Churches will celebrate the sense of anticipation during Advent, awaiting arrival of the Messiah. Advent wreaths and Advent calendars give children and adults a means of counting the days until the wait is over.

            We veterans of a pandemic that killed a quarter-million Americans will be waiting, too, waiting for the holiday seasons of 2021, by which time vaccines and therapies should have Covid-19 banished or under control, and we can gather again, sing again and feel joy again.

Senate in the spotlight, with its odd history

 

This post was published in the Wilson Times Nov. 24, 2020

 

            The climactic runoff in Georgia for two U.S. Senate seats will likely determine partisan control of the Senate. If two Democrats win, that party will, with the vice president’s vote as Senate chair, give the Democratic Party control of that chamber. If a Republican wins one of the two seats, that party will maintain control of the Senate’s agenda.

            It might be time for a refresher course on U.S. Senate history and, perhaps, a reconsideration of the Senate’s structure. The 1789 U.S. Constitution’s Article II states: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof … .”

            That is how the Senate was structured for 124 years, until the Seventeenth Amendment was ratified in 1913. The new amendment changed how senators were elected, stating: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof.” This amendment was born out of the “Populist Movement,” aimed at making individual voters the center of political power.

            Originally, the Senate essentially represented the states, which were considered sovereign and nearly equal to the federal government. The balance of power James Madison and others developed gave half of Congress to the states and half to the people.

            The Seventeenth Amendment changed that balance of power, but the slice of power reserved for the states was consumed by the popular vote. State legislatures were left without representation in Washington. Most people, especially the Populists, thought that was as it should be, foreshadowing the 1960s slogan of “All power to the people.”

            In the 21^st century, some progressive politicians saw a major flaw in the selection of senators. They see the Senate as an amplifier of power of less populated states, each of whom is rewarded two U.S. senators, regardless of the state’s population. California, the most populace state, has no more clout in the Senate than Montana or Rhode Island. That seems to conflict with the Supreme Court’s 1964 ruling that congressional districts (reflecting voter population) must be roughly equal to comply with Fourteenth Amendment’s “equal protection” clause.

            Some conservatives, such as the late James J. Kilpatrick, argued that the Seventeenth Amendment was an unwarranted change to the constitutional structure because it took away state sovereignty and elected two legislative bodies from the same electorate. Liberals dislike the Senate for a different reason: it amplifies the clout of less-populated (and more conservative) states.

            The Senate’s selection structure, critics say, is unfair to the most populated states, with millions of unequally represented voters. That Senate is able to stop legislation from the more democratic-structured House of Representatives. Because the Electoral College is allocated from the number of members of Congress plus the two senators every state gets. In this century, several presidents have won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College (the only count that counts).

Both sides can agree that something’s amiss, but as long as national politics remains sharply divided, the chances of reform are near zero.