Showing posts with label Amy Klobuchar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Amy Klobuchar. Show all posts

Monday, February 17, 2020

Democrats Fail the Ivory Soap Purity Test

Bernie Sanders is a socialist who flies around the country in private jets. While head of the Senate Judiciary Committee Joe Biden let Clarence Thomas become a Supreme Court justice and helped pass criminal laws that incarcerated too many minority men. Amy Klobuchar is a woman hiding a mean temper behind a Midwestern aw-shucks smile. Elizabeth Warren is too wonky.  Apart from being gay, Pete Buttigieg’s two terms as mayor of South Bend, Ind., is too, too trivial to qualify for the presidency and lacking in solid relations with minorities. Tom Steyer has even less experience in public office and we’ve seen how that can impair performance as president. Michael Bloomberg failed as mayor of all the people—read that, minorities—of New York City. Besides, who wants another president who always believes he knows best.

There you have it. Not one Democratic candidate for president passes the Ivory Soap purity test. If you want perfection, just hitch your phone line to the progenitor of the “perfect” phone call to the president of Ukraine. Let’s call off the election right now and cede the Oval Office in perpetuity to The Donald and his offspring, for surely the perfectionist-in-chief dreams each night of surpassing the Kennedys, the Bushes, the Clintons, and, if he knew any history, the Adamses, for spawning political dynasties.

I am tired, as Pearl Bailey used to drawl (google her if you don't know who she was), so tired of pundits who cast doubt on a candidate’s purity when the most tainted incumbent in our history feels empowered to hollow out constitutional rights and governmental and social norms.

I am all for vetting records. But the past is no surety of future behavior, though Donald Trump’s record would argue the opposite. Trump was bigoted as a real estate developer—his actions on immigration, his comments on blacks, Hispanics, Africans and Moslems reveal his bigotry has not left his body.

Unlike Bloomberg, Trump has not apologized for mistakes such as his belief that the Central Park Five raped a jogger. He called for their execution. Even after they were exonerated years later Trump maintained they were guilty.

Given a choice between the “perfect” Trump and any of the remaining imperfect Democrats, do you really want the former?

Now, single issue voters might. Right to Lifers. Israel right or wrong voters. One percenters. Isolationists.  Anti-immigrants.

The character of our country was molded in our ability to transform from a closed to a more universal culture.

Like animals that eat their young Democrats are devouring young and old contenders. Men and women. Straight and gay. Liberal, moderate or progressive.

The attacks on Bloomberg have been particularly virulent. Here’s a sampling of anti-Mike venom:




Sharpened knives will be out in force Wednesday night as the candidates debate in Nevada whether Bloomberg appears on the podium or not.

There is nothing wrong with vetting a candidate, but seriously, people of the Democratic party, remember who the ultimate foe is. The state primary program is intended to expose the efficacy of and affinity toward campaign platforms. It is not meant to attack and expose a candidate’s failure to attain purity.

No one, no one can measure up to the idealized candidate.

Not even George Washington is safe from criticism. In time for his birthday February 22, a revisionist take on our first president has hit the bookstands. Suffice to say, he didn't chop down that cherry tree (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8008559/amp/George-Washington-illiterate-LIAR-cheated-way-new-biography-claims.html).

Sunday, January 26, 2020

Are You an ABT Voter—Anyone But Trump?


Are you an ABT voter—Anyone But Trump?

Wait. Before we get into the original subject of this blog, let me aver that I believe The New York Times, specifically columnist Bret Stephens, must have hacked my iPhone. Heck, if Jeff Bezos’ iPhone could be hacked, who am I to think mine couldn’t, especially when it contains a really juicy story idea about ABT voters. And to show you how nefariously ingenious The Times’ caper is, the paper also ran an Op-Ed piece entitled “Jeff Bezos’ Phone Hack Should Terrify Everyone” (https://nyti.ms/37oujrL), directly above a Stephens article on ABT voters. How cunning to try to misdirect the scent of the crime from its editorial room.

Late last week I started writing a blog on ABT. As I often do, I wrote the beginning on my iPhone in bed before sleep stopped my progress. But I couldn’t fall into deep slumber. Too much on my mind. Too many tasks to accomplish. So I wrote a To Do list in my iPhone before finally allowing zzzz’s to overwhelm my consciousness.

Not suspecting any skulduggery I posted a Friday blog on my recent purchases of cardigans instead of the Anyone But Trump theme.

Imagine my excitement then when Saturday afternoon I opened The Times to see the following headline:
“Anyone But Trump? Not So Fast,” a column by Bret Stephens printed directly under the aforementioned opinion piece on Jeff Bezos (https://nyti.ms/2Rnl0mc). 

I quickly checked my iPhone for literary comparisons to what Stephens wrote. After all, it is not uncommon for good ideas to simultaneously formulate in the minds of several journalists. That’s when the hacking was “revealed” to me. Revealed might not be the right term, for my ABT story and my To Do list were nowhere to be found in my iPhone.

Now, some of you might be thinking I just forgot to save the ABT story. You know, you’re thinking he’s already admitted to being “old,” another synonym for forgetful or just plain tech-challenged. Yeah, true on all counts. But why would I lose the To Do list, as well? I’m thinking The Times hackers stole that file to really mess with my sanity.

I’ve no proof for these wild allegations. Just a deep-seated journalist’s hunch. Or more probably, a pixieish imagination. Anyway, time to talk about ABT and Stephens’ analysis.

I am an ABTer, though I admit I am not enthusiastic about any of the choices Democrats are proffering. There’s goodness in most of them and cautionary traits as well. Unlike many punsters on the left and right I do not fear a Warren or Sanders presidency tilting our government too much to the extreme. None of the Democratic candidates has the bellicosity Trump has displayed to cower the party into cult-like submission. Any Democratic president will have to work with Democrats in Congress to forge consensus, middle of the road changes that first and foremost restore progress achieved in the Obama years to environmental, civil rights, labor, health care, and abortion rights causes, to name a few initiatives. 

Anyone, I believe, would be better than Trump. 

In offering a defense against Trump’s impeachment, Stephens wrote, “First, the argument (for impeachment) overstates the extent to which this presidency has eroded the foundations of liberal democracy at home and abroad. Has Trump abandoned NATO? No. Has he lifted sanctions on Russia? No. Has he closed the borders to all immigrants? No. Did the president steal the midterms, or stop Congress from impeaching him? No. Has he significantly suppressed the press? Again, no.”

I disagree.  Has Trump weakened respect for the judiciary? Yes. Has he weakened our constitutional checks and balances system of government? Yes. Has Trump strained relations with allies? Yes. Has he eroded the credibility of our intelligence and law enforcement services? Yes. Has Trump strengthened the dark forces of white nationalists? Yes. Has he emboldened despots and autocrats around the globe? Yes. Has Trump corroded America’s historic values? Yes. Has he debased the bond our word used to be throughout the world? Yes. Has Trump made lies and falsehoods the new standard of presidential speak? Yes. Has he made Americans and the rest of the world lose trust in what America stands for? Yes.

But all of those actions do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense. They just show he is a bad, dangerous president. 

What are impeachable offenses are his attempt to extort Ukraine into interfering in the 2020 election by announcing a corruption investigation into his political rival, Joe Biden, in return for a White House meeting and the transfer of withheld military aid approved by Congress, and the obstruction of the House of Representative’s probe of his actions by refusing to release documents and allowing his aides to testify about the Ukrainian affair. 

Stephens and I shared an editorial construct. But we diverged in our execution. I prefer mine to his. I hope you do, too.


Wimping Out: While I’m blasting away at The Times, let me also opine that the flagship newspaper of American journalism wimped out when it came to its dual endorsement of Senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar as the best choices for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. 

I’m not against the failure to choose a singular candidate. Rather, what immediately struck me as cowardly is the decision to publish the joint endorsement on a Monday, not on Sunday. 

I know that Monday, January 20, coincided with commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day and was exactly one year prior to the inauguration of our next president, but if The Times wanted the biggest bang for its buck it would have printed its choices in the issue with the largest circulation of the week (1,087,500 copies)—the Sunday edition—which enjoys readership almost double that of the weekday issues (571,500).  

Sunday, December 9, 2018

Want To Get People Talking? Ask Them for Their Opinion on Joe Biden for President


The conversation during Friday night’s dinner started to take on an edge when the discussion turned to potential Democratic presidential candidates. Former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick just dropped out, someone lamented, adding that former New Orleans mayor Mitch Landrieu also withdrew his hat from the ring. As should Senator Elizabeth Warren, a third voice chimed in.   

At the mention of Joe Biden a chorus of “god forbids” or words to that effect cascaded across the room. I disagreed. Loudly (I was, after all, the host, so raising my voice was within the bounds of master of the house). 

While I have not jumped on the Biden bandwagon I reject arguments that he is too old or that his admittedly lapsed leadership as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill confrontation during the former’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing utterly disqualified him from seeking the presidency. These were among the arguments Frank Bruni laid out in The New York Times the next day (https://nyti.ms/2G7OLUr). 

God has yet to create the perfect candidate. All politicians make compromises. All have skeletons, some visible, some not, that inhabit their closets. Has Biden atoned through his work over the last quarter century for his failure to believe and protect Anita Hill in 1991? I’d like to think so. 

As for the age factor, absent examples of dementia, Biden’s age should not disqualify him. As a society we have come a long way in recognizing the contributions senior citizens can make. Keep in mind, Biden’s learning curve for what a president has to master would be much lower than any other candidate, including the current occupant of the White House.  

The main obstacle Biden must overcome to secure his party’s nomination is the primary and caucus system. He doesn’t generate rabid enthusiasm, the type of momentum needed, especially now that the power of superdelegates has been diminished. Primary/caucus voters often are looking for a fresh face. 

Short of nominating a total disaster, however, Democrats should be able to count on winning at least the same states Hillary Clinton did in 2016, I believe. To garner at least 270 Electoral College votes the nominee needs to win some combination of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida. 

Those are older, working class population states with voters who align well with Biden’s core constituencies. Biden might not carry those or any state in a primary where young zealous advocates often opt for the fresh face, but against Trump in a national election he would present solid Democratic values. 

On the other hand, most of the other possible nominees lack the working class credibility Middle Western voters seek. And Biden exudes an aura of accessibility, even a vulnerability given the tragedies that have befallen his family. Down on their luck voters may find it easier to identify with him. 

Coupled with a qualified ticket-balancing vice presidential candidate, someone like Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, or Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Biden could defeat Trump and restore dignity to the Oval Office and our standing in the world. 

I am not endorsing Biden. I just do not believe he should be dismissed out of hand.