Sunday, July 24, 2022
Prayer and Pardons
The arts of power and its minions are the same in all countries and in all ages. It marks its victim; denounces it; and excites the public odium and the public hatred to conceal its own abuses and encroachments.
Henry Clay, 1834 speech in the Senate
It’s hard to pick out the highlights of the trump’s endless production of verbal flatulence. Two recent examples offer the opportunity.
The first is his appearance at a gathering designed to assist the coronavirus in its continuing effort to infect the maximum number of people living in trumpland. It was the speech delivered on June 20 in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Although there were many highlights in the 1 hour 41 minute 20 second speech, the most enlightening was his 11 minute 43 second explanation of events that took place during his June 13, 2020 appearance at West Point to deliver the graduation speech.
In reviewing the speech many in the media world observed that the trump appeared to have difficulty drinking from a glass of water and at the conclusion of the event, descending the ramp from the podium. The trump decided to dispose of any speculation about his health by addressing those issues head on at the Tulsa rally.
At the 21 minute 55 second mark of the Tulsa speech, the trump introduced his explanation of difficulties he encountered when the time came to descend the ramp saying: “[W]e have a great heritage. We’re a great country. You are so lucky I’m president, that’s all I can tell you.” That was followed by a 10-minute description of attending the West Point ceremony: “They make speeches, then I make a speech that lasted a long time. I don’t know, maybe 45 minutes, maybe longer. . . . The sun is pouring down on me, okay. . . .Would you like to salute? Like this? Yes, like this almost 600 times. You know what that is? 600 times. . . . . you do that 600 times, you go home, and you say it’s like a workout without a weight, right? 600 times. . . . I salute for probably an hour and a half, maybe more. ..Think of it, so essentially 600 times.”
That mesmerizing description of raising and lowering the trumpian arm 600 times was followed by a description of his descent from the stage by the steel ramp that was, he said: “like an ice skating rink,” Of the general at the podium with him who was not reluctant to descend the ramp the trump said: “Now he’s standing there, big strong guy and he’s got these shoes but they’re loaded with rubber on flat bottoms because I looked, the first thing I did, I looked at his shoes. Then I looked at mine. Very, very slippery.” As is now well known, the trump got down without incident and as he explained to the Tulsa fan club, “I looked very handsome.”
A few minutes later he addressed the water issue saying, among other things: “I see we have a little glass of water. Where the hell did this water come from? . . . .I look down at my tie because I’ve done it. I’ve taken water and it spills down your tie, doesn’t look good for a long time and frankly, the tie is never the same.” Describing the aftereffects of these two episodes the trump concluded saying: “I have lived with more the ramp than the water, but I have lived with the ramp and the water since I left West Point.” With that the trump went on to other matters to entertain the Tulsa crowd.
Although shorter than the Tulsa speech, the Mt. Rushmore speech was equally inspired. It lasted a mere 41 minutes and 24 seconds. Lest anyone fail to appreciate the joy of living in the United States in these trumpian days, the trump began by saying that the attendees at the event were there to “herald the most important day in the history of nations. . . . every American patriot should be filled with joy because each of you lives in the most magnificent country in the history of the world and it will soon be greater than ever before.” He went on saying: “No nation has done more to advance the human condition than the USA and no people have done more to promote human progress than the citizens of our great nation.” Of course praise for the country was accompanied by condemnation of those who don’t think like the trump. What he calls the left-wing cultural revolution is “designed to overthrow the American Revolution” and “destroy the very civilization that rescued billions from poverty, disease, violence , and hunger, and that lifted humanity to new heights of achievement, discovery, and progress. . . .We will state the truth in full without apology. We declare that the United States of America is the most just and exceptional nation ever to exist on earth.”
Readers can decide for themselves which trump speech they prefer. Sad to say, each is equally authentic trump and each describes a country that only the trump and his benighted followers can see. The rest of us can only mourn that the country the trump describes is not only aspirational, but unattainable, so long as the trump is in the White House. Following his departure, it will take years to restore it to what it was before he took office, and even longer for it to become the place he describes.
Christopher Brauchli can be emailed at Brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu. For political commentary see his web page at http://humanraceandothersports.comrs
Thursday, June 30, 2022
Men and Women
If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
— Gloria Steinem, The Verbal Karate of Florynce R. Kennedy, Esq.
In light of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, a number of readers have written asking whether I thought the Missouri state legislature and other similar state legislatures will consider enacting legislation that would ban sexual intercourse in their states. The question is not as frivolous as it would at first appear and in light of the steps the Missouri legislature took during the 2021 session, it is a sensible question. It would instantly put to rest further discussion about abortions in those states. Pregnancy would become a thing of the past.
In 2021 the Republican-led Missouri Senate launched an effort to limit the ability of those who depend on assistance from Medicaid to obtain devices that would prevent women who had engaged in sexual intercourse or planned to do so, from becoming pregnant. During its 2021 session the Missouri Senate voted to prevent Missouri state’s Medicaid program from paying for the “morning after pill” and intrauterine devices (IUDs) used by women to prevent pregnancy. In the discussion of that legislation some Republican lawmakers said that using IUDs or the “morning after pill” was like getting an abortion.
In assuming their position with respect to Medicaid, the Missouri legislators were following the lead of Texas Republican Senator, Ted Cruz, who has repeatedly referred to birth control pills as being abortion inducing drugs, ignoring the fact that in fact they prevent pregnancy rather than terminate it. By the end of the 2021 legislative session that language had been abandoned by the Missouri legislators who had proposed it, but with the demise of Roe, it may well be resurrected.
The foregoing is merely one example of the kind of legislation Republican inspired legislators may introduce in order to further their purported goals of preserving all human life, even before it occurs. The failure of the Missouri legislators to attain their goal in their 2021 session should not lead to an assumption they never will. As House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy (R.Ca.) said following the issuance of the Dobbs ruling and the possibility that following the November election Republicans would once again control the House of Representatives, the GOP’s anti-abortion work “is far from done.” He went on to say that: “The right to life has been vindicated. The voiceless will finally have a voice. This great nation can now live up to its core principle, that all are created equal, not born equal, created equal.” Kevin is presumably referring to what happens when sexual intercourse takes place. Rep. McCarthy’s hope for the future of the unborn is shown by a bill whimsically proposed to be introduced next year by Mickey Dollens, (D-Oklahoma).
In an interview following the passage of a 2022 bill in the Oklahoma Legislature that greatly limits the ability of a woman to get an abortion, Mr. Dollens suggested that next year he would introduce a bill in the Oklahoma legislature that would provide that all boys should receive a mandatory reversible vasectomy to prevent unwanted pregnancies. As he explained in his interview, “If you really want to end abortion, if that’s your objective, then I would invite you to coauthor a bill that I am considering next year that would mandate each male, when they reach puberty, get a mandatory vasectomy that is only reversible when they reach the point of financial and emotional stability. If you think that’s crazy, maybe you understand how fifty percent of Oklahomans feel about the passage of the anti-abortion bills that were enacted during the recent legislative session.” Considering possible future legislation, Rep. Dollens said: “If there is one thing I have learned from my six years in the Legislature, it is if one Republican controlled state does something, Oklahoma will follow suit.” His concern about what other states might do is warranted.
Following the release of the Dobbs opinion one Missouri legislator who had been involved in the 2021 fight to limit the kinds of birth control that would be provided for Medicaid recipients, addressed what future attempts to control the reproductive rights of women he would support. In addressing the question he said: “ There are some that I think are okay and some that I don’t believe in, especially the morning after pill and things that come after conception. So I think anything’s on the table.”
There is almost certainly one thing that is not on the table. My proposal. If states that are so focused on the evils of abortion simply banned sexual intercourse, women would no longer have to worry about becoming pregnant and the need for abortions would vanish. Unlike all the other methods being discussed by men in state legislatures, it would have exactly the same effect on men that it has on women. That, all male legislators would unanimously agree, would be a bummer and
for that, and perhaps other reasons, it will never happen.
Saturday, June 11, 2022
Prayers and Pardons
Prayer and Pardons
— Jules Henri Poincaré[T]wo equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. That was the lesson learned from (a) the murder of the school children in Uvalde, Texas and (b) revelations that came during the first public hearing of the January 6 committee that took place on June 9, 2022. But first things first. The Uvalde lessons.
Following the murder of the school children in Uvalde, countless Republican members of the House of Representatives defended the presence of guns among us, describing them as respected members of our society enjoying the same constitutional rights as the rest of us. Indeed, one of their most compelling arguments about why guns in any form should enjoy the same rights as the rest of us was that they were protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
In responding to those who suggested that the rights of guns to become respectable members of society only when owned by people who are 21 years of age or older, defenders of the rights of guns to become respectable members of our communities correctly observe that there is nothing in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution on which the guns’ friends rely, that imposes that age limit. That is a compelling argument and the only question that remains unanswered is why the friends of guns have permitted their ownership to be limited to those who have attained age 18. That age is also not specified in the Constitution and, as a defender of the right of guns to be respectable members of society, a question that some may pose is, why are those who have not yet attained age 18 not given the right to be armed that is now enjoyed by the 18-year old? That is especially relevant since had the 4th graders in Uvalde been armed there might have been a completely different outcome to the tragedy.
In addressing the Uvalde tragedy and seeking a solution to the unending gun violence present in this country, some members of Congress offered a solution that those who want to raise the age of ownership have not addressed-prayer. Two members of the House of Representatives, Steven Scalise (R.La.) and Louie Gohmert (R. Texas) suggested that the answer to the endless massacres in which guns are important participants is not to limit guns’ rights but prayer. Following the testimony of one of the children who survived the mass shooting in Uvalde, Mr. Gohmert said that the school massacres were a result of the absence of prayer in the public schools. In a speech on the House floor he said Democrats were disgusted “hearing about prayers. Look, maybe if we heard more prayers from leaders of this country instead of taking God’s name in vain, we wouldn’t have the mass killings like we didn’t have before prayer was eliminated from school.” Ignoring others acts of violence involving schools and school children such as bombings in the 1960s, Scalise said that mass shootings didn’t occur in the 1960s because: “We actually had prayer in school during those days.”
Gohmert and Scalise are not alone in their belief that appealing to a higher power can be a solution to a problem. Thus it is that we learned during the first public presentation by the January 6 Committee that seven members of the House of Representatives sought forgiveness for their sins, before their sins had even been publicly disclosed, by appealing to a higher power. It was the seven members of Congress who, feeling contrite for their past sins, sought pardon for their transgressions by appealing to a higher authority. In their case the higher authority was not God, but the president of the country against which they realized they had committed transgressions, the consequences of which, unlike mass slaughters by gun holders, could not be avoided by prayer.
As of this writing the only member of Congress who has been definitely identified as seeking a presidential pardon from the trump is the congressman from Pennsylvania, Scott Perry. In response to the identification of Scott Perry as one of the seven congresspeople who had sought pardons from a higher authority for their actions in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The names of others who have appealed to the same higher power include Reps. Andy Biggs, Mo Brooks and Paul Gosar. They have all refused to speak to the House Committee and it is not yet confirmed that they joined Rick in appealing to a higher authority for pardons.
We cannot know whether resorting to prayer to a higher power will result in an end to the school massacres that occur on a regular basis. We do know, however, that the appeal for pardons by the Congressmen fell on deaf ears that belonged to the recipient of the request while he still had to power to grant forgiveness to the supplicants. Only time will tell what the consequences of the acts for which the supplicants unsuccessfully sought pardons will be. Future gun massacres, if any, will instruct us in the power of prayer. Christopher Brauchli can be emailed at brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu. For political commentary see his web page at http://humanraceandothersports.com