Category Archives: elections

George 

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve written about George Will before in these entries, a conservative columnist I admired for his thinking in a time when many on both sides don’t, for his eloquence at a time when many merely shout and curse, his insight when many prefer not looking below an ugly surface. Earlier this week, he used something odd from FOX News as the springboard for a powerful essay about an obviously deteriorating, clearly fearful, increasingly worried about how he will be remembered and his efforts to erase history, particularly history of black people. George Will turns 85 on May 4 and unlike our President, he is very much still all there.

If you are a dyed in the wool Trump fan, you won’t make it to the end. If you are a Republican who still believes in service to the country rather than a country serving a President, you might find yourself surprised by how much you agree. If you are a Democrat, you’ll think George nailed it.

From our hilltop, we will not argue with him.  Even when we have disagreed with him, we would not want to debate him. Here’s George with our Friday bonus: (1800) 1 Minute Ago: Trump Falls Apart Staff Handling Him Legacy Panic & Black History Erasure |George Will – YouTube

(We just checked a few minutes ago and saw that the video has been taken down. However, Cockatoo has provided a transcript.  The video ran about 23 minutes.  We’ve adjusted some of the time cues in the interest of complete sentences.)

Something very unusual happened this week. Donald Trump held a cabinet meeting, the kind of organized event where he sits at a very long table, surrounded by people who just agree with everything he says. But this time, things went differently. In the middle of his unclear remarks about trade deals and made up economic wins, Fox News did something they almost never do. They stopped showing it. They just cut away, went to a commercial break, and came back talking about something else entirely.

0:38

When your own supportive news channel, the one that spent years defending everything you said, explaining away every mistake and cleaning up every power grab, decides they can no longer show you to their viewers. That tells you everything you need to know. This wasn’t Fox News protecting Trump. This was Fox News protecting their audience from Trump.

1:02

Because what they saw in that cabinet room was a man clearly falling apart mentally and physically. Even they knew there was no way to put a positive spin on what everyone could plainly see. Let’s look at what actually happened in that meeting, because the clips that got out are truly disturbing. Trump tried to explain recent economic numbers, and I say tried very generously. What he really did was throw out random figures, confuse countries with companies, and at one point completely forgot what he was saying in the middle of a sentence. He said, and these are his exact words, we’re bringing back $400 billion, maybe $500 billion, some say $600 billion from China, from Canada, from the European Union, which is basically Germany if you think about it. And nobody has ever seen numbers like this, the biggest numbers in history.

1:59

None of that means anything. Those aren’t policy ideas. That’s not even a twisted version of the truth. That’s a man reaching for numbers he thinks sound impressive while having no clue what he’s actually talking about. But it’s not just what he said. Look at how he looked physically. The way he gripped the table. The way he leaned forward like he needed the furniture to hold himself up, the way his staff, Carolyn Levitt, Stephen Miller, whoever was there, watched him, the way nurses watch a patient ready to jump in if something went wrong. And afterward, he didn’t take any questions. He didn’t walk over to the reporters. His team rushed him out of there as fast as his weakening body could go. Because they know. Every single one of them knows. Here’s what has become completely obvious.

2:58

Donald Trump’s staff isn’t serving him anymore. They’re handling him. There’s a big difference. Compare how much he appears in public now to his first term. Back then, whether you liked him or not, the man was everywhere. Daily press briefings, hour-long unplanned rants. He would stand in front of his helicopter and just talk.

3:22

It was stream of consciousness, sure, but he was alert and present. Now he barely shows up. When he does, everything is carefully planned. He uses a teleprompter for remarks that he would have made off the top of his head in 2017. Only pre-approved questions are allowed. Media access is limited. And the moment anything goes off script, they pull him away.

3:50

Why? Because the people around him, Stephen Miller, Elon Musk, JD Vance, are no longer working to advance Donald Trump’s goals. They’re pushing their own. While he falls apart in front of everyone.

4:06

There were recent reports that Miller runs a separate private communication line with Trump, feeding him information all day long, basically creating an unofficial power structure that goes around the official White House chain of command. That’s not loyal staff work. That’s a power grab. That’s someone making themselves the real decision-maker, while the president, in name only, gets worse and worse. Elon Musk has openly disagreed with Trump’s own policy statements.

4:44

J.D. Vance is already doing his own interviews, presenting himself as the calm, reliable leader of the administration. These people aren’t serving Trump. They’re using him. They’re getting rich, pushing their own plans, playing the stock market with inside information, and just waiting for the unavoidable moment when he’s too far gone to stop them. Donald Trump has become a figurehead in his own White House, and everyone around him knows it. But here’s where it gets really telling. Here’s where Trump’s mental state becomes impossible to look away from.

5:20 You may have heard about this already. Donald Trump is currently holding up federal infrastructure money, specifically funding for the Gateway Project, which is vital transportation infrastructure for the Northeast, unless he gets his name put on Dallas Airport and Penn Station in New York. Read that one more time. The President of the United States is using blackmail against a sitting senator, Chuck Schumer, to get public buildings renamed after himself. On the surface, this is just sad. It’s the behavior of a deeply insecure narcissist who never got enough attention growing up.

5:43

But it goes deeper than that. Because when you look at the pattern of what Trump has been doing over the past few months, a clear picture forms. And that picture is of a man in total panic about how he’ll be remembered. He renamed the Kennedy Center to include his own name, making it the John F. Kennedy and Donald J. Trump Center for the Performing Arts. He couldn’t even let JFK have that one thing to himself. He’s ordered the construction of a huge arch in Washington DC, a literal monument to himself that historians have compared to the kind of ego-driven projects built by Saddam Hussein and Stalin in their final years. He’s trying to rename military bases, government buildings, any structure that has federal money attached to it. Why?

Why this sudden obsession with monuments? Because history shows us that when dictators sense the end is near, whether that’s political, physical, or both, they speed up their monument building. Saddam Hussein’s palace construction went into overdrive in the late 1990s when international sanctions had him isolated. Stalin’s worship of his own image grew stronger as his paranoia and health got worse in his last years. It’s a pattern. When authoritarian leaders know their time is running out, they try to lock themselves into stone because they understand something basic.

They’ve lost control of their own story. And Trump knows he’s lost control. You can see it in his social media posts. You can hear it in the way he’s been talking lately. He started this week, and I’m not making this up, talking about whether he’s going to get into heaven. He just posted it out of nowhere. He wrote something like, the nasty fake news keeps reporting that I said I’m not going to heaven. It was a joke, but they reported seriously because they’re terrible people who want to make me look bad. First of all, nobody was reporting that. He brought it up on his own. He’s the one who can’t stop thinking about it.

8:13

Second, Donald Trump, a man who never talked about God except to win over religious voters, who couldn’t name a single Bible verse when asked, who famously said he’s never asked God for forgiveness, is now fixated on whether God will judge him. That’s not politics. That’s psychology. That’s a man facing the reality of his own death and realizing that no amount of spin can change what’s coming. There are reports from inside Mar-a-Lago that he’s been having conversations about his funeral, about how people will remember him, about what will be said about him after he’s gone. He’s trying to negotiate with history in real time, and he’s losing that negotiation.

You want to know the most perfect symbol of Trump’s panic about his legacy? The Kennedy Center situation. After Trump forced his name onto the building, after he held a big renaming ceremony, after he stood there smiling like he’d done something meaningful, the Kennedy Center shut down. Just closed, with no set date to reopen.

Officially, they said it was for renovations and reorganization. But let’s be honest about what really happened. Donald Trump couldn’t stand the idea that his name would be next to the legacy of a real president. A president remembered for his vision, his way with words, and his sacrifice. So rather than let that comparison exist, rather than risk the building not getting the worship he demanded, he just closed it. He took his ball and went home. And here’s my prediction. Write it down and come back to it.

In 10 years, every monument Trump is building right now will be a source of embarrassment. Hotels will remove the Trump name to avoid being boycotted and some already have. Buildings will be given new names. The arch will be torn down or turned into something else. His own children will try to distance themselves from the brand and some already are. The monuments he’s so desperately trying to build won’t protect his legacy.

10:27

They’ll become places people visit to laugh. People will go see Trump’s folly, the way they visit Confederate monuments, not to honor them, but to remember what we got past. Donald Trump senses this. He knows this, and it’s destroying him inside.

10:46

But here’s the thing. This isn’t just about one aging man’s vanity. This obsession with monuments, this panic about his legacy, it’s connected to something much more dangerous. It’s connected to what his administration is trying to cover up. Because at the exact same time Trump is trying to build monuments to himself, his administration is systematically wiping out other people’s history, specifically black history.

11:17

It started right away, from day one of this administration. The rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The removal of materials from the Smithsonian. The changes to school curriculum, forcing schools to take out discussions of slavery, Jim Crow laws, and the civil rights movement from American history classes. Remember the Enola Gay situation? They ran a computer search for the word gay in federal museum records and just started deleting things. They removed an entire exhibit about the plane that dropped the atomic bomb because the word gay appeared in its name. That’s the level of foolishness we’re dealing with. But it’s foolishness in service of a very specific goal, which is erasing history.

12:11

Now a lot of people rightly said, of course Trump wants to erase black history. He’s a racist. His administration is full of white supremacists. They don’t want those stories to be told. That’s true. But it’s not the whole truth. Because the reason they’re erasing black history isn’t just hatred.

12:32

It’s a deliberate strategy. Fascism needs people to forget history. Authoritarian rule cannot survive if people remember how it works, what it looks like, who it targets, and how it has been fought before. There was a podcast conversation recently between Andrew Schultz and Charlemagne the God that captured this perfectly. Schultz, who, let’s remember, defended Trump, made excuses for Trump, told people they were overreacting about Trump, was now expressing shock at what he was seeing. I never thought I’d see this in America, he said. People being shot in the streets by federal agents, families being ripped apart, armed thugs with badges hunting people down for no reason. And Charlemagne said something so simple, so obvious, and so powerful in response. He said, you never thought it would happen to white people. Because here’s the reality. This is American history. This has always been American history. Where do you think policing in America came from? Slave patrols. That’s it.

13:46

That’s the origin. Armed men given power by the government to hunt down black people, return them to slavery, and terrorize communities into obedience. That’s where American policing started.

14:01

The ICE raids happening right now—agents breaking into homes without warrants, tearing families apart, making people disappear into detention centers. That’s not new. That’s a copy of the Fugitive Slave Laws, where federal agents were given the power to hunt human beings across state lines and drag them back into bondage. The heavily armed police beating protesters in the streets, the government surveillance tracking activists, The criminalization of people helping each other. Black Americans have been living through this for 400 years. Indigenous Americans wrote the book on it with their own blood. What’s happening now isn’t Trump inventing American authoritarianism.

14:48

It’s American authoritarianism finally reaching everyone. And that’s exactly why they need to erase black history. Because if Americans knew that history, if they truly understood it, they would immediately recognize what’s happening right now. If we knew Frederick Douglass, we would know how to speak truth to power. If we knew Harriet Tubman, we would know how to build secret networks of resistance. If we knew Ida B. Wells, we would know how to document terrible acts and force the country to face them. If we knew Fannie Lou Hamer, we would know how to document terrible acts and force the country to face them. If we knew Fannie Lou Hamer, we would know how to organize at the local level and fight corrupt systems. If we knew about the Black Panther Party’s free breakfast program, we would know how to build community support networks that make us less dependent on a government that wants us helpless.

15:44

If we knew about the labor movements led by A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin, we would know how to shut down the economy when those in power refuse to listen. They’re not erasing history because they hate the past. They’re erasing it because they’re afraid of a well-informed future. They’re terrified that if you knew how black Americans resisted slavery, Jim Crow, and mass incarceration, you would know exactly how to resist them. That’s why Trump’s monument-building and history-erasing are two sides of the same authoritarian coin. Build monuments to the regime. Erase monuments to resistance. Control the past. Control the future. Except it’s not going to work. Because here’s what Donald Trump can’t seem to grasp. His legacy is already written. It’s done. It’s finished. No amount of marble or fancy stone or renamed airports is going to change it.

16:56

January 6th will be studies for centuries, not as a patriotic uprising, not as a protest that got out of hand, but as a fascist attempt to overthrow the government by a president who refused to accept that he lost an election. His face will be next to the word insurrection in history textbooks forever. His COVID response, telling people to inject bleach, holding packed rallies while hundreds of thousands of people died, tearing apart pandemic preparedness systems because Obama built them. That’s his legacy. His family separation policy, children locked in cages, toddlers forced to represent themselves in immigration court, thousands of families permanently broken apart. That’s his legacy.

17:46

His two impeachments, his 34 felony convictions, his being found liable for sexual assault, his fraud convictions, his theft of classified documents. That’s his legacy. Future generations aren’t going to ask, was Trump a great president? They’re going to ask, how on earth did Americans fall for this twice? His name isn’t going to stand for greatness.

18:14

It’s going to stand for American decline, the weakening of democracy, and the conman who nearly destroyed the republic. Every monument he builds is one more thing to tear down. Every name he puts on a building is one more name to scrub off. Every arch he orders is one more structure future generations will demolish. That’s his real legacy, and he can’t change it. But you wanna know what the real monument to this era will be? It’s not going to be his arch. It’s not going to be his renamed airport. It’s going to be the resistance. The millions of women who marched the day after his inauguration and kept marching. The sanctuary cities that refused to become part of his deportation machine, the election workers who protected democracy while he sent a mob after them, the journalists he called enemies of the people who kept reporting the truth anyway, the lawyers who filed lawsuit after lawsuit to block his worst actions, the mutual aid networks that fed people when his government shut down. The young people organizing climate protests while he gutted environmental protections.

19:35

The families torn apart by ice who are fighting to be brought back together. The trans kids he tried to erase who refused to disappear. That’s the monument. That’s what will be taught. Not his buildings, not his speeches, but the fact that millions of Americans looked at his authoritarianism and said, no, not here, not us, not ever. The monument to this era is every person who resisted.

20:06

And that monument is being built right now, in real time, by all of us. Which brings me back to Chuck Schumer and that airport naming deal. Senator Schumer, you have one job right now, one very simple job. Do not negotiate with someone using threats. Do not build monuments to tyrants. Do not give this man one more piece of legacy preservation while he’s actively tearing apart American democracy. The answer to Trump’s blackmail should be simple. No. Build the Gateway Project because it’s critical infrastructure and name it after the workers who built it, not the would-be dictator who held it hostage.

20:55

This is a test not just for Schumer, but for every Democrat who claims to be part of the opposition. Are you actually going to push back? Or are you going to make deals with fascism because it’s the easier path?

21:11

But more than that, this is a test for all of us, because Trump’s team is counting on us being worn out. They’re counting on us forgetting. They’re counting on us not remembering how we got here and who showed us the way out. So here’s what we do.

21:27

We write down everything. Every abuse, every lie, every crime. We create the record they’re trying to destroy. We learn the history they’re trying to hide. Read Frederick Douglass, read James Baldwin, read Ida B. Wells, read the scholars they’re removing from universities.

21:48

Learn the strategies of resistance they don’t want you to know about. And we build the other side of the story right now while they’re still in power, so that when this era ends, and it will end, the history that gets taught is the true one. Not Trump’s fantasy, not his monuments, but the real story of what happened and how we made it through. They want us to forget. Our job is to remember everything. If you’ve read this far, you’re part of the resistance. You’re part of that counter-monument we’re building, and I hope you’ll keep building it with me.

Chuck Schumer, do the right thing. No airports, no monuments, no deals with autocrats. And to everyone else, keep fighting. Keep writing things down. Keep learning the history they’re trying to erase. Keep learning the history they’re trying to erase. They’re counting on your silence. Don’t give it to them.

 

The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Fear (of Ourselves)  

Posted on by
Reply

It was a cool-ish morning, a few degrees above chilly and several degrees above cold, the early sun making the warmth inside my car welcoming a few hours after results of this week’s elections had been announced.

As I had fast-walked my mile around the track at the Knowles YMCA in Jefferson City a few minutes earlier, two moments in history came to me as I thought about the first elections since Donald Trump began his second term.  Two phrases from those events  seemed appropriate:

“The people are coming, armed with pitchforks”  and “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.”

And I thought the Tuesday results amounted to the people armed with political pitchforks, a story springing from the French Revolution of 1789. And my mind added a phrase: “and the grooves in the guillotine are being greased.”

It was October 5, 1789 when 7,000 angry women, armed not only with pitchforks but with pikes and muskets, marched six miles in the rain from Paris to the palace at Versailles to confront Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette about the people in Paris who were starving while the Royal First Family of France ate well in their palace. There had been significant events preceding the march including the famous Storming of the Bastille, the infamous Paris fortress and a prison for Parisians charged with various offenses against the crown, and the circulation of “The Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.

Four days before the march, a banquet was thrown at the palace, welcoming the troops that had arrived to protect the royal family. There were toasts and expressions of loyalty to the throne, a lavish banquet that outraged the hungry people in Paris when the newspapers publicized it.

Now, on October 5, those 7,000 rain-dampened working women were at the palace chanting “Bread, Bread,” to the rhythm of a beating drum, a moment captured two centuries later in the Broadway musical Les Miserables:

When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes!

The twenty-thousand French National Guardsmen were unable to keep the women from breaching the gates and demanding Marie face them alone, which she did from a balcony. The mob by now recognized the strength of its position and demanded that she and the King accompany them back to Paris to witness the misery of the people from whom bread had been withheld.

They had no choice. The next day, they became prisoners of the revolution and two years later went to the guillotine.

The dropping of the blade on the neck of Louis XVI meant the future of France would involve no kings.

We will learn more a year from now how much the story of the No Kings movement in France almost 250 years ago will be played out in our streets against President Trump, who held a sumptuous Great Gatsby Party at Mar-a-Lago hours before the Food Stamp Program expired, leaving millions of his citizens wondering how they could afford bread and other necessities of life as he and his friends dined on fine food.

Tuesday’s election results from coast to coast showed an undeniable revolt against Donald Trump.  It is easy and perhaps simplistic to draw parallels with his party and the banquet at Versailles in 1789, when a ruler and his supporters ate very well at a time when many Americans wondered if they could afford bread—and other necessities.

Trump’s reaction to the results illustrates his tone-deaf self-centeredness, his attitude that he is above the mob: “Trump wasn’t on the ballot, and shutdown, were two reasons that Republicans lost elections tonight, according to pollsters,” he wrote in all capital letters on his social media page.  As usual, he did not cite any pollsters supporting his attitude.

The fact is, Trump WAS on the ballot Tuesday.  And his party loyalists who have tried to blame the shutdown entirely on minority Democrats clearly have not convinced a lot of voters they are speaking the truth.

Trump never campaigned for any of his party’s candidates in this election cycle. In the New York Mayor’s race, he didn’t even endorse his party’s candidate and his name-calling against the eventual winner failed bigly.

Our two political parties face important decisions in the aftermath..  Democrats need to keep the public pot boiling for 2026, perhaps not a huge problem as long as Donald Trump keeps doing and saying Donald Trump things.

Is it already too late for Republicans to keep control?  A year is a long time in politics. Candidates and parties historically have found ways to get off the mat.  The Democrats did it Tuesday. But Republicans surely must be questioning how much continued slavish loyalty to Donald Trump will be a major liability for them as individuals and as a party in 2026.

How relevant will Donald Trump be to what the party needs to do in the next year to avoid being irrelevant to voters?  The party surely must confront the reality of the danger Donald Trump embodies to its continued power.  How will the party move beyond him for its self-preservation?

Mayor-elect Zahron Mamdani of New York told well-wishers Tuesday night, “We can respond to oligarchy and authoritarianism with the strength it fears, not the appeasement it craves.  After all, if anyone can show a nation betrayed by Donald Trump how to defeat him, it is the city that gave rise to him.”

On March 4, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt opened his first inaugural address this way:

This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today.

This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper.

So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself – nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory.

Republicans surely understand that they have been warned, that the No Kings rallies are now emboldened, the pitchforks are out, and the pikes are ready for Republican heads next year. The beating of the drum and the beating of the national heart will intensify.

After Tuesday’s elections, it appears the only thing the Republican Party has to fear is itself.

 

Redistricting and You—and Me

Posted on by
Reply

You and I have no business questioning the Missouri Legislature’s quick obedience to an order from President Trump to redraw our congressional districts so longtime incumbent Democrat will have to leave his congressional office and presumably give President Trump an additional Republican seat in the House of Representatives.

At least that’s what the latest occupant of the Attorney General’s office thinks.

A group called People Not Politicians is gathering referendum petition signatures to put the legislature’s Trumpmandered congressional district map to a statewide vote. Attorney General Catherine Hanaway says they have no business doing that. Congressional redistricting, she says, is sacred to the Missouri legislature.  She issued a statement to St. Louis Public Radio saying her lawsuit to block the referendum on the map drawn by the legislature is an effort to “stop out-of-state dark-money groups from hijacking Missouri’s electoral process and silencing the voices of Missouri voters.”

That is a stunning statement. Absolutely stunning.  A politician, especially one whose party has a chokehold on state government, saying “out of state dark-money groups” should be prohibited “from hijacking Missouri’s electoral process” is a landmark statement.  Since when is out of state dark money something either of our political parties is against?

We will believe accepting out of state dark money is a political sin when we see the state Republican party pass a law outlawing it. We expect Democrats would be excited to work with their GOP colleagues to take that step.

But all of us know the Sun will go dark before that happens.

As for “silencing the voices of Missouri voters:” Doesn’t her lawsuit keeping Missouri voters from having a say on the issue doing exactly that?

Did I even need to ask that question?

Missouri’s constitution allows its citizens to propose laws  and to question actions by the General Assembly. There is no carve-out for congressional redistricting.

Congressional redistricting is, indeed, the job of the legislature IF IT IS DONE LEGALLY AND THE DISTRICTS MEET LEGAL STANDARDS. The petition campaign represents the people’s voice expressing concerns about the legality of what the legislature did.

We have a character in Washington who believes he is above the law and above the U.S. Constitution and he’s looking around and seeing a lot of the public has come to the realization of how dangerous he is to our country—and he is scared to death that voters next year will elect a Congress that is not afraid of him.

His solution is to do everything he can to rig next year’s elections. Unfortunately, Missouri has said “Yes, sir (“sir” is one of his favorite words) how high do you want us to jump?”

It’s one thing for the legislature to pass a law protecting him.  But to say the people who elected the legislators to protect their interests have no right to object when those legislators choose, instead, to protect the interests of one individual who is deathly afraid of facing voter consequences for his actions is flatly un-American.

At least, it used to be—-

back when being an American was not anti-American.

The Hating Terrorists

Posted on by
Reply

President Trump has branded antifa a terrorist organization. It’s just more hot air because there is no organization named antifa. If there was, the word would be capitalized and would have a campaign bank account and would have officers he could arrest.

But if he wanted to see the face(s) of his enemy, all he had to do was watch some non-football news coverage last Saturday when organizers of more than 2,600 No Kings protests say more than seven million people had something to say to and about Donald Trump.

 

 

Organizers claimed a total of more than 7 million people turned out at more than 2,600 protests across the nation.

He missed a great chance by not dispatching his ICE goons to those rallies to round up antifa terrorists as well as brown people or people with names ending in “z,” and some plain American citizens while they were at it.

In an Air Force One news scrum, Trump called he rallies “a joke.”

“I look at the people and they’re not representatives of this country,” he continued. “I looked a all the brand new signs paid for, I guess it was made by Soros and other radical left lunatics…The demonstrations were very small, very ineffective, and the people who worked out, when you look at these people, those are not representatives of the people of the country. “

“And by the way,” he concluded. ”I’m not a King…I work my ass off to make our country great.”

George Soros is one of Trumpisms favorite boogeymen. And the phrase “radical left lunatics” was tiresome the second time he said it. But it’s his phrase of the moment so he’ll beat all the blood out of it.

The Speaker of the House and some other Republicans are calling these events “Hate America Rallies.”  But polls and rally turnouts indicate an awful lot of people aren’t buying the name game that Trump addicts try to apply to these gatherings.

And we don’t know what television coverage he was looking at, but those demonstrations were NOT “very small.”  And he is likely to learn in next year’s mid-term elections if they were, in fact, ineffective.

Organizers of anti-fascist or anti-kings rallies have to be careful, though It’s ten months before the 2026 primaries, more than a year before the general elections, especially in the Trumpmandered congressional districts.  The people behind the “No Kings” rallies—-that’s what they prefer to call themselves regardless of those who try to convince the public that these folks hate America—don’t want to peak too soon.

As far as these people being haters?  Au Contraire, mon frere.  These are people who love America and they love it enough to hold mass rallies that so far have burned no stores, looted no television shops, and broken no large numbers of windows.  In the sixties, anti-war demonstrators sometimes stuck flowers down the barrels of guns that soldiers were carrying.  Today, maybe some will give flowers to the ICE goons.

What organizers have to be careful about is peaking too soon.  This is a time for Democrats to be finding their strongest candidates and rounding up big money from Democrat or Independent million-and-billion-aires.

Antifa might need to go into what the Continental Army called “winter quarters,” to conserve energy and to let Mr. Trump give himself more and more rope.

Republicans who might notice the declining favorability of the Trump administration might wish to quit dismissing these events as “Hate America Rallies” and recognize them for what they are—people who love America and are concerned with the direction that President Trump is taking America. Name-calling will not eliminate the threat these rallies could be to their side of the aisle in a few months and might, in fact, only fuel the efforts of the No Kings folks. Finding a platform that is BETTER than what the “No Kings” voices are expressing and offering candidates more loyal to their oaths than to their president might be a better use of their time and resources.

What is happening now is likely to only intensify as elections draw closer and if the present direction of national leadership follows its present arc.

Those of us who remember the demonstrations of the sixties know that dismissal is the wrong direction to go.

It is dangerous to shake a beehive and believe you can ignore the swarm.

Lincoln

Posted on by
1

(Before we dip our pen in acid for this entry, please let us observe a bit of a milestone. This page represents page 3,000 of these entries. Today we will plod toward word number 1,300,000. We are sure that we are the only one who has read every word and every page.)

If you’ve been along for a long, long time, maybe you should send yourself a sympathy card.

Now, on with the show:)

Lincoln

Some people just have the right names.

Lincoln Hough SOUNDS like a Republican Senator’s name.

He is one.

But he’s in trouble—

—-because Lincoln Hough is not above thinking. And speaking his mind.

Because he had the nerve to suggest that the Missouri Senate was going against everything the Missouri Senate has stood for, he has been slapped down by his party.

Hough objected to the final dismantling of the Senate’s legacy as a deliberative, respectful, collegial part of government when his party’s majority leadership rammed two questionable bills through a short special legislative session to satisfy the self-serving demand of an increasingly dictatorial President and a desire by his party to mangle the concept of majority vote.

His party leaders have increasingly through the years stifled minority opposition to issues by passing motions to limit or prohibit discussion.  Hough is one of two Senate Republicans who had the courage to vote against the bills in the special legislative session, and to vote against ending debate on them.  Within minutes after the session adjourned, the leader of the Senate majority went to his office and fired him as the chairman of arguably the Senate’s most important committee, the one that writes the Senate’s version of the state budget.

Lincoln Hough told The Missouri Independent that as far as he was concerned, the Missouri Senate died at 1:42 p.m. on Friday, September 12 when debate was blocked on the bill weakening the First Amendment right of citizens  “to petition their government for a redress of grievances,” as it is put in the Bill of Rights.

This was one of the darkest weeks I’ve served during my time in the senate.

If the votes that I cast this week that I believed were in the best interests of my constituents in Springfield, the State of Missouri, and the institution of the Missouri Senate put me at odds with the President Pro Tem of the Senate cost me my chairmanship of the Appropriations Committee then so be it. I wouldn’t change any of them.

I’m looking forward spending my time and energy during my last session on the floor of the senate working every day to restore this institution to place of honor I inherited from Senators Richard and Wasson.

Ron Richard, from Joplin, is the only person in Missouri history to serve as Speaker of the House and President Pro Tem of the Senate. Bill Wasson was Hough’s predecessor in the Senate.

I believe in a process where members are given an opportunity to have a conversation about a piece of legislation, two, to ask questions about a piece of legislation, and, three, propose changes through an amendment process on the floor. When all of that is circumvented, that’s a problem.

This was not the first time Hough had voiced opposition to his party’s legislation by steamroller. He objected to shutting down debate at the end of the regular session in May on a bill repealing two issues voters had approved last year—protection of abortion rights and expansion of sick leave.

He called those actions and the special session experience “a dismantling of what the Senate is supposed to be.”

His party leader wasted no time dropping the axe. Less than half an hour after the session adjourned President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin went to Hough’s office and took away his appropriations committee chairmanship. He has been the vice chairman and then chairman since he came to the Senate six years ago.

She said, ‘we are tired of fighting with you. To which my response was, ‘did you fight with me this week, or did I just go out here and vote no on something that was handed down to the Missouri Senate and a bunch of elected members who are not allowed to talk?’

O’Laughlin assured Springfield television station KYTV there really aren’t any hard feelings involved.

“Every good business has a succession plan. We should not expect less for the Missouri Senate. Leadership on the budget includes not only planning expenditures, but being responsible for outcomes. Eight senators are terming out next year and that is a full 1/3 of the Republican caucus. Planning and executing those plans is a complicated process requiring constant work and oversight. In my view we need an appropriations chair who can get acclimated to the job before the turnover occurs. It has been my plan to appoint a chairman who can gain experience and continue on after the seats change next year. In my view this gives them the best chance of success.

Senior senators can help in this process prior to terming out. I implemented that plan yesterday and it is one I spoke to Senator Hough about last November. He is one of the most talented senators l’ve met and the change has nothing to do with votes as some have conjectured. Serving Missouri is not just about prestige but also about doing what is best for Missourians. I greatly appreciate Senator Hough and the immense amount of work he has performed on behalf of Missourians.

That might be true. Or it might be so much eyewash. Regardless, the optics—to use a phrase that has gained some purchase in our politics today—are pretty bad.  As for continuity, the vice chair of the committee is Chillicothe Senator Rusty Black, who is in his first Senate term and faces the voters for a second term next year. Three other Republican members of the appropriations committee are in their first terms and one other was just elected his second term last year. The committee also includes four Democrats, none of them eligible for committee leadership unless an unlikely switch of majority occurs. But committee members are hardly rookies and will have even more experience after the 2026 budget process.

Hough told The Missourinet O’Laughlin’s statement is “completely disingenuous,” noting that she had not replaced any of the other term-limited chairs of other Seante committees.

Here’s something else that speaks for the character of Lincoln Hough.  He has a picture of Harry Truman in a prominent place in his office.

He hasn’t done it because he’s some kind of a maverick. He’s done it because of the history of his office.

He put up the Truman picture after I saw David Balducchi’s article in the Missouri Historical Review in April, 2021 detailing Truman’s brief Missouri directorship of the National Reemployment Service. From October of 1933 until mid-May of 1934, Truman spent three days a week in Jefferson City where his office was in rooms 419A and 419B of the Capitol.

I took the article to Senator Hough’s office in those rooms and as soon as he read it, he set about getting a nice farmed picture of Truman with a note included in the frame noting Truman’s use of that space.

It was while Truman held that job that Kansas City political boss Tom Pendergast offered him a chance to run for the U.S. Senate, a move some say Pendergast engineered because Truman had been too honest in his job as Jackson County Presiding Judge and Pendergast expected him to lose the Senate bid at the same time his administrative judgeship ran out so a Pendergast crony could be installed in the county position. Truman surprisingly won the first of his two terms before he became President.

It seems kind of appropriate that a portrait of a man who was too honest to suit his own party’s political boss in 1934 should be inhabited by a state senator today who had the courage to call out his party’s willingness to do the biddings of a President who acts as a political boss today.  Hough:

It’s pretty easy to pass legislation in the Missouri Senate if you don’t have to talk about it, and you can just bring it before the body and say, we’re not, we’re not going to have any discussion whatsoever. It seems that if you have any independent thought, or even just raise a question, you have a problem with this Republican Party and that is not the Republican Party that, 15 years ago when I first ran for the House, that I was part of.

There is a penalty sometimes for courage. Hough wasn’t told when he was fired as appropriations chairman if he is even still a committee member.

He lost a Republican primary bid for Lieutenant Governor last year.  I noticed on Facebook a few days after the session ended that someone thinks he’d be a good Congressman. At a time when President Trump’s support seems to be slipping within the Congress, a Republican such as Lincoln Hough, who has an independent streak, might be the kind of Republican the party needs for its future.

A Republican named Lincoln with a big picture of a Democrat named Harry in his office.

Those are pretty good optics.

 

Sellout

Posted on by
Reply

The Missouri General Assembly has sold out the people of Missouri and more than two centuries of our heritage in following President Trump’s dictate on congressional elections.

The quick obedience of our legislature came less than a month after Trump issued a wholly unconstitutional rant on his social media page on August 18—

Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.

While we might have had other presidents who THOUGHT that, only Donald Trump has said so clearly and unmistakably that he is a dictator, the Congress, the Courts, and the Constitution be damned. He, he claims, can order states to do his bidding.

It is nothing short of a political tragedy that our Governor and our Missouri General Assembly have so unabashedly acknowledged that he is what he says he is and they will take orders from him, to the detriment of their constituents.

The legislative journals will be testimony for decades to come how completely the people from our home towns that we chose to represent us have sold out to a president who respects no bounds, including those of the United States Constitution, as well as forfeiting the rights of independence asserted by our State Constitutions for more than two centuries.

To be clear: What Trump and our legislature have done is NOT for the good of our country or our state. Their actions are an abdication by the majority of their oath of office to defend the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Missouri:

“I do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the state of Missouri, and faithfully perform the duties of my office……”

The attitude by legislators who have endorsed the Trump congressional district map raises serious questions whether the people in the House and the Senate that we elected to serve and to protect US have “faithfully performed” the duties of their office—which do not include following the dictates of a President of the United States who demands service only for the good of Donald J. Trump, a man either ignorant of the Constitution HE swore to uphold or who flagrantly ignores Section Four, which reserves the power to the states to regulate elections and the counting of votes and they in no way must do what the President tells them to do.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.

The loophole in the language, however, does allow the legislature to carry out a President’s wishes and there’s nothing to stop a power-hungry President from telling the legislature to do his bidding and the majority of the legislative members can rationalize reasons for doing so—which they have done although the legislature is under no legal obligation to do so.

The legislature also has ignored the wording of every Missouri Constitution in the 204-year history of our state by agreeing Missouri, and other states “are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes.”

States are not agents. They are independent subdivisions and Missouri has repeatedly claimed that distinction. Article Ten of the Bill of Rights, often cited—especially by Republicans—establishes that:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Missouri has always firmly claimed those powers, beginning with our first constitution.

1820: “We, the people of Missouri, inhabiting the limits hereinafter designated, by our representatives in convention assembled, at St. Louis, on Monday the 12th day of June, 1820, do mutually agree to form and establish a free and independent republic, by the name of ‘the State of Missouri;’ and for the government thereof, do ordain and establish this constitution.”

1865: Article 1, Section 5: That the people of this state have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police thereof, and of altering and abolishing their Constitution and form of government, whenever it may be necessary to their safety and happiness; but every such right should be exercised in pursuance of law, and consistently with the Constitution of the United States.

1875:  BILL OF RIGHTS. In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles on which our government is founded, we declare-.

Section 1. Political power, origin of. —That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. [Same as Const. 1865, Art. 1, Sec. 4.]

Sec. 2. Internal affairs, regulation of. —That the people of this State have the inherent, sole and exclusive right to regulate the internal government and police thereof, and to alter and abolish their Constitution and form of government whenever they may deem it necessary to their safety and happiness : Provided, Such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.  (same, in substance, as language from 1865 Constitution)

1945 Constitution: Bill of Rights:

Section 4. Independence of Missouri—submission of certain amendments to Constitution of the United States.—That Missouri is a free and independent state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States; that all proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States qualifying or affecting the individual liberties of the people or which in any wise may impair the right of local self-government belonging to the people of this state, should be submitted to conventions of the people.

Free and Independent state?  Not anymore.  Not as long as a President can say “jump” and the Missouri legislature leaps.

How high would it leap?  Senator Lincoln Hough of Springfield is the answer. Hough has been a trusted figure among the Republican super majority. You don’t get much more trusted than by being put in charge of the committee that decided what gets how much of a $50 billion budget.

He and Senator Mike Moon of Ash Grove  voted against both the petition proposal and against Trump’s gerrymandered map.

Hough has told The Missouri Independent that Senate leader Cindy O’Laughlin within minutes of the vote removed him as the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee because he defied orders to vote for the petition and redistricting bills.

Hough told The Independent, “She said, ‘​w​e are tired of fighting with you.’  To which my response was, ‘did you fight with me this week, or did I just go out here and vote no on something that was handed down to the Missouri Senate and a bunch of elected members who are not allowed to talk?’”

“What I’ve seen at the end of last session, and what I saw this week, is a dismantling of what the Senate is supposed to be.”

The Senate as an institution nationally and in this state has always—until now—held itself to be the careful, deliberative chamber that allowed all voices to be heard, even if those voices tried to defeat or  modify legislation.  What happened in that chamber last week ended that important role in which one chamber of the Congress or of the legislature cooly evaluates the value and the honesty of legislation.

The Senate leadership, not even pretending to honor that tradition and that role in the system of government checks and balances that our nation’s creators gave us, destroyed that tradition. It twice voted to silence opposing voices and go straight to a vote, the outcome of which was guaranteed even with the two GOP defectors (Republicans control 2/3 of the seats in both chambers).

O’Laughlin several days ago fell back on the questionable excuse that the bills should be rammed through the special session to protect “Christian conservative values.” We are still waiting for her definition of them.

Whether the government should force Christian views—-or the perceived views of politicians who consider themselves Christians—on others seems clearly violative of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

The Pew Research Center recently released its survey on religion in Missouri, showing 62% of Missourians identify themselves as Protestant Christians. Catholic Christians represent 14%.  Historically Black Protestants make up five percent. Four percent of adults identify with other religions—Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindus and other world religions.

One-third of the responding adults say they are “nones,” religiously-unaffiliated. Five percent are atheists and eight percent are agnostic. “Nothing in particular” adds up to 20%.

If our legislature was interested in a representative congressional map, especially one based on those “Christian Conservative Values,” the map would be 5-3 Republican based on the perentages in the Pew study. Instead, it has caved to political greed and created a 7-1 map that does away with the only ordained Christian in our delegation and one of only of two active Christian ministers in the U.S. House of Representatives. Then it punished one of the caucus’s own members for taking a principled stand while the rest of his party colleagues sold out.

Whether it is a matter of religion or just raw politics, the Senate by its actions, got far under the covers with our President, and—in effect—endorsed his great desire to be a dictator.

Ultimately, these actions will reach the federal courts. Sadly, we no longer have confidence that the ultimate federal court will find our legislature’s bowing to a President seeking total power is far out of Constitutional bounds.

Some of the protestors at the Capitol when the House voted pointed to the state motto, “Let the welfare of the people be the supreme law.”  Pretty clearly, the legislature has chosen the welfare of Donald Trump as its priority.

You and I have been sold out by those closest to us that we trust to defend our freedoms from a President who wants to become a tyrant.

Remember those who have done this to us. Remember it next year when they ask for your vote.

We do still have the right to vote for our legislators.

For now.

Your Vote Won’t Mean a Thing OR it Might Mean Everything

Posted on by
Reply

—if the legislature passes a crazy initiative petition reform proposal suggested by Governor Kehoe.

Gerrymandering our congressional districts to eliminate one of our Democrat members of congress—because President Trump wants no congressional limits on his power—is not the only threat to our republican (small “r”) form of government on legislators’ desks in the special session.

It is widely recognized that the petition process by which citizens can demand a new law be passed (because the legislature won’t pass it) has its problems and it has its perils that arise from mass expenditures of money to, in effect, buy part of our Missouri Constitution or part of our state statutes.

But a proposal that means 7/8 of Missouri’s voters’ ballots will have no meaning whatsoever is simply absurd.

The governor wants a law passed that says any proposal put on the ballot by citizen petition not only must achieve a majority to pass, it must get a majority in every one of our eight congressional districts.

One of the problems with the current process is that votes in our heavily-Democratic metropolitan areas have been enough at times to pass a proposal opposed throughout the rest of the state.

Governor Kehoe did not address that issue in announcing his recommendation in issuing the call for the special session. He said, “For far too long, Missouri’s Constitution has been the victim of out-of-state special interests who deceive voters to pass out-of-touch policies.  It’s time we give voters a chance to protect our Constitution.”

The answer to this problem is NOT, however, in killing a sacred part of this country—majority rule.

If Governor Kehoe’s idea had been in effect last year, we would not have sports wagering coming to Missouri regardless of how many millions of dollars the gambling interests spent. You’ll recall that the industry spent more than $40 million to get its petition issue passed by 3,000 votes. The industry fits like a glove the governor’s description of “out-of-state special interests who deceive voters.”

The proposal lost in three counties that have casinos—Lewis, Cooper, and Cape Girardeau. It carried in the metro areas that have casinos by tens of thousands of votes. Only one outstate county with a casino—Pemiscot—approved, but by only about 340 votes. It failed not in just one congressional district but probably in five (we haven’t seen a breakout according to district but the county-by-county plus St. Louis and Kansas City totals are available).

This is a ridiculously BAD idea.  Under this idea, a petition-proposed law or amendment could pass in seven of our congressional districts but fail by a single vote in the eighth. That single vote would negate every other vote in every other part of the state.

The proposal deals with a problem that is largely of the legislature’s own doing. By refusing to pass bills that have significant public support, our lawmakers are clearing the way for citizen petition campaigns. Sports gambling is the biggest and most recent such failure. The refusal to pass a law has led the gambling to put sports wagering in the Constitution and therefore make in extremely hard to deal with the problems this new form of gambling cause by changing a law. If it’s in the constitution, correction is manifoldly more difficult.

Here’s something else that’s kind of tragic—

This proposed law does not require a public vote.  You and I will have no right to vote on whether the state should be able to take away our votes, even if we are in the majority, at least not as the proposal is now written.

Law by petition has its problems.

Such laws do not go through the rigorous examination and refining process of legislative procedure. That can be frustrating for those hoping for a change in something. But writing a law that says specifically what it is meant to say, no more and no less,  is a finely-developed talent. Once it is written, it goes through committee hearings where shortcomings can be highlighted and corrected. Then in each chamber of the legislature, it goes through a “perfecting” process that again can be a rigorous review before it is finally passed.

But that doesn’t mean the right of petition given us by our ancestors more than a century ago should be rendered meaningless by this proposal.

The system does need some careful tweaks, but not surgery by meat cleaver. One tweak is a requirement that entities wanting to put a petition issue on the ballot should file only one version of the proposal with the Secretary of State whose elections staff spends time reviewing for correctness.

The Secretary of State’s web page has numbers that dramatically point to the problem. Last year, 174 petitions were filed. Nine were rejected, 24 were withdrawn, and 139 were approved for circulation. Only four were submitted with signatures and put on the ballot. Four out of 174. Large numbers were slightly different versions of the same matter. But each required review by the Secretary of State staff.

A law saying a group gets one shot would be helpful. If there are problems, then the group can submit a better proposal. But the shotgun approach needs to stop.

Secretary of State Denny Hoskins has some ideas about improving the process:

Limit abuse of process, by instituting modest filing fees and banning duplicate or near-duplicate submissions.

Ensure broad geographic support, strengthening the constitutional “district distribution” requirement so that petitions reflect statewide, not concentrated, backing.

Ban foreign or out-of-state fundraising, and stiffen penalties for fraudulent signatures or circulator misrepresentations.

Increase transparency, with public comment periods and clear, plain-language explanations available before signature gathering begins.

Generally, these aren’t bad ideas although the funding ban might be a little shaky because of  First Amendment speech problems and whether limits on raising the money to do the speaking infringes on the right to petition by groups who say they can’t enjoy that right unless they can raise money from whatever source.

The secretary’s idea, however, of allowing one congressional district to be, in effect, a killing entity that makes votes in all of  the other districts meaningless is simply undemocratic.

These are statewide issues and the votes from throughout the state mean something today. But they won’t tomorrow if this proposal passes. “Broad geographic support” sounds good. But it’s shorthand for “forget majority rule.”

Missourians already have given up their right to vote. Twice. First, it was term limits that means we have no right to vote for a lawmaker who has served us well and that we would like to represent us for more than eight years. Second is the adopted initiative petition proposal requiring votes every five years in Kansas City and St. Louis on whether to continue their earnings taxes. One provision of that issue says none of our other cities can ever ask voters to approve a similar tax for their city. Proposals might not pass, but we have a law—again, submitted by initiative petition—that says we can’t even vote on it.

Now we are being asked to approve an idea that says a statewide majority is useless if one-eighth of the state, by as little as one vote, can wipe out the votes of everybody else.

The governor’s plan doesn’t take onerous amounts of money out of the process. Doing so has to be through a way around First Amendment protections of free speech and right to petition. Nobody has figured out how to do that in a way that the court system will buy.

A undemocratic proposal that says votes from 7/8 of our state can be rendered meaningless by the barest of majorities opposed in one district is just plain wrong.

Suppose we applied the idea to legislative races saying no one can be elected to the House or the Senate if one precinct in their district fails to give them a majority. That’s “broad geographic support” brought home to roost.

If they’re not willing to put themselves in that predicament, they shouldn’t put everybody else in the state in it.

 

A REALLY Special Session

Posted on by
Reply

Our lawmakers are back in Jefferson City to help decide what kind of a country we will have, and what kind of country we will be. That’s a pretty strong observation. But if we are honest, it is also pretty strongly true.

Governor Kehoe has called them back because President Trump worries he won’t have continued absolute power for the last half of his term unless legislatures in various states take unprecedented action to change congressional district lines to eliminate Democrats.

Forget what the voters decided in the 2024 Congressional elections. Make sure some of them can’t have the representative they elected because a President who brags about his popularity is worried that, in truth, he is so unpopular in poll after poll that Americans might vote in 2026 to impede his seizure of absolute power.

The Missouri legislature wants to take Representative Emanuel Cleaver’s elected job away from him by splitting his district so about half of his biggest supporters can’t vote for him in 2026.

It is interesting that Republicans, who have so many chest-thumping evangelical Christians supporting them, want to eliminate a member of Congress who is a Christian minister. Perhaps Emanuel Cleaver isn’t Christian enough. Perhaps they think he is spiritually lost or spiritually bankrupt because he’s a Methodist, a mainline Christian group that has split in a dispute about whether God creates gays.

Wouldn’t you think that a president who peddles Bibles, poses holding a Bible in front of a D. C. church, and says in commercials that he has several Bibles and it’s his favorite book would want someone like Congressman Cleaver in Washington as a moral force?

That’s Trump’s problem. He is not a moral force himself. In fact, there are plenty who wonder if he has any morals at all.

Donald Trump, who is so scared of losing power that he will disrupt the entire system of picking a representative government, wants the legislature to just turn over the keys to the democratic process in Missouri to him.

He talks about American exceptionalism but cares not for the government system that gives us that distinction and he will do anything to make sure his power goes unchecked for as long as he and his political offspring can keep it.

Have the people of Missouri asked for this change in who represents them?

No.  There has been no public outcry that our congressional delegation has betrayed the people who elected it. But those we have chosen to represent us at the state level are facing a demand that the legislature go against its own public’s wishes so Missouri can help keep a man in power who day after day advances policies that are antithetical to a heritage that millions have lived and died to defend and to perfect.

Now we have the spectacle of our chosen state representatives and our chosen state senators meeting to undermine our representatives in the national government that we voted to support less than one year ago, and in the process throw out a Black Methodist minister who has served our state with great honor and decency in Washington since January 3, 2005, a man dedicated to public service in the pulpit as well as in the places of power—a dozen years on the city council in our largest city, eight years as its mayor, and more than two decades representing Christian values and his district’s needs.

He rightfully threatens to fight this ill-conceived realignment in court: “It will render people in Kansas City essentially silent and powerless,” Cleaver said. “The reason I’m saying this is Kansas City is roughly 70-something percent Democratic. If you tear Kansas City apart — put one portion of the Kansas City area in one district, the other in another — the chances are they have no representation.”

He is correct although today’s majority party does not seem to care.

What hammer does Donald Trump hold over our lawmakers that makes them so craven in doing his bidding? It’s a big one. It’s the power to withhold or even take back the billions of dollars in federal funding that underwrite about half of the state budget.

It is awfully hard to look down the barrel of that gun and not wilt. Trump wants no defiance from Missouri and from other Republican states. He and those who are pulling his strings daily prove they care not one whit for most of us but expects our voices in government at state and federal levels to say only two words: “Yes, sir.”

Some key questions emerge: Is there time to make all of this happen?  Can opponents drag out the special session before the bill passes and the court battles begin and how long will that process take before it clears state courts and goes through the federal court system, which will take even more time?

When will filing for these offices begin if this issue is tied up in courts?  Candidates cannot file in districts that will not legally exist until the courts rule which map will be THE map. When will primary elections be held, ditto? When will lawsuits challenging the results begin and be processed? Will the court fights be  done  before time for a November election?

This is going to be a long and ugly process that will do nothing to improves public confidence in Missouri’s, and the nation’s, government.

One man wants to take away one of our members of Congress with a new map THAT IS UNLIKELY TO BE PUT OUT FOR VOTER APROVAL before an election is held specifically to oust a congressman who has been elected eleven times by people in a district that Trump wants the Missouri legislature to destroy.

Here is the final question:

How much does the Missouri General Assembly want to disgrace itself for a man who has been considered by almost 150 of the nation’s most distinguished historians one of the worst presidents in history—-eve before he started swinging a sledgehammer in his second term.

Despite the words of a long-ago popular song, Freedom IS a word for everything to lose.

Our legislators will tell us at the end of this special session if they think it is, as the song also says, “just another word.”

Petting the buffalo, feeding the bears

Posted on by
Reply

The first time we visited Yellowstone National Park, we noticed a line of vehicles parked on the shoulder of the road. That can only mean there’s an animal, or animals, in the neighborhood.

We pulled in behind a pickup truck where two baby bears were on their hind legs and being fed apple slices from a slightly lowered driver’s side window.  While the driver fed the cubs, the passenger got out with his camera and came around to the left front fender and took pictures.

In a few minutes, the pickup truck pulled away and the baby bears came our way. When they stood up their noses reached the bottom of our car’s windows and when they got no satisfaction on my side, they went around to Nancy’s side. Eventually, we realized our doors were not locked and hastily locked them.

We never saw Mama Bear until she lumbered up out of the woods, and stood up and put her front feet ON THE ROOF of our car.  I still have the photograph I took looking out my window at a big brown bear chest and its white stripe.

She didn’t shake the car or anything, just stood there for a little bit before going back into the woods with the kids.

We quickly observed how lucky was the clown with the camera taking pictures at the pickup truck that Mama Bear didn’t come out then. They move awfully fsst, these bears, perhaps faster than a guy who might not have sensed her rush out of the woods until the last second and couldn’t get back into that truck.

Some tourists do some incredibly dumb things in Yellowstone. More often these days we hear about some idiot who decides to pet that nice buffalo and realizes much too late that Yellowstone is many things but it’s not a petting zoo.

So it is that we wonder if Donald Trump’s demands that congressional districts can be redrawn to protect him and his disastrous reign might not be a case of feeding bears and petting a buffalo.

Redrawing the districts just might urinarily agitate not only Democrats, but also be the final straw for some of his Republicans and—most important—quiet independents, who could be the Mama Bears and the intolerant buffalo in those district elections. In this political climate, sure-things are not necessarily sure.

The polls have indicated some softening of R voters who might not vote or—for this election only—hold their noses and vote for a Democrat. Republicans, as is true with all other voting blocs, do not lack independent thought and might decide this is a time to really stop the steal.

The biggest bloc that could come into play are the outright independents who might have found Trump marginally less objectionable than Harris last year but this year might see redistricting as the straw-breaking issue for them, too.

If Donald Trump really was confident in his domestic and foreign policies, he wouldn’t be pulling this stunt.  But he isn’t, so he’s unthinkingly feeding bears and trying to pet a buffalo.

The 19th century English poet William Cosgrove Monkhouse, wrote an appropriate limerick for this occasion—although it involves an animal not found in Yellowstone National Park:

There was a young lady of Niger

Who smiled as she rode on a tiger;

They returned from the ride

With the lady inside,

And the smile on the face of the tiger

Independents, disaffected Republicans, and angry motivated Democrats could combine to make a huge Tiger in 2026. Trumpists might want to consider carefully how much they want to use their twigs to poke it through the bars. Creatures such as bears, buffalo, and Tigers seem docile enough.

Until……

 

Sometimes—-

Posted on by
1

I wish I was a reporter again. God! I used to love to ask important people, “What the Hell do you think you’re doing?” although I didn’t use those words. The point of the questions was the same.  I loved those moments, as good reporters do.  It’s what we are there for, actually.

Bloomberg News has quoted the leader of the Missouri Senate saying President Trump wants our congressional districts redrawn “to be sure Missouri’s representation matches Missouri’s Christian conservative majority.”

If I were still a reporter, I would have several questions. .

What are the values of a “Christian conservative majority” that are lacking in any of our present congressional districts—or members of Congress?  Is it just a matter of Democrats serving from two of those districts?  Does the election of Democrats indicate a majority of the people in a district lack Christian values, particularly “Christian conservative” values?

Given that our two Democratic controlled districts are centered in our biggest cities, is she suggesting St. Louis and Kansas City are to some degree not Christian?

Are these congressional districts that are not conservative Christian Muslim?  Shintoists? Buddhists? Sikhs?  Atheists?  One of the Congressmen is a Methodist Minister. Is he not Christian enough?  He’s the one in the crosshairs. How about Methodists generally?  The denomination has split recently. Which side is most Christian?

How does the Trump administration reflect the Christian values of being our brother’s keeper, of being the Good Samaritans, of helping the poor, of healing the sick? How does President Trump fit into that description of Christianity?

How is ICE and its behaviors a reflection of “Christian conservative values?”

How does she square Paul’s letter to the Galatians that proclaims, “There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

—Or even how well the leader of our government fits the admonition from the Old Testament Prophet Micah:

He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.

It seems from here that there are shortages in the justice and mercy categories. And humility is not a word in the Bible he’s peddling.

One of the joys of being a reporter is being curious about things and having access to people who can discuss answers to that curiosity.

I was away from the Capitol for about five years after I left my life in the newsroom and when I went back to the Capitol to try to convince the legislature to do things the casino industry won’t let it do, I realized how much I missed the intellectual give-and-take of the place. A reporter’s job is to question and questions by reporters should not be automatically interpreted as hostile as often as they are, especially today when some political skin seems horribly thin.

How can we understand the religious attitudes that are dividing us if we refuse to ask or refuse to answer questions that test what we believe. And how Christian is it to claim that there is no room for different interpretations whether they are personal, denominational, social, or political?

Religion is an especially touchy subject these days when it has become a political tool or weapon. I struggle to accept those who think differing views make someone less Christian.

As I have often remarked, “Nothing screws up faith more than religion.”

I’d like to know what religion has to do with congressional redistricting.  I doubt that Donald Trump has made that one of his reasons for trying to gerrymander-rig the 2026 elections.

Apparently, six Christian districts and two heathen districts isn’t good enough.  We’ll be watching how legislators suddenly take a heathen area and with a few strokes of their genuine Donald J. Trump Sharpie, legislators will turn a heathen part of the state into a Christian one.

I’m pretty sure that is not something James Madison and his fellow creators anticipated when they wrote the Constitution. And I’m also pretty sure the court system has never ruled that congressional districts must be drawn intentionally to reflect Christian values.

I’m just an observer now. But, man oh man, there are times when I wish I could walk up to someone who thinks they’re important and ask things like this.

One Christian to another.