When Heroes Fall

The lives of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Congressman John Lewis together show a very big truth about this country: There are many ways that one can make a difference in the great cause of "liberty and justice for all". Their examples suggest that the way can--or must--be a nonviolent one. 

  The Notorious RBG Justice Ginsburg had great abilities which allowed her, a true product of merit, to rise above her obvious disadvantages. In my view, her superpower was rhetoric, the ability to express herself precisely, concisely, and accurately, in order to persuade. Listen to her public speech: Every word deliberately chosen. 

 I leave it to others to flesh out her amazing biography, but I feel her writing will be studied as one of our greatest jurists (though too often in dissent). 

 She was very clever in the way she interacted with others, with humor and grace, and I feel she tolerated the worshipful praise she received because it did so much to encourage others. 

 It is sad that she was unable to complete this year on the Supreme Court's bench, which she loved and upon which she reflected so much honor. If only her last wish, to hold off on seating her replacement until after January 20, could be honored (see below). 

 John Lewis - The Modern-Day Social Justice Warrior? 

 You could say so, but it is a different kind of war. A nonviolent war.  Like Ginsburg, he worked within the framework of lawful challenge to legal injustice. 

 A friend of mine made the comment, referring to my condemnation of Republican hypocrisy with regard to the Supreme Court nomination, "Calling politicians hypocrites is like calling prostitutes whores." To which, my response was simply, "John Lewis?"

 I have not always been either fully aware or fully appreciative of all that he has done. I knew that he had led the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee when that was an accurate description of that organization's activity. I remember being shocked when he defeated Julian Bond in a party primary runoff for the Congressional seat that he then held for 34 years. Then there was a long time that we came to learn what John Lewis was about, what he had always been all about. 

And, to the greatest extent, what Ruth Bader Ginsburg's life and career were all about. Their 'brand', if you will, was about as solid as there was. Will there be those who can rise to that level, with the quality and purity of agency? At least they have opened doors. 

Ruth Bader Ginsburg - The post-mortem 

No morals, no principles. Just an unrestrained grab for power and money. 

There is a compromise, and it's not hard to find. 

 Trump has every right to nominate the candidate of his choice, but there is to be no final cloture allowed on the motion to confirm the nomination before the election. Thus the election can be conducted with the question of the acceptability of his nomination implicit in the verdicts of the voters, and the vetting of the candidate can go forward in good faith. If Trump and the Republican Senate should lose, they could go forward with the vote during the lame duck session, but at their own peril, knowing that the gloves would come off in terms of future Senate rules. 

Ideally, the new Congress can consider the qualifications of the candidate after being sworn in. Or not. All that is required is that McConnell agree not to close off the filibuster before Election Day. 

McConnell knows all this, but will give away nothing unless he must. 

He will attempt a hard line on starting immediately with the confirmation as soon as the person is named. There will be "concern" from several Republican Senators and within their ranks, maybe a thin group of binding No votes on a summary process (like the impeachment trial was). Sen. Collins can be relied upon to oppose an immediate vote, and so can Sen. Murkowski. Romney is more than just a possible roadblock.  

The fourth known potential defector (four are needed) is one who's specifically excluded a vote during election time in the past. South Carolina Senator Lindsay 'Gollum' Graham, in the electoral fight of his life, will choose the slimiest route toward the sea on this troublesome vote. His self-serving logic I believe looks like this: if he sticks with Trump on this one, he may or may not win his re-election, but if Trump wins and Graham loses, he could still maybe get a Cabinet post, specifically Secretary of Defense, a job which would certainly open up in that case. So the odds are better that way (in his calculation) than for sticking to the principle to which he invited all to hold him accountable. What that translates into in Graham's behavior will be a call for proceeding "with normal order" (as if an upcoming election does not always disrupt normal business) and then extravagantly praising the nominee and calling for approval by acclamation. 

This won't hurt McConnell in his contested re-election campaign, which for him is just about bringing home his state's base of support. It may hurt his chances of holding onto Senate control, though. Putting incumbents in tough races (IA, CO, AZ, and especially NC as examples) into a bind may backfire. My reading of his public statements does not commit him to a vote before the election, only before the end of the year. I will look for him to prepare the way (all the hearings and meetings that can be arranged), but actually hold the meaningful votes in the weeks immediately following the election, whatever the outcome. 

For Mitch, whether Donald Trump wins or not is irrelevant: Like he is for Putin, Drumpf is McConnell's useful idiot he can do without if necessary. But the SCOTUS seat for McConnell is of paramount importance. That, and somehow preventing the Democrats from reversing his weight on the scales of justice after he and his crew depart, as they must soon.

Post P-M:

  I should've posted the above last night (Sunday the 20th) but for some technical issue with the new interface on blogspot.   I watched the touching Mitch speech to commemorate RBG, followed immediately by his line in the sand.  I still see the confirmation vote being sometime in the range of Nov. 14-21, whether the election outcome is Yea, Nay, or still being counted.   That is about the best they can do, except appeal to hypothetical Republican consciences. 

I don't see this changing the Presidential race much; I do see this impacting some Senate races, and raising the level of awareness of its importance.  Unlike some others, I think this "principled stand" Sen. Collins is taking might help her save her seat.  

Policy Proposal for Joe

VP Biden should announce that he will propose a National Institute for Home Health Work.  

In doing so, he will allow us to address a critical future need of our society and develop the value of a widespread, under-trained and under-paid service. 

Why Home Health Work?  - It is a demographic fact that the numbers of retired people, at all levels of health, are increasing dramatically, and we should expect those to continue.  

The coronavirus epidemic in the US and other countries has shown us that concentrations of people with compromised health conditions can be explosively dangerous in the case of contagious disease.  Many or most retirees would prefer to live at home, if the right care can be provided to them. 

The quality of service provided by home healthcare providers is, in general, not good enough.  In the employment marketplace today, that work is understood to be underpaid and unstable, with its main advantage being easy entry,  great demand, and easy exit.  A few manage to land private placements with more stability, but most wash out or give up. 

That is not the kind of care that people need.  There is an identifiable range of necessary skills, from first aid, medication assistance, and making good judgement calls on emergency assistance, to practical things like assisting around the house, cooking, and helping with transportation for clients.  A nationally-recognized certification and training program would assist agencies in finding qualified employees, who would legitimately expect to be paid better than today's norm. 

How? and Where? -  Most of the training needs to be done remotely, through a thin network of accredited centers which primarily recruit and coordinate, providing technical communications assistance as needed, as well.

The rollout should look like this: 

• Bring in a small group of experienced workers, public health and safety experts, and trainers from top-rated agencies and video training experts to develop curriculum. 
• Recruit initial groups from among top-rated home health workers to 'train the trainers'. Ensure maximum diversity.  These trainers are the permanent employees of the institute and would create a new professional corps.
• Fine-tune the balance of "lectures", "interactive discussions", and "hands-on monitored sessions", adjusting over time with feedback from trainers.  Provide secondary assistance in a variety of foreign languages, and create an additional language certification for workers able to assist in them. 
• Testing of learners should similarly engage online, written, and hands-on demonstrations.  The goal is to provide valid credentials and guide learners to additional training where necessary before going or returning to the field. 

The location of the Institute should be in South Florida.  That's where the greatest numbers of both clients and potential learners reside.  Other centers should be in similar magnet areas where there is unmet demand for high-quality home health workers. 

I would make a rough estimate that the whole process to initiate and roll out the program would cost $500 million.  After that, the annual cost of the service should be no more than one-tenth that; clearly the service should charge a fee, but it should be one that recognizes the public value being created, and the length of the course--some 3-6 months for workers with previous experience, a year for those without--will make it cost-effective for tens of thousands. 

Someone who has access please pass this on to the Biden-Harris campaign!  

 

He Did the Kenosha Kid

Why Wisconsin? 

There are many possible paths for the Electoral College vote.  Some, like a Biden collapse, a Trump resignation, or a huge Democratic wave, are real but relatively unlikely.  If most of the states fall out in accordance with historical patterns and continuing recent trends, some number like the low 200's can be expected to fall out to each side.   This excludes surprise scenarios like Biden winning TX, GA, OH, or IA, and Trump winning states like NH, NV, NM, and, importantly, MI.  It has been reliably reported that the Trump campaign has pulled its TV ad buys there, and polls publicly reported are showing Biden's lead now just above the margin of error.  

So, the starting point for this main scenario is a 238-203 Democratic lead.  

Here's the visual image: Endgame scenario - pt. 1

The ones not assigned are the remaining "battleground states"--FL, PA, AZ, WI, NC, and (newly-added to the list) MN; also two single-vote congressional districts in the two states that divide their votes up that way:  the Second Congressional district of Maine and of Nebraska (ME-2 and NE-2).  Remarkably, both are expected to be close. 

Florida and Pennsylvania are two states both campaigns have at the top of their priorities:  if Biden can win both, in this high-likelihood scenario he has the win; if Trump gets both, with North Carolina Trump is at the verge.  Let's divide them, though, according to the preponderance of recent elections--FL and NC to Trump and PA to Biden.  

This brings it to the grim endgame scenario, Biden up to 258-247.  (Here's a link to see that scenario:   Grim endgame) In order to win, Trump needs two of the remaining states (MN, WI, or AZ), and one or two of the single-vote districts. (Or all three, of course).  Biden needs one of them, with one or two of the secondary targets.   

This is why Trump had to go to Kenosha.  The national Trump campaign is working the "Law'N Order tactic", and the purpose was not to console Jason Blake, paralyzed by multiple shots in the back, but to stir up more resentment among those who felt their security endangered by the uprisings against police violence. This was targeting the suburbs of WI, MN (shaken by the George Floyd killing and its aftermath), and all-important PA.  

As for AZ, I have heard that Trump has pulled ads there, and Biden continues to show small leads in this state, which is trending Democratic after a long, uninterrupted string of Republican Presidential wins there.  I predict the Republicans will try to regroup around a law 'n' order themed attack, especially if there is some kind of domestic strife in Phoenix's Maricopa County.   Finally, a tell that this endgame strategy is fully in play will be special effort in those two Congressional districts (ones Obama won that went narrowly to Trump in 2016), the Omaha area of Nebraska and rural upstate Maine. 

So far, though, there is little evidence the George Wallace-ite approach has moved voters enough in those  key states.  For this, I can give some credit to the much-discredited discernment of the electorate.   

Boiling Over

 If that new managed account is doing reasonably well, I'd look to move some additional money to it from the big Discover savings account (which is now paying only about 1% interest).  In the meantime, it can wait a few weeks.  Third quarter earnings reports in October will be watched unusually closely. 

* * * * 

Oh, sorry, wrong Clipboard.  

Here is a response I wrote on dailykos just now in response to an article citing Trevor Noah's " quote:

Enough with this "militia" bullshit. This isn't the Battle of Yorktown. It's a bunch of dudes threatening people with guns. 

“Dudes threatening people with guns” is bad enough; it leads to armed, violent encounters.  Like Kenosha, but worse.  

On the other hand ‘dudes with guns who threaten people’ is worse. 

We must expect that, in the leading nation of the day, in this technologized era,  ‘people’ are presumably unarmed.  Threatening unarmed people with even ‘unloaded’ weapons is a crime!  Unfortunately, in this nation at this time, we cannot assume that. There is one flaw: Can you find it? 

* * * * 

I've seen a lot of discussion and points being asserted with regard to two recent national polls showing a six-percent margin, as opposed to the nine-point ones in recent weeks.  The press release from Yahoo! was typical, highlighting this alleged trend, instead of this more interesting bit:  

The new Yahoo News-YouGov poll shows that nearly every voter in America has made up his or her mind, with 96 percent Biden and Trump supporters now saying they have decided how they will vote — up 2 percent from when the same voters were surveyed in late July. Only 8 percent remain undecided"

Despite the faulty math, the fact remains that there is only a small percentage of leaners to be decided in the debates and campaign shows.  The real game is about getting those votes in and counted. 

Response to bhatman

Oh, yeah.  Simple choice:  It's the Biden-Harris ticket, or shitting oneself on the toilet, once again.  No other choice. At some point, the flush is going to give out.  

Chinese and Russian tyrannies are looking for signs of decrepitude in our republic they can exploit.  Japan is going to be a surprise watchpoint in foreign affairs.   Meanwhile, our lawlessness is showing, once again.   Brazil is always the country of the future.  With luck, we could be Brazil soon.  

Ever see the movie 'Brazil'?  Great satire, one I usually forget to mention when making lists of my very favorite genre. 

* * * * 

One of Fareed Zakaria's best shows ever last week.  How the rest of the world sees us.  (Available on podcast.)  I find that our fellow humans are being somewhat patient, maybe seeing the end better than we; the fires of war abroad are smoldering, rather than burning, and they would prefer to have our "leadership" when the crunches come.  Translation:  regime change, please!

Edit--added 9/9/20: 

Comment (9/3) on a Haaretz article, titled "Netanyahu May Be Just as Corrupt and Disruptive, but He’s No Match for Trump in Terms of Crazy", by Chemi Shalev: 

who is the better con man, Bibi or Drumpf? Netanyahu's con deserves respect for its long run and complexity, but Donald trumps him with its world-historical audacity.

Can he succeed in the end, get away clean? His US holdings may be forfeit in the end, but the outfit can probably continue on thru JaredCo. As for exile, he's trying to swing Istanbul. In preference to a dacha in Yalta. I'm thinking Ankara.