Monday, September 10, 2018

A SOCIO/POLITICAL POTPOURRI, PART ONE

By Edwin Cooney

Usually, I write about one topic. Today, I offer a political potpourri in response to two occurrences and to one proposed event. This musing could be called “A Potpourri of Reactionary Red Meat” because it is composed of straight opinion rather than my usual balanced thoughtful reactions to events. For what it’s worth, here it goes:

(1.) Monday, July 16th, 2018. Standing beside President Vladimir Putin, President Trump tells the world, in particular his Republican colleagues, that he trusts the word of President Putin regarding Russia’s activities during the 2016 presidential campaign more than he does America’s intelligentsia. Since 1945, Republican and conservative leaders have shamelessly charged President Franklin D. Roosevelt with treason at the February 1945 Yalta Conference during which he made certain concessions to Premier Joseph Stalin enhancing the Soviets’ influence and power especially in Eastern Europe. For all the legitimate criticism that might be thrown at FDR, his concessions to Stalin were made with two vital purposes in mind. First, FDR sought the Soviets’ essential participation in the new United Nations. Second, and vitally important at the time, was Stalin’s agreement to declare war on Japan once the European war was over. As history unfolded, the Soviets ultimately got more out of Roosevelt than he got out of Stalin. Since the Trump-Putin conference at Helsinki, anti-Soviet and even anti-Russian Conservative Republicans have been reluctant to tag President Trump the way they have labeled Roosevelt for over seventy years. As I see it, herein lies a bit of hypocrisy! Even more, FDR’s objectives were, at the very least, forward-looking. So what were President Trump’s objectives by comparison? The least that can be said about them is that they were strictly self-serving and lacking any degree of purpose or patriotism. The most that can be said for the president’s behavior is that he “out Roosevelted” Roosevelt! Remember the story about Vice President Nixon’s first meeting with Nikita Khrushchev in July 1959? They spent much of their first 30 minutes together arguing over whether pig or cow dung smelled worse. Nixon ultimately prevailed when Khrushchev agreed that pig dung really was worse than cow manure! On July 16th, Americans got a pasture full of both Putin and Trump manure which traditional Republicans and Conservatives couldn’t even smell! Nuts!

(2.) Since Senator John McCain’s death on Saturday, August 25th, many have been searching for ways to honor him. One such suggestion has been to rename the Richard Brevard Russell Senate Office Building after John McCain who, unlike Senator Russell, was no racist. The justification for such a move is in support of a desire, especially on the part of Liberals, to tear down monuments to the Confederacy. Although I’m generally sympathetic toward the long overdue de-glorification of the Confederate States of America because they really were both racist and treasonous by their very founding, Senator Russell’s career didn’t take place during the life of the Confederacy. Richard Russell, although unapologetically racist, was the most capable member of the United States Senate of his era according to the testimony of his colleagues. He was the father of FDR’s New Deal in the Senate. He founded the National School Lunch Program and vigorously backed and advanced the National Youth Administration, of which young Lyndon B. Johnson was the Texas State Director. Many senators insist that had he not been a Southerner, he would have been the Democratic party’s presidential nominee in 1948 or 1952. He was Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and, in 1964, the same year he fought LBJ’s Civil Rights Bill, he was appointed to the Warren Commission which investigated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Senator Russell’s appointment was a testimony to his intellect as well as to his integrity. Thus, as I see it, since Richard Brevard Russell of Georgia who served in the US Senate from January 12th, 1933 until his death on January 21st 1971 was honored by his Senate colleagues, the withdrawal of that honor would in itself lack honor. There are at least four reasons why I say this. We have rightfully honored slave owners because their accomplishments vastly outweigh their sins of slave ownership. Senator Russell’s life was neither about the confederacy nor about slavery. The Senate that supported the naming of that office building for the late Senator Russell was bedecked with such liberal senators as Humphrey, McGovern, Kennedy, Brook, Muskie, Javits, Hart, Bayh, Proxmire, Nelson, Symington, Eagleton, and others with solid non-racist backgrounds or outlooks. In addition, an honor reflects a cultural continuum. As such it ought not to be ignored by the mores of future generations. It’s true that Senator McCain undoubtedly deserves to be honored by his Senate colleagues, but that honor will be degraded if it is received at the expense of another Senator’s legacy. As I see it, downgrading Senator Richard Russell does not in any way honor the memory and life of Senator John McCain.

(3.) On Friday, September 7th, in Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, Obama took off the gloves, but rather than brawling, he punched with finesse. One of my continuing criticisms of President Obama has been his reluctance to “get in there and duke it out with the opposition.” In last Friday’s speech to students at the University of Illinois, the former president utilized all of the standard criticisms of President Trump including criticism of his denial of climate change, withdrawal from NAFTA, his identification with strong dictators over parliamentarians and, of course, the president’s unwillingness to condemn racists or ethnic bigots. “How hard,” Obama asked rhetorically, “can it be to declare Nazism bad?” In addition, his style of tweets and name-calling did not escape former President Obama’s notice.

However, the most powerful part of the former president’s remarks came near the close of his address. First, he minimized the significance of the activities by the individuals in the Trump White House who were doing their best to curtail Mr. Trump’s reckless activities while devoting their efforts to support 90% of his policies. Mr. Obama’s biggest concern wasn’t as much about Trump’s activities or policies as it was about the havoc he’s visiting on our most vital national institutions. As Scott Baker pointed out in the New York Times, Obama asserted:  “…in the end, the threat to our democracy doesn't just come from Donald Trump or the current batch of Republicans in Congress or the Koch brothers and their lobbyists, or too much compromise from Democrats, or Russian hacking,” he said. “The biggest threat to our democracy is indifference…”

For most of our lives, you and I have thought that hate is the opposite of love. In other words, hate for America, the opposite of love for America, just must be our greatest enemy. However, when you really think about it, that’s not precisely true. A hater may attempt to or actually commit a single deadly deed before he or she is caught. One who is indifferent may, even without realizing it, starve America of all its energy and desire to matter.

Political and ideological bombardment by ambitious talk show hosts, politicians, and especially by preachers may be numbing our very beings, not to the desire for personal comfort or satisfaction, but from a sufficient energy to identify and thus defend our genuine and vital national interests!

If that doesn’t scare you, then I guess you’ve already been had!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY

No comments: