THANK YOU GENERAL! NOW IT'S UP TO US TO LIVE UP TO YOU!

By Edwin Cooney

In less than 24 hours after General Powell's passing, something of a miracle occurred. Men and women, Republicans and Democrats from both houses and aisles of Congress, were remembering former General, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and citizen Colin Powell with both admiration and gratitude.

Although as dedicated to American military superiority and as interested in America's successful engagements in international affairs as Generals MacArthur and Dwight Eisenhower were, like the latter, General Powell was a moderate in the application of American prerogatives. When he was George Herbert Walker Bush's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1990 and ’91, he privately asserted that Saddam Hussein should be kept in office. Publicly he stated that our military objective in Iraq was to isolate Saddam Hussein's army and then proceed to kill it. After being appointed Secretary of State by George W. Bush (whom he used to call Sonny), he originally thought it was necessary to maintain Hussein in office due to the likelihood that Saddam's successor could be much worse. Nevertheless, following 9/11, Secretary of State Powell became convinced that the Iraqi leader possessed “weapons of mass destruction.” He therefore went before the United Nations on Thursday, February 5th, 2004 and declared that given the existence of such weapons in the wake of 9/11 it was necessary to occupy Iraq and remove Hussein from office. Subsequently, when it was discovered during our invasion of Iraq that no such weapons existed, Secretary Powell decided that it was time for him to go.

General Powell was neither personally or professionally flawless, a reality he never sought to hide. He later told broadcaster Barbara Walters that he considered that U.N. speech a stain on his public record.

Politically, Colin Powell was registered first as an Independent, but during the 1990s he reregistered as a Republican. In 2000, although he was inclined to support the presidential candidacy of Senator John McCain, General Powell was significantly highly regarded enough to address the GOP convention that would nominate George W. Bush and later to be appointed by President-elect Bush to be Secretary of State. He was the newly elected president's first announced cabinet member and, in view of the controversy surrounding Governor Bush's election, General Powell's appointment strengthened the new president's political legitimacy. "We're a political nation," Powell once observed. "There's nothing dirty about it!”

From time to time, Citizen Powell's political choices pleased and disappointed the partisans of both parties. His almost instinctive desire to support John McCain originally displeased the George W. Bush camp and some Conservatives were likely unhappy that his address to the 2000 Convention urged Republicans to support programs for the education and betterment of children and minorities. Having decided in 1995 that he lacked the drive to campaign for the presidency, he nevertheless felt obligated to announce his support for Senator Barack Obama two weeks before the 2008 election despite his personal high regard for Senator McCain. Although he never left the GOP, he would vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and for Joseph Biden in 2020. Of Donald J. Trump, Secretary Powell's judgment was harsh. "He's a national disgrace and an international pariah!” said the 4 star general.

Colin Luther Powell's death is indeed sad. However, the bipartisan and biracial approval and admiration of what he accomplished and achieved indicates that there remains a spark of national pride and even unity in these fifty states that once upon a time were united under the Union flag — but never under the Confederate flag!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY

WHICH IS THE SUREST ROAD TO PERFECTION: DEMOCRACY OR MERITOCRACY?

By Edwin Cooney

As most of us learn in grade school, you and I live in a democracy. The leaders are elected and even appointed to high office by a majority in either the state or national electorate.  Federal executives and judiciary members  are confirmed by most voting members of the Senate and sometimes by the House. Over the years, especially in these days of increasingly political polarization, some are advocating that our leadership should be both elected and appointed by merit rather than by favor. Thus the question above: ought we to be a democracy or a meritocracy?

The delicious aspect of this question is: who ultimately controls the "ought" of the issue. George Washington, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and the rest of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention debated and decided during that hot Philadelphia summer of 1787 that a democracy, largely due to its flexibility, was preferable to any other form of government.

Alexander Hamilton and John Jay tended to favor a meritocracy as did other future Federalists in the eventual Washington Administration. John Adams and Alexander Hamilton (who came to heartily dislike one another) essentially believed in government by "the better born and educated" where as men like Madison and George Mason favored government open to the wisdom of the farmer and small merchant. Ultimately, we became a democracy primarily due, I think, to the lack of practicality in meritocracy.

I'm convinced that the call to government by meritocracy is a call for government by, of, and for people of perfection. The question therefore is: who are these people and where do they live?

My friend “Albany Steve,” a gentleman of considerable principle and integrity, appears to be leaning toward preferring government by men and women of merit as opposed to government by pure politics. However, as I see it, there are several exceedingly serious flaws in government by men and women of merit.

The first and most fundamental issue is: who decides who is sufficiently meritorious to deserve trust in a potential meritocracy? Back in the late 1780’s, only General George Washington was unanimously regarded as possessing sufficient merit or worthiness to select a government worthy of governing this newly independent and free republic. (Note that by the close of his presidency, President Washington wasn't quite as meritorious as he was at the outset of his two administrations.)

Second, what values, beliefs and principles ought men of sufficient merit hold to be trusted with the cares of public office?

Third, as Albany Steve points out in his message to me, James Madison in Federalist Paper #51 writes: "If men were angels no government would be necessary.”

Fourth, while there are men and women possessed of above average judgment, principle, and integrity, as I see it, no one is sufficiently gifted with an adequate amount of judgment and principle to be labeled “perfect.” Any student of the Bible reminds us on a regular basis of the imperfection of humankind. Hence, as I see it, meritocracy demands a higher degree of perfection than the Bible acknowledges humans of possessing. Even more to the point, people admire perfection in arts, crafts, and athletics, but they tend to resist and even resent intellectual and spiritual perfection.

Political polarization isn't so much a question of differences of values and principles as it is a question of who gets to apply various aspects of judgment. Back in 1976, for instance, the GOP platform said that the whole matter of abortion rights ought to be left up to the individual states. Another significant political and social change can be found in the fact that at one time states' rights was a fundamental principle of the Democratic Party. States' rights and less government have become GOP principles today.

Today, rather than celebrating our right to see things differently, we glory in charging each other with extremism. Have you ever heard a liberal talk about the “moderate right”? Have you ever heard a conservative refer to the “near left”?

Many years ago, I put the above distinction to my friend Ken from Alameda, California, a strict conservative. He finally decided that the only near or moderately leftwing personages he'd ever heard of were his wife Nancy, me, and — get this — Jesus Christ. How's that for political judgment!

In 2021, we're more interested in accusation than we are in accommodation. Today, presidential candidate George Washington would be judged more as a slave owner than as either a general or administrator. President Washington demonstrated in his farewell message his lack of both intellectual and moral judgment when he criticized political parties without advocating a better way to select future leaders. After all, he didn't even suggest that we should become a meritocracy as Albany Steve appears to soon be ready to advocate!

Hey, Albany Steve, I just compared you to George Washington while Alameda Ken once compared me to….OH, NEVER MIND!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY

THE DAY SOVIET RUSSIA GOT US AND THE U.S.A. "ALL SHOOK UP!”

By Edwin Cooney

Nineteen fifty-seven was an amazing year — one of my favorites growing up. Rock’n’roll radio was really taking off. Elvis was certainly king but Pat Boone, Fats Domino, Paul Anka, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, the Everly Brothers, and, surprisingly, Harry Belafonte's calypso music dominated pop music. For ladies, soft woolly sweaters, poodle skirts, and, for men, white sport coats and black slacks were the fashion. Automobiles sported tail-fins and cigarette smoking was as "in" as hot rod racing. Ike and Dick Nixon were in the White House. 

Friday, October 4th, 1957 separated the second and third game of the 1957 World Series between the New York Yankees and the upstart Milwaukee Braves. The teams were tied in the series, one game apiece. Suddenly, that Friday, even baseball's World Series took second place in the hearts of many (although not mine!) when Moscow radio announced that a satellite had been launched into space and would orbit the earth every 98 minutes. In geopolitical or in American  language, a nation of “slave laborers” had outstripped a nation of free men and women in such a way as to almost immediately endanger America's national security. After all, millions of Americans wondered if the Russians could launch a satellite that contained primarily equipment, how long would it take them to launch an atomic bomb orbiting the earth which at the very least would make Nikita Khrushchev and Communism the master of all humanity?

The Russians, of course, denied such an intention, but they certainly gloried in the political prestige their scientific breakthrough awarded them. Huge changes in the United States military, in technology, in high school and university syllabuses were the result of that little Russian satellite.

Sputnik, which is Russian for "fellow traveler,” was the size of a beach ball (about 23 inches) and weighed 80 pounds.  It lacked the information-gathering capacity of even the United States’ Explorer 1 which only weighed 31 pounds, but it packed a political and social wallop to our national psyche that wouldn't be matched until 9/11.   

As a student of history, I can name two types of dates. First there are memorable dates which excite, sadden or even disgust us. Then, there are dates that are both memorable and affect our self-perception and future attitudes and policies in both our domestic and foreign affairs.

Declarations of war both reflect who we are and stamp our future as a nation. Here are some dates of lasting significance:

On Friday, June 18th, 1812, we declared war on Great Britain. 

On Wednesday, May 13th, 1846, Congress declared war on Mexico. 

On Friday, April 12th, 1861, Confederate forces drove the Union Army out of Fort Sumter thus opening the Civil War. 

On Friday, April 6th, 1917, Woodrow Wilson signed Congress’ Declaration of War on Germany and the Central Powers of Europe. 

Finally, on Monday, December 8th, 1941, FDR signed Congress's Declaration of War on Japan. (Note: on Thursday, December 11th, 1941, Adolf Hitler declared war on the United States in response to our war declaration on Japan as part of his “Axis.”)  

So devastating have declarations of war been that no president has recommended and no Congress has adopted any such presidential request in the nearly 80 years since. The Korean War was called a "police action" and the first Gulf War was called an “authorization.”

Other dates of lasting significance include December 8th, 1941 (Pearl Harbor Day); August 6th and 9th, 1945 (our atomic response to Pearl Harbor Day); June 26th, 1950 (when President Truman asked the United Nations to resist North Korea's invasion of South Korea); Monday, May 17th, 1954 (when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Brown vs. Board of Education which determined that separation of the races in education was not equal); Tuesday, April 12th, 1955 (the tenth anniversary of FDR's death which was the day that the Salk Polio vaccine was announced); Wednesday, March 1st, 1961 when John Kennedy signed an executive order calling for the establishment of a Peace Corps; Tuesday, October 8th, 1963 when JFK signed the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with Great Britain and Soviet Russia; Friday, July 2nd, 1964, the day that Lyndon Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights bill which would change mores and domestic political alliances; and Monday, January 22nd 1973, the day that the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision on Roe v. Wade, constitutionally sanctioning abortions. Of course, on Tuesday, September 11th, 2001, we were attacked by Al-Qaeda. Finally, there’s January 6th, 2021 when President Donald Trump authorized and sanctioned treasonous activity against the Congress and Constitution of the United States.

By Thursday, October 26th, 1957, the batteries of Sputnik One were drained and by Saturday, January 4th, 1958, the Soviet''s first satellite had been destroyed after losing power and drifting back into Mother Earth's atmosphere.

On Saturday, January 31st, 1958, the United States launched Explorer 1, a much smaller satellite which contained more sophisticated instruments. The race to the moon had begun in earnest. Fortunately, all humanity has benefited with the scientific and medical advances although too often the venture has been hazardous.

The batteries for Explorer 1 finally ran out on Friday, May 23rd 1958, but it remained in orbit until Tuesday, March 31st, 1970.

As the French, our original allies, might say: Long live the memory of Friday, October 4th, 1957!

One more thing. If you know a date that was equally or even more significant than the ones I mentioned above, you’re perfectly welcome to offer it!

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY