Wednesday, January 6, 2021

January 6, 1941. Four Freedoms.



President Roosevelt delivered his famous "Four Freedoms" address as a State of the Union Address on this day in 1941.  As we've noted in our This Day In Wyoming's History Blog:1941 Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his State of the Union address, outlined a goal of "Four Freedoms" for the world: freedom of speech and expression, the freedom of people to worship God in their own way, freedom from want and freedom from fear.

Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Seventy-seventh Congress:
I address you, the Members of the Seventy-seventh Congress, at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union. I use the word "unprecedented," because at no previous time has American security been as seriously threatened from without as it is today.
Since the permanent formation of our Government under the Constitution, in 1789, most of the periods of crisis in our history have related to our domestic affairs. Fortunately, only one of these--the four-year War Between the States--ever threatened our national unity. Today, thank God, one hundred and thirty million Americans, in forty-eight States, have forgotten points of the compass in our national unity.
It is true that prior to 1914 the United States often had been disturbed by events in other Continents. We had even engaged in two wars with European nations and in a number of undeclared wars in the West Indies, in the Mediterranean and in the Pacific for the maintenance of American rights and for the principles of peaceful commerce. But in no case had a serious threat been raised against our national safety or our continued independence.
What I seek to convey is the historic truth that the United States as a nation has at all times maintained clear, definite opposition, to any attempt to lock us in behind an ancient Chinese wall while the procession of civilization went past. Today, thinking of our children and of their children, we oppose enforced isolation for ourselves or for any other part of the Americas.
That determination of ours, extending over all these years, was proved, for example, during the quarter century of wars following the French Revolution.
While the Napoleonic struggles did threaten interests of the United States because of the French foothold in the West Indies and in Louisiana, and while we engaged in the War of 1812 to vindicate our right to peaceful trade, it is nevertheless clear that neither France nor Great Britain, nor any other nation, was aiming at domination of the whole world.
In like fashion from 1815 to 1914-- ninety-nine years-- no single war in Europe or in Asia constituted a real threat against our future or against the future of any other American nation.
Except in the Maximilian interlude in Mexico, no foreign power sought to establish itself in this Hemisphere; and the strength of the British fleet in the Atlantic has been a friendly strength. It is still a friendly strength.
Even when the World War broke out in 1914, it seemed to contain only small threat of danger to our own American future. But, as time went on, the American people began to visualize what the downfall of democratic nations might mean to our own democracy.
We need not overemphasize imperfections in the Peace of Versailles. We need not harp on failure of the democracies to deal with problems of world reconstruction. We should remember that the Peace of 1919 was far less unjust than the kind of "pacification" which began even before Munich, and which is being carried on under the new order of tyranny that seeks to spread over every continent today. The American people have unalterably set their faces against that tyranny.
Every realist knows that the democratic way of life is at this moment being' directly assailed in every part of the world--assailed either by arms, or by secret spreading of poisonous propaganda by those who seek to destroy unity and promote discord in nations that are still at peace.
During sixteen long months this assault has blotted out the whole pattern of democratic life in an appalling number of independent nations, great and small. The assailants are still on the march, threatening other nations, great and small.
Therefore, as your President, performing my constitutional duty to "give to the Congress information of the state of the Union," I find it, unhappily, necessary to report that the future and the safety of our country and of our democracy are overwhelmingly involved in events far beyond our borders.
Armed defense of democratic existence is now being gallantly waged in four continents. If that defense fails, all the population and all the resources of Europe, Asia, Africa and Australasia will be dominated by the conquerors. Let us remember that the total of those populations and their resources in those four continents greatly exceeds the sum total of the population and the resources of the whole of the Western Hemisphere-many times over.
In times like these it is immature--and incidentally, untrue--for anybody to brag that an unprepared America, single-handed, and with one hand tied behind its back, can hold off the whole world.
No realistic American can expect from a dictator's peace international generosity, or return of true independence, or world disarmament, or freedom of expression, or freedom of religion -or even good business.
Such a peace would bring no security for us or for our neighbors. "Those, who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
As a nation, we may take pride in the fact that we are softhearted; but we cannot afford to be soft-headed.
We must always be wary of those who with sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal preach the "ism" of appeasement.
We must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American eagle in order to feather their own nests.
I have recently pointed out how quickly the tempo of modern warfare could bring into our very midst the physical attack which we must eventually expect if the dictator nations win this war.
There is much loose talk of our immunity from immediate and direct invasion from across the seas. Obviously, as long as the British Navy retains its power, no such danger exists. Even if there were no British Navy, it is not probable that any enemy would be stupid enough to attack us by landing troops in the United States from across thousands of miles of ocean, until it had acquired strategic bases from which to operate.
But we learn much from the lessons of the past years in Europe-particularly the lesson of Norway, whose essential seaports were captured by treachery and surprise built up over a series of years.
The first phase of the invasion of this Hemisphere would not be the landing of regular troops. The necessary strategic points would be occupied by secret agents and their dupes- and great numbers of them are already here, and in Latin America.
As long as the aggressor nations maintain the offensive, they-not we--will choose the time and the place and the method of their attack.
That is why the future of all the American Republics is today in serious danger.
That is why this Annual Message to the Congress is unique in our history.
That is why every member of the Executive Branch of the Government and every member of the Congress faces great responsibility and great accountability.
The need of the moment is that our actions and our policy should be devoted primarily-almost exclusively--to meeting this foreign peril. For all our domestic problems are now a part of the great emergency.
Just as our national policy in internal affairs has been based upon a decent respect for the rights and the dignity of all our fellow men within our gates, so our national policy in foreign affairs has been based on a decent respect for the rights and dignity of all nations, large and small. And the justice of morality must and will win in the end.
Our national policy is this:
First, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to all-inclusive national defense.
Second, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to full support of all those resolute peoples, everywhere, who are resisting aggression and are thereby keeping war away from our Hemisphere. By this support, we express our determination that the democratic cause shall prevail; and we strengthen the defense and the security of our own nation.
Third, by an impressive expression of the public will and without regard to partisanship, we are committed to the proposition that principles of morality and considerations for our own security will never permit us to acquiesce in a peace dictated by aggressors and sponsored by appeasers. We know that enduring peace cannot be bought at the cost of other people's freedom.
In the recent national election there was no substantial difference between the two great parties in respect to that national policy. No issue was fought out on this line before the American electorate. Today it is abundantly evident that American citizens everywhere are demanding and supporting speedy and complete action in recognition of obvious danger.
Therefore, the immediate need is a swift and driving increase in our armament production.
Leaders of industry and labor have responded to our summons. Goals of speed have been set. In some cases these goals are being reached ahead of time; in some cases we are on schedule; in other cases there are slight but not serious delays; and in some cases--and I am sorry to say very important cases--we are all concerned by the slowness of the accomplishment of our plans.
The Army and Navy, however, have made substantial progress during the past year. Actual experience is improving and speeding up our methods of production with every passing day. And today's best is not good enough for tomorrow.
I am not satisfied with the progress thus far made. The men in charge of the program represent the best in training, in ability, and in patriotism. They are not satisfied with the progress thus far made. None of us will be satisfied until the job is done.
No matter whether the original goal was set too high or too low, our objective is quicker and better results. To give you two illustrations:
We are behind schedule in turning out finished airplanes; we are working day and night to solve the innumerable problems and to catch up.
We are ahead of schedule in building warships but we are working to get even further ahead of that schedule.
To change a whole nation from a basis of peacetime production of implements of peace to a basis of wartime production of implements of war is no small task. And the greatest difficulty comes at the beginning of the program, when new tools, new plant facilities, new assembly lines, and new ship ways must first be constructed before the actual materiel begins to flow steadily and speedily from them.
The Congress, of course, must rightly keep itself informed at all times of the progress of the program. However, there is certain information, as the Congress itself will readily recognize, which, in the interests of our own security and those of the nations that we are supporting, must of needs be kept in confidence.
New circumstances are constantly begetting new needs for our safety. I shall ask this Congress for greatly increased new appropriations and authorizations to carry on what we have begun.
I also ask this Congress for authority and for funds sufficient to manufacture additional munitions and war supplies of many kinds, to be turned over to those nations which are now in actual war with aggressor nations.
Our most useful and immediate role is to act as an arsenal for them as well as for ourselves. They do not need man power, but they do need billions of dollars worth of the weapons of defense.
The time is near when they will not be able to pay for them all in ready cash. We cannot, and we will not, tell them that they must surrender, merely because of present inability to pay for the weapons which we know they must have.
I do not recommend that we make them a loan of dollars with which to pay for these weapons--a loan to be repaid in dollars.
I recommend that we make it possible for those nations to continue to obtain war materials in the United States, fitting their orders into our own program. Nearly all their materiel would, if the time ever came, be useful for our own defense.
Taking counsel of expert military and naval authorities, considering what is best for our own security, we are free to decide how much should be kept here and how much should be sent abroad to our friends who by their determined and heroic resistance are giving us time in which to make ready our own defense.
For what we send abroad, we shall be repaid within a reasonable time following the close of hostilities, in similar materials, or, at our option, in other goods of many kinds, which they can produce and which we need.
Let us say to the democracies: "We Americans are vitally concerned in your defense of freedom. We are putting forth our energies, our resources and our organizing powers to give you the strength to regain and maintain a free world. We shall send you, in ever-increasing numbers, ships, planes, tanks, guns. This is our purpose and our pledge."
In fulfillment of this purpose we will not be intimidated by the threats of dictators that they will regard as a breach of international law or as an act of war our aid to the democracies which dare to resist their aggression. Such aid is not an act of war, even if a dictator should unilaterally proclaim it so to be.
When the dictators, if the dictators, are ready to make war upon us, they will not wait for an act of war on our part. They did not wait for Norway or Belgium or the Netherlands to commit an act of war.
Their only interest is in a new one-way international law, which lacks mutuality in its observance, and, therefore, becomes an instrument of oppression.
The happiness of future generations of Americans may well depend upon how effective and how immediate we can make our aid felt. No one can tell the exact character of the emergency situations that we may be called upon to meet. The Nation's hands must not be tied when the Nation's life is in danger.
We must all prepare to make the sacrifices that the emergency-almost as serious as war itself--demands. Whatever stands in the way of speed and efficiency in defense preparations must give way to the national need.
A free nation has the right to expect full cooperation from all groups. A free nation has the right to look to the leaders of business, of labor, and of agriculture to take the lead in stimulating effort, not among other groups but within their own groups.
The best way of dealing with the few slackers or trouble makers in our midst is, first, to shame them by patriotic example, and, if that fails, to use the sovereignty of Government to save Government.
As men do not live by bread alone, they do not fight by armaments alone. Those who man our defenses, and those behind them who build our defenses, must have the stamina and the courage which come from unshakable belief in the manner of life which they are defending. The mighty action that we are calling for cannot be based on a disregard of all things worth fighting for.
The Nation takes great satisfaction and much strength from the things which have been done to make its people conscious of their individual stake in the preservation of democratic life in America. Those things have toughened the fibre of our people, have renewed their faith and strengthened their devotion to the institutions we make ready to protect.
Certainly this is no time for any of us to stop thinking about the social and economic problems which are the root cause of the social revolution which is today a supreme factor in the world.
For there is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy. The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:
Equality of opportunity for youth and for others. 
Jobs for those who can work. 
Security for those who need it.
The ending of special privilege for the few.
The preservation of civil liberties for all.
The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living.
These are the simple, basic things that must never be lost sight of in the turmoil and unbelievable complexity of our modern world. The inner and abiding strength of our economic and political systems is dependent upon the degree to which they fulfill these expectations.
Many subjects connected with our social economy call for immediate improvement.
As examples:
We should bring more citizens under the coverage of old-age pensions and unemployment insurance.
We should widen the opportunities for adequate medical care.
We should plan a better system by which persons deserving or needing gainful employment may obtain it.
I have called for personal sacrifice. I am assured of the willingness of almost all Americans to respond to that call.
A part of the sacrifice means the payment of more money in taxes. In my Budget Message I shall recommend that a greater portion of this great defense program be paid for from taxation than we are paying today. No person should try, or be allowed, to get rich out of this program; and the principle of tax payments in accordance with ability to pay should be constantly before our eyes to guide our legislation.
If the Congress maintains these principles, the voters, putting patriotism ahead of pocketbooks, will give you their applause.
In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression--everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way--everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want--which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants-everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear--which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor--anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.
To that new order we oppose the greater conception--the moral order. A good society is able to face schemes of world domination and foreign revolutions alike without fear.
Since the beginning of our American history, we have been engaged in change -- in a perpetual peaceful revolution -- a revolution which goes on steadily, quietly adjusting itself to changing conditions--without the concentration camp or the quick-lime in the ditch. The world order which we seek is the cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized society.
This nation has placed its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions of free men and women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God. Freedom means the supremacy of human rights everywhere. Our support goes to those who struggle to gain those rights or keep them. Our strength is our unity of purpose. To that high concept there can be no end save victory.

The speech resulted in series of very widely known, and still produced, illustrations by artist Norman Rockwell; Freedom of SpeechFreedom of WorshipFreedom from Want, and Freedom from Fear.


The famous speech was later turned into a series of wartime posters by legendary illustrator Norman Rockwell.


It's easy to forget what desperate times they were really issued in, and what the atmosphere was at the time that Roosevelt delivered his address.


It's also hard not to lament the state to which we seemed to have declined, in national psyche, since that time, but perhaps that's putting too optimistic of spin on things in a way regarding the past.

More on the famous speech here:

Today in World War II History—January 6, 1941


Harry Hopkins left for the United Kingdom by way of Portugal on this day in 1941.   The circuitous air route was due to the war, with the risk of flying into a belligerent nation too high.  Hopkins was photographed on his mission as he boarded his plane in an era when air travel itself was much more arduous than it now is, but then was safer than sea travel due to the war.


More on this day in the war here:

Day 494 January 6, 1941

A photographer caught bank employees in New York at work.





January 6, 1921. A Turkish regular army enters the war Greco Turkish War.

Wilkes Bare, Pennsylvania.  January 6, 1921.
 

Greece and Turkey entered a new stage of their struggle in Anatolia as Turkey fielded a new regular army loyal to its National Assembly for the first time in the First Battle of İnönü.

It was a Greek victory and a Greek offensive action, but the new Turkish army performed well so the Greeks limited their advances and ultimately later withdrew from a non strategic position as a result.

Pope Benedict XV delivered an address, Sacra Propedium, on St. Francis, which stated:

To the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See. Venerable Brothers, Health and Apostolic Benediction.

1. We regard as most opportune that solemn festivities will be held for the seventh Centenary of the Third Order of Penance. Many motives prompt Us to exalt the occasion in the eyes of the Catholic world, in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, but before all is the hope of the incontestable advantages which the Christian people will draw therefrom.

2. In the next place there is the personal remembrance which they evoke for Us. We love to recall that in 1882, when the centenary of his birth spread amongst the mass of the Faithful the fervent cultus of Francis of Assisi, We wished to range Ourselves amongst the disciples of that great Patriarch, and received regularly the habit of the Tertiaries in the celebrated Church of Ara Coeli, served by the Friars Minors. Today, placed by Providence on the chair of the Prince of the Apostles, We are particularly happy to seize this occasion to testify Our devotion to Saint Francis in exhorting the Catholics of the entire world to affiliate themselves with eagerness or to remain faithfully attached to this Franciscan institution, which today responds marvelously to the needs of society.

3. That which matters now is to replace before all eyes the true moral physiognomy of Saint Francis. The Saint Francis of Assisi whom certain moderns present to us, and who springs from the imagination of the Modernists, this man, guarded in his obedience to the Apostolic See, a specimen of a vague and vain religiosity, is assuredly neither Francis of Assisi nor a saint.

4. The striking and immortal services rendered by Francis to the Christian cause, which have shown in him the defender whom God in such troubled times reserved for the Church, found, as it were, their coronation in the Third Order. Is there anything which proves more clearly the greatness and violence of the burning desire which consumed his soul to spread throughout the whole earth the glory of Jesus Christ?

5. Profoundly saddened by the misfortunes which the Church was then passing through, Francis conceived the incredible design of renewing everything conformably to the principles of the Christian law. After having founded a double religious family, one of Brothers, the other of Sisters, who pledged themselves by solemn vows to imitate the humility of the Cross, Francis, in the impossibility of opening the cloister to all whom the desire of being formed in his school drew to him, resolved to procure, even for souls living in the whirlpool of the world, the means to tend to Christian perfection. He founded, then, an Order properly called Tertiaries, differing from the two other Orders in that it would not bear the bond of the religious vows, but would be characterized by the same simplicity of life and the same spirit of penance. Thus the project which no founder of a regular Order had yet imagined, to cause the religious life to be practiced by all, Francis first conceived the idea of and the grace of God gave him to realize it with the greatest success. We have no other proof of it than this beautiful homage of Thomas de Celano: “Marvelous workman, whose example, direction, and teachings have this admirable result, to renew in both sexes the Church of Christ and to lead to triumph a triple phalanx of souls preoccupied with their salvation” (I Cel. xv. 40).

6. We shall confine Ourselves to this testimony of so authoritative a contemporary; of itself it suffices amply to show to what a depth and to what an extent this initiative of Francis of Assisi shook the popular masses, what notable and salutary reparations it worked therein.

7. Uncontested founder of the Third Order, as he was of the two first, Francis was for it, further, without doubt, the most wise legislator. We know that for this work he had the precious aid of Cardinal Ugolino, who later, under the name of Gregory IX, was to make illustrious this Apostolic See, and who, after having whilst he lived, maintained the closest relations with the Patriarch of Assisi, elevated later on his tomb a magnificent and sumptuous basilica. As to the rule of the Tertiaries, no one is ignorant that it was regularly approved by Our predecessor, Nicholas IV.

8. But We shall not, Venerable Brothers, delay Ourselves too long on these questions; Our object is here, before all, to bring to light the character, and, as one says the particular spirit of the third Order, for the Church expects from it special advantages for the Christian people in this age, as hostile to virtue and to faith as was the epoch of Francis of Assisi. With his profound sense of situations and times Our predecessor,

Leo XIII, of happy memory, desirous to adapt better the regulation of life of the Tertiaries to the social level of each of the faithful, brought, by the Constitution Misericors Dei Filius (1883) to, their statutes or rule most wise motivations which should put them in accord with the actual state of society; he modified it in some secondary points responding but imperfectly to our customs of today.

9. “Let none believe,” said he, “that these changes take away anything whatsoever from the essential principles of that Order. We wish absolutely that they remain in their integrity, and secure from any branch.” The rule of the Third Order has then undergone only retouchings of detail; its range and spirit have been respected, which remain what their holy founder willed them. Now it is Our conviction that the spirit of the Third Order, altogether impregnated with the wisdom of the Gospel, would be a powerful element for the making healthy of private and public orals if it were spread anew as in the times in which by his word and example Francis preached everywhere the Kingdom of God.

10. What Francis wished to shine out, above all, in his Tertiaries, and which ought to be as their characteristic mark, is fraternal charity, most watchful guardian of peace and concord. Knowing that charity is the special commandment brought by Jesus Christ and the synthesis of the whole Christian law, Saint Francis was careful to make of it the spiritual rule of his children; and he attained this result, that the Third Order rendered naturally the greatest service to the entire human family.

11. Further, Francis was powerless to contain in the recesses of his heart the seraphic love which consumed him for God and his brothers; he was compelled to permit it to overflow on all the souls which he could reach. Thus it was that he set himself to reform the individual and family life of his disciples in forming them to the practice of the Christian virtues with such ardor as would make one believe that it was all his program. But he did not dream that he ought to limit himself to this; individual conversion was but an instrument of which he availed himself to reawaken in the bosom of society love of Christian wisdom, and to gain all men for Christ.

12. The preoccupation which had moved Francis of Assisi to make of the members of the Third Order messengers and apostles of peace in the midst of the bitter discords and civil wars of his time was ours in the days wherein the conflagration of a horrible war was kindled in almost the entire world; it has not ceased to be so at a moment in which, here and there, the smoking hearth of this ill-extinguished conflagration still shoots out flames.

13. To this scourge had been added the interior crisis which the nations are going through, first of the forgetfulness and prolonged disdain of Christian principles. We wish to say that this fight for the sharing of goods which sets in conflict the different classes of society is so relentless that it threatens already to lead to a universal catastrophe.

14. In this so vast field, wherein, as representative of the pacific King, We have lavished Our especially attentive cares, We make an appeal for the zealous help of all those who claim for themselves Christian peace, but especially for the collaboration of the Tertiaries. They will exert a marvelous influence in restoring concord in spirit the day wherein their number and their efforts will be developed. It is, then, desirable that in every city, town, and even in each village, the Third Order count henceforth a sufficient group of members, not of inactive adherents satisfied with the mere title of Tertiaries, but instead, of those who spend themselves with zeal for their own salvation and the salvation of their brothers. Why even should not the various Catholic associations which multiply everywhere, associations of youth, of workmen, of women, not affiliate themselves to the Third Order to continue to work for the glory of Jesus Christ and the triumph of the Church with the same zeal that Francis had for peace and charity?

15. The peace for which humanity cries out is not that which the laborious treaty-making of human prudence can decree, but that which Christ brought by its message: “My peace I bring you; I do not give it as the world gives it.” (John 14: 27). The accords between State and State or between class and class which men have been able to shadow forth will not be durable, and will not have the force of true peace except on condition that they are founded on the pacification of hearts; and that itself is only possible if duty has bridled the passions whence all conflicts spring. “Whence comes,” asks the Apostle James,” wars and quarrels amongst you? Is it not from your passions, which combat in your members?” (James 4:1.) Now to regulate wisely all the movements inherent to nature in such a way as to make man the master, not the slave, of his passions, submissive himself, and docile to the divine will, the hierarchy, which is at the base of universal peace, that belongs to Christ, and its action manifests a marvelous efficacy in the family of Franciscan Tertiaries.

16. This Order, having for its object, as We have said to form its members in Christian perfection, even whilst they may be plunged in the embarrassments of the age, so true is it that no state of life is incompatible with sanctity, it happens, as it were, necessarily, where the Tertiaries in numbers observe faithfully their rule, that they are for all about them a source of encouragement in fulfilling their duties, and even to tending towards a perfection of life superior to the exigencies of the common law. The testimony rendered by the Divine Master to those who attached themselves closely to Him: “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (John 17:16) may justly be applied to the sons of Francis who, if they observe the evangelical counsels of mind and heart as far as possible in the world, may lawfully put to their account the words of the Apostle: “As for us, we have received not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit which comes from God” (1 Cor. 11:12).

17. They will seek, then — completely strangers themselves to the spirit of the world — to introduce the Spirit of Jesus Christ in the current of social life on every side to which they have access.

18. Now there are two passions today dominant in the profound lawlessness of morals – an unlimited desire of riches and an insatiable thirst for pleasures. It is this which marks with a shameful stigma our epoch; whilst it goes ceaselessly from progress to progress in the order of all which touches the well-being and convenience of life, it seems that in the superior order of honesty and of moral rectitude a lamentable retrogression leads it back to the ignominies of ancient paganism. In that measure, in truth, wherein men lose sight of eternal goods which Heaven reserved for them, they permit themselves to be more taken in by the deceitful mirage of the ephemeral goods here below, and once their souls are turned down towards the earth, an easy descent leads them insensibly to relax themselves in virtue, to experience repugnance for spiritual things, and to relish nothing outside the seductions of pleasure. Hence the general situation which we note: with some the desire to acquire riches or to increase their patrimony knows no bounds; others no longer know, as formerly, how to bear the trials which are the usual result of want or poverty; and at the very hour in which the rivalries We have pointed out set by the ears the rich and the proletariat a great number seem to wish to further excite the hatred of the poor by an unbridled luxury which accompanies the most revolting corruption.

19. From this point of view one cannot sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and condition; made foolish by desire to please, they do not see to what a degree the in decency of their clothing shocks every honest man, and offends God. Most of them would formerly have blushed for those toilettes as for a grave fault against Christian modesty; now it does not suffice for them to exhibit them on the public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of the churches, to assist at the Holy sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table where one receives the heavenly Author of purity. And We speak not of those exotic and barbarous dances recently imported into fashionable circles, one more shocking than the other; one cannot imagine anything more suitable for banishing all the remains of modesty.

20. In considering attentively this state of things, the Tertiaries will understand what it is that our epoch expects from the disciples of Saint Francis. If they bring their gaze back to the life of their Father, they will see what perfect and living resemblance to Jesus Christ, above all in His flight from satisfactions and his love of trials in this life, had he whom they call the Poverello, and who had received in his flesh the stigmata of the Crucified. It is for them to show that they remain worthy of him by embracing poverty, at least in spirit, in renouncing themselves, and in bearing each one his cross.

21. In what concerns specially the Tertiary Sisters, We ask of them by their dress and manner of wearing it, to be models of holy modesty for other ladies and young girls; that they be thoroughly convinced that the best way for them to be of use to the Church and to Society is to labor for the improvement of morals.

22. Moreover, after having created divers charitable works for the solace of the indigent in their wants of every kind, the members of this Order would wish, further, We are sure, to cause those of their brothers who are deprived of goods more precious than those of earth, to benefit by their charity.

23. Here comes back to Us the memory of the counsel of the Apostle Peter, asking Christians to be, by the holiness of their lives, models for the Gentiles, and this in order that, “remarking your good works, they glorify God in the day of His visitation” (1 Peter 2:12). Like them, the Franciscan Tertiaries ought, by the integrity of their faith, the holiness of their lives, and the ardor of their zeal, spread abroad the good words of Christ, to warn those of their brethren who have gone out from the road, and to press them to reenter upon it. Behold that which the Church asks, that which she expects from them.

24. As to Us, we cherish the hope that the coming celebration will mark for the Third Order a new development, and We doubt not that you yourselves, Venerable Brothers, as well as the other pastors of souls, will make great efforts to cause to flourish again the groups of tertiaries where they vegetate, and to create others everywhere possible, and to render all flourishing, as much by the observation of the rule as by the number of their members.

25. In truth what is in hand definitely is, by imitation of Francis of Assisi to open to the greatest possible number of souls the way which will lead them back to Christ; it in this return that resides the firmest hope of salvation for society. The word of Saint Paul, “Be my imitators, as I myself am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1), we can with good right put upon the lips of Francis, who, in imitating the Apostle, has become the most faithful image and copy of Jesus Christ.

26. Thus, in order that these celebrations bear still more fruit, upon the instances of the Ministers General of the three Franciscan families of the First Order, we accord the following favors drawn from the treasury of the Holy Church:

I. In all Churches wherein the Third Order is canonically erected, and wherein will be celebrated by a Triduum the solemnities of the Centenary in the year to run from April 16, next: the Tertiaries each day of the Triduum, the other Faithful once only, may gain a plenary indulgence from their sins. All the Faithful who, with contrite hearts, will visit the Blessed Sacrament in one of these churches may gain at each visit (toties quoties) an indulgence of seven years.

II. All the altars of these churches will be deemed for those three days privileged altars; during the course of the Triduum every priest may celebrate there the Mass of Saint Francis, following the rite of the Mass pro re gravi et simul publice de causa according to the general rubrics of the Roman Missal inserted in the last Vatican edition.

III. All the priests who serve these churches may, during these same days, bless beads, medals, and other objects of piety, enrich them with Apostolic indulgences, and apply to beads the Crozier and Bridgettine indulgences.

As pledge of Divine favors, and in testimony of Our paternal benevolence, We accord with all Our heart, to you, Venerable Brothers, and to all the members of the Third Order, the Apostolic Benediction.

Given at Rome, near Saint Peter’s, the Feast of the Epiphany of the year 1921, in the seventh year of Our Pontificate.


2020 General Election, Part III


 
December 14, 2020

As I noted when I posted Part II of this thread:

We'll we've never had that happen before.

November 13, 1920 cover of Judge.  I mean nothing by posting this at all, including commenting on "ads is ads" or "pigs is pigs", whatever that means.  I just like the illustration and the wry sense of getting back to normal, as if we're getting back to normal.  One thing we can't say about this year is Elections is Elections.

And by that I mean run a second "General Election" thread. Usually I run one, and then the election post mortems.  This year has been dramatically different.

Yesterday Pennsylvania and Nevada certified their elections. The day prior, Michigan did. Georgia already has. There the states that were extremely close have officially called their elections and, while some litigating goes on, it's over.
Or not.  

I went on to note how the election results are known and have been since the day after the election.  In spite of that President Trump has drug this out with a series of lawsuits and spurious claims about election fraud.

Now we have the results of the Electoral College and Biden has "officially" won, right?

Yes. . .but . . . and this year all the "buts" have freakishly come true.

Oddly enough, in the weird 19th Century way that the American Presidential election works, the results still need to get to Congress by January 3 and then Congress needs to certify them by January 6.  A mere formality, right?

Well it sure should be, but this year?

I didn't credit what I thought a wild scenario from The Atlantic that Trump would attempt to reverse the results of the election through the courts and state legislatures, but he did. That would have effectively have been a judicial and legislative coup.  The courts were dismissive of the attempt and legislatures didn't bite, but Texas did sue other states in the effort and a large number of Republican Congressmen signed on to it, perhaps knowing that it wouldn't occur.

Given all of that, however, I'm now not convinced that Trump will actually concede in any form and that there won't be a final effort on January 6 to have Congress reverse the results.  It'd be a tragic absurdity, but we're deep into a tragic absurdity right now.

And, of course, we still have the Georgia runoff yet to go.

Cont: 

Attorney General William Bar is "stepping down".

It's hard to say at this point whether late breaking developments with Barr have caused him to actually resign or whether Trump is firing him.  While it's hardly been noted, Barr wasn't a supporter of efforts to find supposed election irregularities and all but instructed his department not to make too much of the claims.  That seemed unnoted at the time but when it honestly reported that there was in fact nothing to make of the election fraud stories the rift with Trump seemed to grow irreparable.

At any rate, its hugely remarkable as Barr was a diehard Trump supporter. 

December 15, 2020


Also yesterday the Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected the Trump post election litigation bid there.  This was again not a surprise.

Cont:  

Senators Enzi and Barasso, along with Liz Cheney, all indicated that they respect the results of the Electoral College yesterday.  They stopped short of actually stating that they agree the results are fair, which they obviously actually do, but which continues the surreal situation of obviously intelligent Republican figures in the know actually knowing what occurred, but being reluctant to state that publicly as they fear that their base has bought off on the conspiracy theories.

Be that as it may, the move is significant for at least Barasso who was supportive of the doomed legal efforts to overcome the election.  It's been clear for weeks that Cheney didn't buy off on the Trump effort and was simply choosing to be quiet.  Enzi is retiring in January so his silence wasn't too surprising and can almost be taken as the position of somebody who simply doesn't want to be bothered now that he's walking out the door.  Cynthia Loomis is apparently in Georgia for some reason and couldn't be reached.

Cont:  

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell acknowledged Joe Biden and Kamala Harris as the victors in the election and congratulated them on their victory today.

In contrast, Donald Trump issued a tweet stating that there was election fraud, which has been completely disproven.

As the gap between the administrations refusal to acknowledge reality and various Republicans coming around to acknowledging it grows wider it'll be interesting to see if this is the beginning of a Republican severance with President Trump.

December 16, 2020

Cynthia Lummis acknowledged Joe Biden's victory yesterday.

Lummis has been campaigning in Georgia for the GOP candidates in that state's runoff, although its hard to see how a freshman Senator from Wyoming would have much influence there.

Mitch McConnell has been urging Republican Senators to vote no to consider Republican House members challenges to the general election.  McConnell likely senses that the game has run on election challenges and that the mood in that part of the public that supported them is shifting away from them, and the rest of the public is becoming hardened against the efforts to the detriment of the GOP.

December 21, 2020

Sidney Powell and her client Michael Flynn visited the White House on Friday and then Powell was back in the White House over the weekend. Powell is an attorney whose positions in regard to the election were so bizarre that the Trump legal team dumped her.

Reportedly the Friday meeting became a shouting match as members of the Trump administration argued down the more extreme Powell positions.  At some point somebody even brought up the idea of declaring martial law.  Powell's statements have been so bizarre and lacking in credibility that its difficult to see why she was even allowed in the White House, and Trump confidant Chris Christie warned him not to let Michael Flynn in.  None the less she was back in over the weekend.

President Trump reduced the news stories to being "fake news" but the fact that Trump, whose legal team announced yet another doomed attempt at an appeal to the Supreme Court, would even entertain somebody like Powell at this point is damaging to his credibility.

Indeed, the Atlantic, which turned out to be on the mark in regard to its predictions that Trump would try to use the courts and state legislatures to overturn the election results, has came out with a story yesterday that was headlined "Trump is losing his mind" flatly declaring that the President is descending into a species of "madness".  Twice entertaining Powell in a three day period, whose claims about the election are not only totally discredited but completely bizarre, and the fact that she represents Flynn who has advocated for declaring martial law to "rerun" the election in states that Trump disputes, are disconcerting in the extreme.

Indeed Flynn's statements are among those that meet the definition of sedition in that he's clearly calling for the use of force against the government in order to achieve a political result.  Flynn has only recently been pardoned but something like this is of such a serious nature that at some point serious thought should be given to the legal implications of it.  Even if he is credited with having a sincere belief in the conspiracy theories that have been floated it would not amount to a defense.

The continued maintenance of such extreme theories and the fact that they continue to be entertained does credit them with Trump supporters, however, which gets back to the Atlantic's article. This sort of thing stands to do serious damage to the country.

December 30, 2020

President Trump has been lashing out at his own party as it becomes increasingly clear that the GOP, late in the day, is starting to put some distance between themselves and his efforts to maintain that he won the election.  Indeed, these efforts have been so distinct that they've resulted in a two fold reaction; 1) they simply baffle close election watchers as they're bizarre and 2) they're starting to be widely ignored.

On the latter point, sometime in the last week the President tweeted that he'd heard from a young man with military connections that recently elections in Afghanistan were more fair than those just conducted in the US, and closed his comment by calling Biden a "Fake President".  This is both absurd and shocking, but it received very little attention in the news as for the most part nearly everyone has moved on from these comments.

The fact that they're still made, however, is really hard to figure.  The election was really well conducted and a massive amount of American voters turned out.  At this point the President is really beyond just asserting his rights, but is outright lying.  Commenters on This Week were unable to really land on either, but one expressed the view that he simply didn't understand the process.

This came about as it seems that the President and his allies might believe that the Vice Presidents role in acting as the crier for the delivery of the electoral vote amounts to more than simply delivering it.  It doesn't.  None the less some Republican Congressmen have filed another doomed lawsuit, actually naming Pence as a defendant, which takes the position that he can ignore state elector certification and choose his own electors if there's any sort of a contest.  Following is the prayer for relief from the suit.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

73. Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court issue a judgment that:

A. Declares that Section 15 of the Electoral Count Act, 3 U.S.C. §§5 and 15, is unconstitutional because it violates the Twelfth Amendment on its face, Amend. XII, Constitution;

B. Declares that Section 15 of the Electoral Count Act, 3 U.S.C. §§5 and 15, is unconstitutional because it violates the Electors Clause. U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 1;

C. Declares that Vice-President Pence, in his capacity as President of Senate and Presiding Officer of the January 6, 2021 Joint Session of Congress, is subject solely to the requirements of the Twelfth Amendment and may exercise the Case 6:20-cv-00660 Document 1 Filed 12/27/20 Page 25 of 28 PageID #: 25 26 exclusive authority and sole discretion in determining which electoral votes to count for a given State;

D. Enjoins reliance on any provisions of the Electoral Count Act that would limit Defendant’s exclusive authority and his sole discretion to determine which of two or more competing slates of electors’ votes are to be counted for President;

E. Declares that, with respect to competing slates of electors from the State of Arizona or other Contested States, or with respect to objection to any single slate of electors, the Twelfth Amendment contains the exclusive dispute resolution mechanisms, namely, that (i) Vice-President Pence determines which slate of electors’ votes shall be counted, or if none be counted, for that State and (ii) if no person has a majority, then the House of Representatives (and only the House of Representatives) shall choose the President where “the votes [in the House of Representatives] shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote,” U.S. CONST. amend. XII;

F. Declares that, also with respect to competing slates of electors, the alternative dispute resolution procedure or priority rule in 3 U.S.C. § 15, is null and void insofar as it contradicts and replaces the Twelfth Amendment rules above by with an entirely different procedure in which the House and Senate each separately “decide” which slate is to be counted, and in the event of a disagreement, then only “the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State … shall be counted,” 3 U.S.C. § 15; Case 6:20-cv-00660 Document 1 Filed 12/27/20 Page 26 of 28 PageID #: 26 27

G. Enjoins the Defendant from executing his duties on January 6th during the Joint Session of Congress in any manner that is insistent with the declaratory relief set forth herein, and 

H. Issue any other declaratory judgments or findings or injunctions necessary to support or effectuate the foregoing declaratory judgment.

74. Plaintiffs have concurrently submitted a motion for a speedy summary proceeding under FRCP Rule 57 to grant the relief requested herein as soon as practicable, and for emergency injunctive relief under FRCP Rule 65 thereof consistent with the declaratory judgment requested herein on that same date.

To put it more politely than one disgruntled Republican I know defined it, a lawyer filing this is really risking sanctions and I'll be somewhat surprised if they don't result from this.

Stuff like this really needs to stop.  It's discrediting the nation and the people who bring the suits and its completely wiping out any legacy Trump may have had, and he did in fact have one.  Much like Watergate has come to completely define Richard Nixon, the denial of election reality is going to completely define Donald Trump.  And its really hurting the nation at this point.

Beyond that, and this is now starting to happen, it's so odd that some people are questioning Trump's grasp on reality.  The early best theory was that these actions were occurring for strategic reasons and he was simply finding a way to weld the base to himself.  That is probably correct but if its beginning at this point to really fail.

Lots of Republicans are severing themselves from Trump at this point.  His actions in regard to COVID emergency relief funds, no matter what you think of them, is further damaging this as he's now pitted directly against Mitch McConnell, whom he's lashing out at, and he's sabotaging the chances of  the two Republican candidates for the Senate in Georgia who are on record supporting them.  Indeed, while polls have proven particularly unreliable this year, one GOP candidate who had a lead going into next week's race is now neck and neck with the well spoken Democrat.  These races were always extremely tight but early election pundits figured the GOP would win them. There's real doubt now, which perhaps there always should have been as Georgia added 20,000 potential voters between November and next week.  Trump's lashing out at his own party, however, is creating really trouble for the GOP's chances.

Again, on This Week the theory was that this was being done on purpose by an angry President, and nobody, including the Republican Chris Christie, denied that.  Indeed, Christie, a real Trump loyalist, is now making clear signals that the post January GOP really doesn't have a place for Trump. The fact that he's now acting against McConnell suggests that things really are severing, and McConnell has a record as a survivor.

December 31, 2020

2,560,000 votes have already been cast in the Georgia runoff.

As a reminder, the Democrats currently hold 46 seats, the Republicans 50, and there are two independents who caucus with the Democrats.  Two seats in Georgia are up in the election.

The House ended up with 222 Democrats and 211 Republicans.

January 2, 2021

President Trump declared the Georgia runoffs illegal and asserted that "we", by which he presumably means he, won the election there "big".  This is simply false.   By all measures the vote in Georgia was extremely tight and Joe Biden won.

Assertions of this type are now being widely regarded as becoming hugely problematic for the Republican candidates in Georgia who are regarded as being put in the place of siding with the President on demonstrably false claims or facing his ire.

Cont:

Wyoming's Cynthia Lummis is one of the dozen or so Republican Senators who have announced that they're going to vote for a debate of certain state electors and demand an audit of the votes for the same states, an effort that's doomed.  Indeed those backing the effort know its doomed so the effort is for posturing reasons.

Those already in the Senate can take this position with no immediate risks, but those coming in, like Lummis, are taking a risk in that they're bucking Mitch McConnell, who is rapidly becoming a more significant GOP figure than President Trump and who definitely is in the Senate.  In short order there's a good chance that this will play itself out in terms of committee assignments with those incurring McConnell's' ire finding less than plumb assignments, assuming that the GOP retains the Senate.  If they don't, this is almost certain to occur.

All of this is being done for strategic purposes, of course, but is really feeding into a belief in some quarters that the election was stolen.  If this strategy doesn't bear fruit by 2022 it may well haunt the GOP significantly, perhaps fatally.  There's already a strong suggestion it may have swung Georgia's voters to the Democrats in which case the Democrats will take the Senate..  The opposing party usually gains mid term, of course, but these are odd times and this is pretty risky strategy.

January 4, 2021

An election that seeming couldn't get any odder, keeps getting odder.

A bipartisan coalition of ten U.S. Senators issued a letter condemning the effort by a dozen Senators, including Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis, to join Republican Congressmen in questioning the certification of certain electoral votes and submit them to a commission.  Wyoming's Elizabeth Cheney warned that the effort risked setting "an especially dangerous precedent"

In the meantime, President Trump telephoned Georgia officials including Georgia Secretary of State George Raffensperger and pressured them to "find" sufficient votes to give him the state's electoral votes.  It should be noted that even if that occurred, Trump would still lose the election.  Raffensperger has defended his office's work and after the news broke he specifically replied to a Tweet from President Trump denying that his office had done its work improperly and vaguely hinting that there's more to reveal about Trump's effort with "Respectfully President Trump, what your saying is not true. The truth will come out."

Georgia Election Board members have now called for an investigation into the call, which may have criminal implications.  Georgia Senator Perdue, who is in a tight runoff election that goes to the polls tomorrow, indicated that he was "shocked" by the call and termed the efforts by eleven Republicans to challenge the electoral votes "disgusting".  This may indicate that Trump's actions, which have been hurting the two Georgia Republican candidates, may have reached the point where those Republicans and Republicans in general now will feel free to break from the departing President.  At least one other Trump loyalist in the Senate has publicly disavowed the effort.

CNN has a complete transcript of the rambling hour long telephone call on its website.

Chuck Todd managed to end up in the headlines due to Meet The Press.  It's a well known rule of sorts in journalism that the journalist should never become the headlines, although there are exceptions.  Todd was outright confrontational and dismissive of his guest Senator Ron Johnson, terming him an "arsonist" for his role in creating a controversy that he now will be voting to investigate, but Johnson was unable to defend himself and came across as rather dim.  Johnson tried to divert attention to hearings he had on why doctors weren't given greater leeway with alternative treatments early in the pandemic but the effort was anemic at best.  The same episode featured an portion on the QAnon conspiracy theorists which was well done.

As noted, Georgia goes into its runoff tomorrow. The events of the past 24 hours have been dramatic, and are likely to have long lasting impact. What that is right now isn't really known and Trump's followers have been so loyal to him that perhaps it will have no impact.  It will have an impact on GOP fence sitters however and it opens the door, possibly, to criminal prosecution of Trump after he's left office, something that Democrats on the left will likely assert should be done.  Overall, the contents of the call are shocking and show and reveal a clearly improper effort to pressure Georgia's officials and a President who is either completely comfortable with lying or who is believing fantasies regarding the election himself.  At least to the extent that they're on the call, it also shows that some of his staff are willing to be complicit in asserting stories that are false in this effort.

The long term implications for the GOP, as noted, are vast.  Right now there's a fairly good chance that the party will split into two parties and one or both of them will die, leaving a gap until a new conservative party emerges.  That's only one possibility of course but the GOP won't continue on this way and a struggle for its future has really commenced.  The irony is that the GOP had done well down ballot this year and now the defeated President is wrecking his party in real terms.

In the House, Nancy Pelosi secured another term as Speaker, but only barely.  Part of that is simply, and now ironically, because the GOP did well in the down ballot elections and picked up seats in the House.

Cont:

The Lincoln Project, the Republican group opposed to Donald Trump, has taken the interesting approach of identifying large donors to the eleven Republican Senators who are going to oppose accepting the electoral votes and are urging Americans to reconsider their patronage of those entities.  Picking up on the idea, the New York Times sought their comments.  One of those entities, the ExxonMobilPac, was a donor to the Lummis campaign in the amount of $10,000 (not a giant sum in context) and responded to the NYT by congratulating Joe Biden on his victory.  Another, the US Chamber of Commerce, didn't respond to the Times but had earlier congratulated Joe Biden.

This is an interesting approach as embarrassing donors serves to dry up donations in some circumstances, which is a limiting factor with politicians.  

Dick Cheney, father if Congressman Cheney and former Secretary of Defense organized a collection of former Secretaries of Defense who have called for the Republican effort to end.

Trump allies Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham have denounced the Republican Senators efforts to refuse to certify the election.

This is particularly interesting in that both individuals are Trump stalwarts who are abandoning ship.  Graham in particular has been a Trump loyalist even after the election.  If Graham is abandoning the effort its a pretty clear sign that the Republican Party is now breaking away from Trump.

January 5, 2020

Over 170 business leaders issued a leader urging President Trump to accept the election results.

The Mayor of Washington D.C. has activated the city's National Guard units in advance of pro Trump protests scheduled this week.

Two US. Attorneys appointed by Trump have resigned this week.

Georgia election officials were very vocal yesterday, even as Trump was in their state, in their defense of their state's election process.  One official compared what is going on to the movie Groundhog Day.

Kelly Loeffler, an incumbent Georgia Senator filling out a term through an appointment pledged to support the effort of eleven Republican Senators lead by Ted Cruz to challenge the election results. This effort is known to be doomed and is splitting the GOP.  Loeffler has been falling in the polls and this step, which is the polar opposite of the position taken by Senator Perdue of Georgia, is presumably calculated to appeal to hard line Trump supporters, which would have supported her anyway.

January 6, 2021

Raphael Warnock, a Baptist minister in Atlanta, unseated incumbent, but appointed, Kelly Loeffler, putting the Democrats one seat closer to controlling the Senate by the thinnest of margins.  While this was with 98% of the vote in, it was beyond the margin needed for a recall and the net result is that Loeffler lost.

Her loss may be directly attributable to President Trump.  During the runoff campaign Loeffler went from having a margin over Warnock to behind n the polls as Trump continued, and continues, to maintain he won an election he clearly lost.  In the final days of the campaign he pressured, unsuccessfully, Georgia election officials to "find" votes, which they resisted, and then the spectacle of a Ted Cruz lead effort to challenge the electoral vote in the Senate was endorsed by Loeffler while condemned by fellow candidate Perdue.  All  in all, Loeffler generally presented poorly in the election, appearing baffled and lost, while Warnock didn't.  In the end, Trump's machinations and her miscalculation drug her under in the polls.

As this race was to fill the remainder of a term, Warnock will have to run again in two years, making 2022's mid terms all the more dramatic as a result.  While we'll post more on this later, this makes it clear that the GOP needs to figure out how to handle the growing division in its ranks by that time.

Senator David Perdue fell behind candidate Jon Ossoff but the race is too close to call.  Having said that, it now appears likely that Perdue will fall as well.

If this is the case, the Senate will go to the Democrats, but only because it will be, for the time being, evenly split 50/50.  This assumes no Republican defections to independent, which right now is not a safe assumption.  While we'll also deal with this later, this also means that Kamala Harris will be the tie vote.

Prior Threads:





Blog Mirror: George F. Will; Hawley, Cruz and their Senate cohort are the Constitution’s most dangerous domestic enemies

 Hawley, Cruz and their Senate cohort are the Constitution’s most dangerous domestic enemies

Tuesday, January 5, 2021

January 5, 1941. The death of Amy Johnson.

 


Amy Johnson.

Pioneering aviatrix Amy Johnson died on this day in the service of the British Transport Auxiliary, the British air ferrying service that was created in order to allow civilian pilots, including women, preform this service during war time.

She was flying an Airspeed Oxford in poor weather when it went off course and is generally believed to have run out of fuel.  She bailed out over the Thames Estuary and was sighted descending by vessels of the Royal Navy, which went to help.  She was sighted in the water in heavy seas and the commander of one of the vessels, Lt. Cmdr Walter Fletcher went over the side to rescue her but was unable to, soon becoming unconscious himself.  He died a few days later.  Her body was not recovered.  

Her loss remains controversial in the UK.  In 1999 a crewman of a wartime anti aircraft batter claimed his gun had shot her down when she had failed to reply to an identification signal and that the crew had believed they had shot down an enemy aircraft until they read of her death the following day, at which time an officer ordered them not to speak of the event.  That's possible, but in my view unlikely as the claim of a hit would have been made at the time and likely records of it might still remain.

And a crewman of the ship that was nearest to her claimed many years later that she was sucked into the ship's screw which killed her, although the crewman did not witness it.  Given the way that ships generally work and the depth of the screws, that's also quite unlikely.

In any event, two heroes, Johnson and Fletcher, who lost their lives that day.

More on events of this day including the Commonwealth victory in Bardia.

Today in World War II History—January 5, 1941

Day 493 January 5, 1941

January 5, 1921. The times in a mirror.

The Senate Committee on the Election, January 5, 1921

The Senate Committee on the Election met on this day in 1921.  

If they could see the Senate now, I wonder what they'd think?  It wouldn't be kind, I'm sure.



 Workers maintaining White House tennis courts, January 5, 1921.

Workmen were out in D.C. maintaining the tennis courts.  At that time, the utility vehicle remained horse drawn.

Vehicles were very much making their inroads, of course.

Times Square, 1921.

New York City imposed traffic regulations that included one way traffic for a portion of the day around Times Square.  It was revolutionary at the time.

In Washington D. C. the fire chief's vehicle collided with another, resulting in serious injuries to the chief.




Headlines in the paper warned that the Soviet Union was menacing Europe and a new general European war looked almost certain to break out.

The first principal of democracy is democracy itself.*

There are, in these extraordinarily odd times, some posts on politics here, but then there always has been.  

One thing I keep noting is that you can't read any of the entries here and presume to know how I voted.  You'll be wrong. But you can presume that I'm extraordinarily concerned about what's going on with the country right now.

A friend of mine, who is clearly a Trump fan, posted a long post that he picked up from somebody else regarding Donald Trump's accomplishments in office.  And while I disagree with him that its "well written" (it isn't), the post does have some points.   President Trump has some real accomplishments.

Indeed, Trump recently noted, and I think correctly, that the opposition to Trump, is due to Trump. That is, he doesn't get credit for his accomplishments due to people disliking him personally.

Now, contrary to what people like to argue, I haven't seen a President during my entire lifetime that people generally "opposed but respected". Detesting a President has been the national norm since there was a President.  But there's no denying that the last twelve years have been unique in this regard, and there's also no denying that Trump has brought much of this upon himself.

It's also the case, however, that he has given voice and action to the concerns of a lot of people.  Many of these people probably would express themselves the same way that Trump has, but that doesn't mean that their concerns aren't real and their points aren't valid, as we've noted in prior posts.  

For example, up until the Coronavirus pandemic the economy was doing well.  Trump did not cause the nation to engage in any new wars, which has not been the case for recent Presidents (although things were dicey with Iran from time to time, so this nearly wasn't true to some degree. Trump has brought troops home, which is something that Americans have long claimed they desired.  Conservative judges were appointed, which is something that was massively overdue and a huge accomplishment.  The balance of trade hasn't been fully corrected but there was a lot of progress on this score.  For social conservatives, who have been pretty much ignored for decades, policies somewhat came in that favored their views, although not universally so.

Some of this, right from the onset, is what caused liberals, who have rebranded themselves as "progressives", to scream and oppose him, and indeed "resist", from day one.  

But here's the things.

These feelings, i.e., the ones by an ignored demographic, are being used now by Trump in a them against us effort.  And that's anti democratic.

Lots of nations have gone through a period of time in which a large demographic had a series of real points and then came to the conclusion that the them vs. us element of was so strong, democracy didn't matter, or if it did, the other side didn't count. And that's right where we seem to be now.

Liberals deserve some of the blame here in that their words that they would "resist" fueled the them vs. us aspect of it.  Trump diehards who point out that the Progressives didn't acquiesce to the election results have a point, although the counter point is being over used.

But at the end of the day there's always one question in a democracy. And that is, do you respect the democratic process or not?  

If you don't, there's no point in pretending that anything is really about elections.  It's about power.  

If you do, you have to accept that there's absolutely no earthly way that those in power are always going to be the people you'd like to have there.  But they'll cycle over one day.

You also have to accept that the country will never be exactly the way you want it to be. But the contrary is that if its exactly the way some people want it to be its exactly the opposite of what other people want it to be, and there's no argument that it shouldn't be that way.  I.e., people who voted for Communist candidates in various countries that went for fascism, can't really complaint about it, or vice versa, as their concept of power is the same.

Which brings us to this.

If we support democracy, we support it, and contesting democracy is subverting it.  When our views are subverted in that case, we really have no complaint. We agreed, through our view of the process, that this was okay.

When people fall into arguing their side must prevail, over everything else, there's always an excuse for it.  Our side isn't as bad as theirs and there is no middle.  Their side is evil.  The election must have been corrupt, or people would have voted the way I did, as I'm surely right and they are wrong.  But the excuses tend to be dishonest. The real view is that might makes right.  I should win, because I'm right and you are wrong and that's all that matters.  And if I lose in that atmosphere. . .well that doesn't really matter as I've established the nature of power and who gets to exercise it.

______________________________________________________________________________

*This was written prior to the news story on the Trump effort to get Georgia officials to find an additional more or less 12,000 votes.

That effort is disturbing in the extreme and really should be measured by those in the Senate who are going to go along with Ted Cruz's efforts to challenge the electoral vote.  Indeed, Senator Cruz really ought to reconsider it himself.

It appears to have dawned on Cruz and his confederates that things have quit looking good on this effort and there's beginning to be a real backlash.  In spite of his boldness on Trump election matters, Cruz's margin against Beto O'Rourke in 2018 was only a little over 2% of the vote.  It's widely speculated that Cruz is aiming for the Oval Office now himself which will be a mistake if true as he's widely detested in much of the country and was so detested prior to this event.  Cruz has a good grasp on his base in Texas but not elsewhere and is strong outside of Texas only in the Trump base.  Therefore it's been speculated that his effort here was in order to curry favor with that base in the belief that Trump won't run in 2024.

He may have overcalculated as of the date of writing this, the morning of January 4, 2021, more Republicans are feeling free to leave the Trump orbit and strike out back towards the establishment GOP.  Indeed, the establishment GOP, lead right now by Mitch McConnell, is striking out and away from Trump.  Guesses on where the Trump base will be in 2024 are just that, guesses, but they may not be around at all.  The most recent revelations are going to shrink it at least a little and that will hurt figures like Cruz no matter what.  Indeed, on This Week it was noted how poor the Ivy League schools are looking now due to the participation of their graduates in this effort.

Cruz seems to know this as the most recent position of his camp is that they aren't challenging the election at all, they're merely arguing for a process that will make it certain that when Joe Biden takes office everyone will respect the election that put him there. As Cruz earlier volunteered his service to argue one of the Trump lawsuits at the Supreme Court level, another act that has to be regarded as self serving (why would they want him to argue it?).  This same argument has been picked up by his confederates who obviously all agreed on the line.  It was that line that fell flat with Chuck Todd on Meet the Press when he accused Senator Johnson of being the arsonist who is now calling to put out the fire.

It's too early to tell where all of this will be going, and predictions on matters like this are notoriously inaccurate, but looking at the early signs, there's going to be a split in the GOP that will be a wide fissure.  The question at this point is whether it will be two parties, or one.

If its one, it's going to resemble the Democratic Party in the 1865 to 1965 period in which it was effectively two parties, one liberal Northern Party and one conservative, and racist, Southern Party.  The Southern party effectively died in the 1970s and 80s and its members largely moved over to the Republican Party except, ironically, for its black members who remained in it.  The thing to note about that is that the Democratic Party of the Solid South was really rarely given voice outside of the South.  If that becomes the model, what will occur is that the GOP in the rural West will be a Trumpite Populist Party and the GOP everywhere else will be more or less the pre Trump party.  It will also mean that the Trump wing of the party will be influential only in its own region. 

If it splits into two parties, and there's a real chance it will if what we see going on now continues to develop, there will be the old Republican Party and the Trumpite Party. The Trump Party will be like the Progressive Party of little over a century ago.  It'll be successful regionally for an election cycle and then rapidly fade as its members rejoin the old party.

A third possibility exists that the GOP will split and both parties will die as neither will be large enough to sustain itself.  This has happened with American political parties before, and its worth remembering that the Democratic Party is the oldest political party in the world, which is something notable as it isn't that old.  The GOP is a minority party as it is, something that's easy to forget in the West where it predominates outside of urban areas.  If it splits in two that basically yields national politics to the Democrats and what could ultimately occur is that a new conservative party would emerge.  Some conservative commentators have been urging this since 2016.

If that becomes the case the new party will have no real influence in the country for at least a decade or more.  The irony of that would therefore be that a long lasting legacy of the Trump Administration was that its final days converted the politics of the country permanently to a more left leaning one.  A conservative party that reemerged following a GOP breakup would find itself in the same world that the Conservative Party of Canada, or the Conservatives in the UK, or the European conservative parties find themselves in, a place where being "center right" means you are to the left of any existing American party.

Monday, January 4, 2021

Blog Mirror: The Supreme Court and the president’s pardon power

Supreme Court blogger Amy Howe takes a look at a topic that's been coming up a lot recently, that being the President's power to pardon.  She looks at it from the prospective of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court and the president’s pardon power

The article addresses the topic of whether the President can pardon himself, as he can pardon others for crimes they're not actually convicted of.  My feeling is that he cannot, although as noted, it's an undecided legal issue.

Going out from there and into the controversial, the only existing Presidential pardon of a former President, Gerald Ford's pardon of President Nixon, is in my view one of the great American blunders of the 20th Century, or perhaps in our entire history.  Nixon should have been tried and convicted for his role in covering up the Watergate break-in.  His conviction and sentencing would have stood as an example that Presidents aren't above the law, which Nixon famously stated in an interview that they were.  HIs pardoning suggested that in fact they were, no matter what Ford's intent was.

To go to the really controversial, I feel the same way about figures from the Confederacy who would have been logically subject to criminal charges for their role in rebelling against the United States.  By this I'm not suggesting that they should have tried men down to the enlisted ranks, or even all of the officers.  But they should have tried the principal political figures like Jefferson Davis.  They should also have tried U.S. Army officers who abandoned their commissions to serve in the Confederate forces.  

That's a harsh, Radical Republican (in the terms of the day) view, but that would have chastised a South that was ready to cooperate with the Federal government and it would have kept the Southern aristocracy from regaining control of the region.  It would have put us decades ahead in achieving a more equitable society as well.  It was an opportunity lost.

Indeed, both acts of mercy were opportunities lost, with the merciful forgetting that there really are no "chapters in history".  It's one long book.



Resolute Progress. Culling the podcast herd

The other day, I posted this item:

Resolute Progress. Weeding the Cyber Garden.

I've done the same on podcasts.

I like podcasts a lot, and started listening them some time ago.  Indeed, they're the reason I gave up on XM Radio.  I had taken them up to the extent I wasn't listening to it much anymore.

When I traveled around a fair amount by road, they were fairly easy to keep up with. . . sort of.  Well, that wasn't every fully true, but I did keep up on them more than I do now.  COVID 19 is the reason why.  Fewer road trips.

So I've culled some.  And some really needed to go.

One that I tried to repeatedly cull but stuck around due to the oddity of how podcast upload on the iPhone was the Patrick Coffin Show.  Coffin was the host for years of Catholic Answers Live, which I really like and still listen to, although I've never listened to every episode.  Coffin, who has an acting background, was a great hosts.  The current host, however, Cy Kellett, is leagues superior in every sense.  Coffin's departure turned out to be a boon for Catholic Answers.

But not for Coffin .

I wasn't sure why Coffin was leaving but he set up his own podcast and apparently that project was part of it.  Right away Coffin strayed into the Rad Trad fields, something that the very orthodox Catholic Answers, which is conservative, but not Rad Trad, doesn't.

When Coffin's show would pop back onto my podcast feed, I'd often leave it there to see if there was anything interesting. That ended when he had an episode that features some whackadoodle boosting a Bill Gates is responsible for the pandemic theory.

Not that there weren't warning signs before.  Soem of Coffin's guests were really extreme.  Dr. Taylor Marshall is one and he was one the lesser ones.  

Well, no more. Coffin is gone.  Indeed, in my view Coffin is one of the people who is presented with a delimma of the nature expressed here the other day in that he's now expressed views that he knows or should know, at least in regard to the absurdity of the pandemic episode, are false.  As he has a media company of some sort, he needs to recant that, in my view.

This isn't the only podcast I've excised recently.  There's just too many to keep track of and too many of them are good. At some point, some have to go.

Simplify.