ChrisWeigant.com

Trump Moves To Center Stage

[ Posted Monday, July 15th, 2024 – 16:15 UTC ]

After a two-week detour through the landscape of Democratic angst, Donald Trump has once again reclaimed the center stage of the political world. President Joe Biden will be interviewed on NBC tonight, but this will likely become no more than a footnote in a dramatic week for Trump and the Republican Party.

Part of this shift in focus was planned, as the Republican National Convention gets underway in Milwaukee today, but the most dramatic event was not. Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt in a small town in Pennsylvania over the weekend, as his ear was apparently grazed by a bullet fired at him from a roof overlooking his rally. One spectator was killed and two seriously injured in the attack. This is likely to generate some sympathy for Trump, although assassination attempts are rare enough that it's impossible to say what the political effect will be. One thing that's certain is that it will become a central focus at the convention.

Continue Reading »

Friday Talking Points -- Democrats In Limbo

[ Posted Friday, July 12th, 2024 – 16:37 UTC ]

Well, that was another week mostly wasted.

This isn't just our opinion, either. Here is what Biden campaign chair Jen O'Malley Dillon had to say in an all-staff call yesterday:

We had two very, very, very hard weeks, very bad weeks. I told you I'd level with you; they've been bad fucking weeks. This two-week window has really sucked, and it is hard, there is no doubt about it.

This week began (since our weeks here are divided by when this column is published) with President Joe Biden sitting down for an interview with George Stephanopoulos last Friday night. The whole thing lasted only 22 minutes, and while Biden did do a better job than he did at his trainwreck of a debate, that's not really saying much.

Continue Reading »

Reviewing Biden's Press Conference

[ Posted Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 18:57 UTC ]

President Joe Biden just gave a solo press conference today. Before it took place, the media had a lot of time to kill, due to the presser being postponed multiple times (it finally began just before 7:30 Eastern, almost two hours after it was scheduled). The most cogent comment I heard from the pundits was someone essentially saying that it could be a "break" moment (if Biden did badly), but that it probably wouldn't be a "make" moment, since no matter how good Biden did the fears will not be completely put to rest -- we'll just be in a sort of endless cycle of every unscripted appearance by Biden becoming its own make-or-break moment on its own. That seemed about right, to me, and it still seems right after watching Biden's performance.

Continue Reading »

Will Other Democrats Clear The Field For Harris?

[ Posted Wednesday, July 10th, 2024 – 16:01 UTC ]

In all the speculation about what the Democratic "Plan B" could be (should President Joe Biden decide not to continue his run for re-election), so far there are really only two basic scenarios: an open convention, with multiple candidates vying for the nomination; or, conversely, Biden anointing Vice President Kamala Harris to stand in for him. But there are now two interesting developments which could be an indication of some possible party unity on the horizon. This is only a mere possibility right now -- it is in no way guaranteed -- but if it happened, it might be the best option possible for the Democratic Party.

The first development was that Michigan's Governor Gretchen Whitmer was directly asked in a recent interview if she would consider running for the presidential nomination, if Joe Biden stepped down. Her answer was an unequivocal: "No." The second development came when California's Governor Gavin Newsom was asked about a previous commitment he had made last year; that he would not run against his fellow Californian Kamala Harris for the presidency. When asked if Newsom still felt that way, he responded: "Of course, yes."

Continue Reading »

Biden Toughs It Out

[ Posted Tuesday, July 9th, 2024 – 16:21 UTC ]

President Joe Biden isn't going anywhere, he insists. He remains committed to his candidacy and is confident that he will indeed beat Donald Trump in November. And his strategy of toughing it out against all the critics calling for him to step away from the race appears to be paying off -- at least so far.

This morning, House Democrats held a party caucus meeting, but afterwards not a whole lot changed. The number of House Democrats who have publicly called for Biden to get out of the race increased by two -- to seven -- with an additional three who called for the same thing in a private call with Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries on Sunday. This adds up to 10 Democrats, out of a total of over 210 in the House. That is less than five percent.

Senate Democrats met later in the day and also did not emerge from their meeting with any sort of cohesive stance. To date, there have been zero Democratic senators publicly calling for Biden to end his campaign (although a number have expressed their reservations about Biden staying, without explicitly calling him to get out). In other words, the situation hasn't changed appreciably even after both caucuses met. Having Biden remain as the party's nominee is either gaining traction in the rank-and-file, or perhaps people are taking a "wait and see" approach, at least for now.

Continue Reading »

A Tense Week Ahead

[ Posted Monday, July 8th, 2024 – 15:59 UTC ]

Will President Joe Biden's re-election candidacy survive the week? That is the question on every Democrat's mind right now, as the forces line up both pro and con. Whatever happens, it pretty much has to happen soon. If Biden does somehow survive this week, then his chances of riding out the entire "Pass the torch, Joe" storm will have increased, that much seems somewhat certain. But with Congress back in session, all the elected national Democrats will be in one place again, and in both the House and Senate they are planning on holding very tense caucus meetings tomorrow.

It's probably going to come down to the weight of the numbers. So far, to date, nine House members have pretty much declared themselves on the "pass the torch" side. Five of them have done so with public statements, and the other four did so in a virtual meeting with the ranking committee members that Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries held yesterday. But there have also been a growing number of House Democrats who are (so far, at any rate) forcefully pushing back on the notion and swearing their continued wholehearted support for Biden. The line has been drawn, and we'll just have to see how many of them wind up on which side of it.

Continue Reading »

Friday Talking Points -- It's Time To Go, Joe

[ Posted Friday, July 5th, 2024 – 16:21 UTC ]

[Program Note: Once again, this week we are dispensing with our normal Friday format, as it truly was a one-issue week, and this made it all but impossible to come up with our usual awards and talking points. Instead, we have to weigh in on the subject at hand, because it is so important.]

 

This week, the nation celebrated its 248th birthday. (Feel free to insert a "Biden's so old" joke here, if you wish....)

It's been a rather excruciating week, aside from enjoying the fireworks last night. The entire political media universe has been completely consumed with the question of whether President Joe Biden is the best candidate to take on Donald Trump, or whether he should instead gracefully step aside and allow the Democrats to nominate someone younger who might have a better chance at victory in November. We have to admit, we've never really seen anything like this (but then we are too young to remember Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968). The pressure on Biden seems to only be growing, day by day, as more and more people come to the conclusion that Democrats would be better served with a new nominee.

Continue Reading »

From The Archives: Celebrate The 4th -- Pursue Some Happiness!

[ Posted Thursday, July 4th, 2024 – 14:44 UTC ]

"And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air, gave proof through the night that we still know how to throw one heckuva party!"

Enjoy your Independence Day, everyone!

 

Originally published July 4th, 2007

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

-- Preamble to the Declaration of Independence

 

That line will be widely quoted across this land today, in parks and bandstands, on radio and in newsprint, from California to the New York islands, in countless big-city parades and from a myriad of small-town gazebos.

The more serious-minded of these proclaimers will go on to read the entire text of the Declaration which began the idea of the United States of America. It's an interesting text to read, and if you haven't read it since Junior High, I certainly encourage you to do so. There are obvious parallels in the deprivations of King George III which may sound uncomfortably apt today, for various reasons.

For instance, in the list of grievances: "He [King George] has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither..."

Funny, but I didn't hear many Republicans quoting that line during the recent immigration debate.

There are always those who point out the politically incorrect bits, too: "[King George] has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."

That part gets edited out of a lot of small-town ceremonies, and also winds up on the cutting room floor of a lot of big-city newspapers.

But I write today not to quibble with or otherwise criticize what was writ more than two centuries ago, but instead to shine a brilliant spotlight on the fundamental and far-ranging statement which begins the preamble. Because -- today of all days -- it bears understanding by all who call America home.

In 1921, the incomparable H.L. Mencken decided the text needed updating, so he wrote "The Declaration of Independence in American," which is just as funny today as when he wrote it (although the politically incorrect slurs and other rough language are from another era, so the easily-offended should be warned). He translated the relevant text above into the following:

"All we got to say on this proposition is this: first, you and me is as good as anybody else, and maybe a damn sight better; second, nobody ain't got no right to take away none of our rights; third, every man has got a right to live, to come and go as he pleases, and to have a good time however he likes, so long as he don't interfere with nobody else."

Well put, for 1921. While I admit I am tempted to follow in Mencken's footprints and rewrite the entire document into modern American vernacular, that'll just have to wait for another year. Because increasing understanding of the bedrock sentence in the entire document is more important.

 

We hold these truths to be self evident...

The following ideas are so blindingly obvious to any thinking individual that they simply cannot be contradicted. There is no argument against the following statements which has any meaning at all. They are statements of truth and fact with which no intelligent person can argue. The following things we say are not only true but indeed are so axiomatic that they require no proof whatsoever, and rather stand alone as solid pillars of linguistic granite requiring no external support.

 

...that all men are created equal...

All humans are born of woman and enter into this world in pain. We are all children of "Nature and Nature's God," equal in value and equal in importance. The law and the government must see all humans equally and treat them all equally, since this is Nature's intent.

[OK, admittedly, that's not what it meant when it was written. When it was written, it meant "...all men are created equal... except for slaves (of course)... and Indians (of course)... and women (of course, that's why we said "men")... and any men who didn't own property -- who may have been created equal, but we're certainly not giving them the right to vote..." But I freely translate the Founding Fathers into what the phrase should have meant when written, and is indeed slowly coming to mean in today's America.]

 

...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,...

That when they are born, each human has certain rights which cannot be separated from them. Governments cannot take these rights away, and the individuals themselves cannot sell, barter, or give away these rights. They are the birthright of every citizen, and remain with that citizen until arriving on Death's door. These rights may be usurped by tyrannical governments, but the possession of these rights is still each human's divine gift. A government may take away your freedom -- but not your inherent right to be free, since that is a possession which simply cannot be taken from you by anyone.

 

...that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

Among these rights (not only these we're going to mention, mind you, but just among the many which are every human's true birthright) are the ability to live free, the ability to freely live, and the ability to pursue happiness in whatever method you choose that does not infringe on another's rights. This could mean acquiring property, this could mean pursuing the profession of your choice, this could mean running for public office. However you define happiness, it's your inherent right to chase your dream, and the government cannot take this fundamental right away from you.

 

The entire sentence's keystone is the word "unalienable," defined as: "non-transferable." Today, it's considered archaic and bad English, but it was perfectly acceptable in 1776. Some even translate the word into its modernly acceptable spelling, "inalienable," which is just a semantic travesty. While the two words are essentially interchangeable in meaning, some things simply should not be edited -- ever -- and the founding document of our country would seem to fit that category, in my humble opinion.

The Oxford English Dictionary lists both words as synonyms, and cites usages of both back to the 1600s. Some, even today, argue that the words are not interchangeable, and that "unalienable" means something that you are not allowed to sell (like liberty -- you cannot sell yourself into slavery, as it is illegal to do so) -- something, in other words, that is your birthright and cannot ever be surrendered or taken from you. The flip side to this argument is that "inalienable" should be defined as something which cannot be surrendered or taken from you without your consent. I reject such hair-splitting as etymological foolishness. The Founding Fathers knew what they were talking about, and they were talking about natural rights which each possess and which cannot be removed from you, ever, by anyone.

If proof of this is necessary, the Virginia Constitution's Bill of Rights, which is seen by many as a "first draft" to our own Constitution (from June of 1776), begins with Section 1:

"That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity, namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

That meaning is crystal-clear, even if it does use more words to describe the same concept.

 

The wonderful thing about the Fourth of July is... well, OK... number one has to be the fireworks. It's hard to top the bombs bursting in air, and the rockets' red glare and the concomitant "Ooohs" and "Aaahs."

Seriously, though, the wonderful thing about the Fourth is that although it is a summer holiday, unlike Memorial Day there is simply no guilt factor about enjoying yourself. Every Memorial Day, a certain contingent of Americans gets indignant opinion articles published in newspapers across the country (or in letters to the editor, if they don't have enough influence) which grumble about how: "This day is for the soldiers, not for mattress sales and barbeques. Show our veterans some respect, put a flag on a military grave," and all the rest of that refrain. Problem is, they're right. If they weren't right, the rest of us wouldn't feel guilty at what they have to say -- they would simply be ignored.

Labor Day, our other bookend summer holiday, has no guilt attached to it whatsoever. I guess the decline of unions in America... oh, heck, that's not really it... it's because union members love to hold and attend fantastic picnics on Labor Day as much as the next guy. They are the next guy, in fact -- standing there just beside you.

But the glorious Fourth is all about what a cool idea America was in the first place, and how we of all nations came up with the idea first. It is a day even a tree-hugging liberal in San Francisco can fly an American flag proudly -- with no militaristic overtones taken by her tree-hugging liberal neighbors, it should be noted -- since it is a day to celebrate what the ideal of America is. And that's something every American holds deeply in their own heart, and can celebrate in a very personal way -- even while enjoying the public celebrations.

So go ahead this Independence Day. Have a hot dog. Jump in some water somewhere. Watch a parade. Drink a beer. Drink two! Watch some fireworks.

The Founding Fathers not only would have approved of the concept of you having a great July 4th, they founded the whole damn country just so you could exercise your natural right to do so. You would be letting them down, in essence, by not doing so.

And that's something we all truly can celebrate together. Because it's not just celebrating your right as an American to have a happy Fourth, it's actually celebrating your birthright as a human being to be happy.

So go out there and pursue some Happiness today!

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

Democrats' Crisis Of Confidence

[ Posted Wednesday, July 3rd, 2024 – 15:48 UTC ]

The Democratic Party is now in a full-blown crisis of confidence. Part of this is media-fed, since writing "Democrats In Disarray" columns comes so naturally to most pundits, but it really goes a lot deeper than that. There are real worries out there that President Joe Biden is not going to be up to the task of defeating Donald Trump. There were worries about that before the debate, actually, since his poll numbers have been so anemic for so long. But after America saw Biden stumble through a 90-minute debate with Trump, these worries have gotten a whole lot more acute and immediate.

Something missing from much of the media commentary is something I hear a lot from actual voters. The question to them isn't whether Joe Biden is up to the task of being president right now (or through Election Day), it is instead whether he will still be up to that task three or four years from now. After all, we are electing a president not just for the short term, but for another four-year term in office. Is there anyone out there who is supremely confident that Biden will be mentally sharp and decisive at this point in the year 2028? Because what I am hearing is a lot of doubt on that key point. Whatever his current mental state is, four more years of the toughest job in the world is going to take a toll.

Continue Reading »

Should Joe Stay Or Should He Go?

[ Posted Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 – 16:25 UTC ]

Back in the early 1980s (before he was in his early 80s), the punk band The Clash put out a song asking what has now become Joe Biden's new existential question:

Should I stay or should I go now?

If I go there will be trouble

And if I stay it will be double

So you gotta let me know

Should I stay or should I go?

The only problem with fitting the song lyrics to Biden's current conundrum is that it is Joe and Joe alone who will be making this decision. Others can "let him know," but the choice is going to be his and his alone to make.

Continue Reading »