A split has emerged among Dems over whether the party should aim to work with Republicans or wage war against them, a division stemming from a belief by many rank-and-file Democrats that the GOP has stopped playing by the old rules. From me & @seungminkim:https://t.co/WTMXKtLYYv— Matt Viser (@mviser) May 31, 2019
and had a few thoughts:
A) As a scholar of IR, I immediately thought: if a country declares and fights war on another country and that second country chooses not to fight, we tend to call that surrender and defeat. What happens after surrender? Mostly very bad stuff. So, the Dems need to choose war.
B) Um, who radicalized me? I used to be a fairly moderate democrat. Oh, that's right, Mitch McConnell. And John Kelly and Kirstjen Nielsen.
One can argue about the date when this war started. It could be 2009 when the GOP said they would prefer to deny Obama any wins even if it was good for the country exactly at a time where the US was involved in two wars and the deepest economic hole since the Great Depression. It could be 2016 when Mitch McConnell refused to let Merrick Garland have a hearing in the Senate, making up a rule that he has recently reputed--that Presidents should not be allowed to have their SCOTUS nominees considered in an election. One could argue it has been since 2017 as the GOP in Congress refused to do their damn jobs--overseeing the government. They have tolerated both massive corruption and the arson of institutions far and wide.
So, the real question is not war or peace, but how to fight the war. Whether impeachment now or down the road, whether to hold up USMCA (NAFTA 1.001), whether to close government the next time the opportunity shows up, etc. Speaking of the last, it turned out that shutting the government down because of Trump's petulance hurts Trump.
Expecting bipartisanship is kind of like being a Special Prosecutor and thinking that the Trump-appointed Attorney General would do the job according to the old rules. It is naive bordering on stupidity. Or vice versa.
I don't think Dems should go on Fox, I don't think the Dems should work with Trump, and I am starting to think that the Dems should be starting the impeachment process even though I know it will not lead to Trump losing office. And, yeah, by the way, kids are dying in cages.
There are one thing the Dems should not do in this war. They should not try to appeal to the US armed forces to do anything about it. It is not their job. It is the job of the courts (until they are packed with Trumpists), and it is job of lawyers and of legislators at all levels. Because even in wars, there are limits to what one should do, as Trump's pardoning of war criminals reminds us.
1 comment:
I just wish someone would read the advise and consent clause to Mitch McConnell -- "he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law"-- and then ask him how he, as a strict constructionist/originalist on constitutional matters, finds anything in that clause that makes Advise and Consent optional, at the will of the Senate Majority leader.
I also don't understand why Obama didn't fight him on this matter, on constitutional grounds.
But then what do I know about constitutional law?
Post a Comment