It’s time for many of my colleagues in the California Democratic Party to get a clue about the current gubernatorial recall election against Gavin Newsom. This isn’t 2003, and Arnold Schwarzenegger is not running for Governor of California this year.
In other words, the hostile hyperventilating that you hear from some of our state’s party leaders is unnecessary, since there is almost no realistic chance that Gov, Newsom is going to be recalled, in large part thanks to the fact that all registered voters in California will automatically receive an absentee ballot in the mail for this year’s recall election.
Speaking of unnecessary behavior, the ugly arm-twisting and aggressive suppression of the Democratic candidacies of some well-known potential gubernatorial replacement candidates is unfortunate, not to mention unseemly (and unAmerican, if you ask me). Democrats, run for office if you want to! Don’t be bullied by anyone.
There needs to be at least one viable Democratic gubernatorial replacement candidate on the ballot this fall, just in case the majority of California’s voters do decide to go ahead and recall Gov. Newsom from office. This latest laughable political proposition of “Newsom or No One” currently being promulgated by not only Gov. Newsom’s inner circle, but also by the friends and former underlings of recalled Democratic Gov. Gray Davis is so fundamentally at odds with realpolitik, where does one even begin?
How about with the 2003 gubernatorial recall election in California? “Democrat” Gray Davis (who was barely a Democrat at all) lost that recall election for one main reason — and I’m not talking about Davis’ Republican replacement Schwarzenegger or former Lieutenant Gov. Cruz Bustamante, the most prominent Democratic replacement candidate on the ballot that year. Blaming Bustamante for Davis’ loss is ridiculous.
Gray Davis was recalled as Governor by California’s voters in 2003, because then second-term Gov. Davis had the lowest approval ratings of any California governor in my lifetime (and I’m a middle-aged man who was born and raised in California). Conservative Democrat Gray Davis’ approval ratings were in the 20s at the time of the recall election, in other words only about one out of every four or five Californians approved of the job Davis was doing, which is why Gray Davis’ second-term as governor of California came to an abrupt, embarrassing end in 2003. The voters wanted Davis to go.
Blame the blatant corruption of Bush-Cheney, Ken Lay and Enron for Davis’ ignominious defeat, if you wish, but stop beating up on Cruz Bustamante already, conservative Democrats! Or were you unaware of the fact that a bunch of angry, asinine, over-the-hill, white-haired White folks falsely blaming Bustamante might backfire on our current Gov. Gavin Newsom?
As the worst president in American history, Donald Trump used to say so often: “We’ll see what happens.”
JAKE PICKERING, Arcata, Calif.
In her column, “Get Thee Vaccinated, Evangelical Friend” (5/1/21 TPP), Connie Schultz shared an anecdote of being at odds with her mother. When Connie expressed doubt regarding God’s expectation that she should love everybody, her mother sent to her to her room to contemplate that theological matter.
Through the centuries, well-intentioned believers have tried to make their faith more palatable to skeptics. Emphasis, for example, has been placed on the Beatitudes and much of the rest of the Sermon on the Mount of Olives.
Yet, as his words have come down to us in the Gospel narratives, the Nazarene did come down heavily on the Pharisees, the Sadducees and other sectarian and partisan people collectively. Apart from Biblical scholars and sophisticated interpreters, those anomalies may trouble the earnest seeker of insight.
WILLIAM DAUENHAUER, Willowick, Ohio
The answer to all this babble that is currently taking up our time and patience is found in Paul’s First and Second Epistles to Timothy. It’s very clear about our issues, going on about our political arguing and all the words about words. People who claim to be Christians should look it up and read what it says. There are also scripture from I Corinthians 61-20, for further example, of answers to these issues our present political leaders are wrestling with. In fact, if one studies all of the epistles, one will see many solutions to our current issues. Those who claim to be Christians could look into these things, for the sake of our nation. “Wisdom” is what it’s called.
Ephesians is addressed to the Church, which is made up of all believers in Christ. Let all who say they are believers start there. Please.
CHERYL LOVELY, Presque Isle, Maine
It is important to me that all Americans pay serious attention to a very important recent development in the world of politics. It appears to me that there have been many well-respected and well-admired ECONOMISTS, some of whom are conservative-Republicans and some of whom are liberal/progressive Democrats (which I happen to be), who have stated that our huge national debt and huge federal government budget deficits do NOT pose any real danger or threat to the current and future well-being of our economy and our country. However, not all respected economists are saying this.
Obviously, conservative-Republicans are going to instinctively insist that they are “wrong,” and liberal/progressive Democrats are going to instinctively insist that they are “right.” I want to urge “both sides” to take a long, hard look at this and to try to be as objective as possible about how “true” that it is or is not. Personally, I would love it if our federal government could safely spend more on federal government social programs that would help everyone in the middle and lower classes who are trying hard to lead responsible and productive lives. However, I would not love it if doing so would hurt and bankrupt our country.
STEWART B. EPSTEIN, Rochester, N.Y.
Sensing that the US Supreme Court is poised to look favorably on bills outlawing abortion, the Texas Legislature has approved sweeping new legislation that would ban abortions as early as six weeks into pregnancy and allow anyone to sue abortion providers as well as anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion.
Abortion opponents hope that by turning enforcement of the new guidelines over to everyday citizens, rather than a government agency, they can avoid the legal challenges that have delayed so-called heartbeat bills in other red states from taking effect, the Houston Chronicle reported. Texas would be the 13th state to pass such a measure.
Texas law currently bans abortion after 20 weeks, with exceptions when a woman’s life is in danger or if the fetus has a severe abnormality.
The Senate accepted a House amendment prohibiting rapists from suing their victims, although it does not specify whether they have to have been convicted to qualify, the Chronicle reported. Most sexual assaults are unreported.
Critics say the bill’s enforcement mechanism is meant simply to harass abortion providers with costly legal work. Under the proposal, for example, providers could not recoup legal fees even if they successfully defended themselves from litigation.
If Texas succeeds in forcing a pregnant girl or woman to bear a child, of course, mother and child are on their own, because Republicans are in no mood to let Texans become dependent on welfare. The Legislature earlier in the session rejected the option to take federal money to pay for expansion of Medicaid to cover working poor families.
JESSIE HIDALGO, Houston, Texas
Time for Town Meeting under a huge white tent (paid for with COVID-19 funds) — 285 of us sitting in chairs far apart. We are, some, in couples, close.
First things first — we ballot vote and get what Police Chief has awaited for 25 years — a proper safe and secure facility.
I thumb through Town Report and find Tree Warden’s
report — read how he and wife “have traveled around town viewing many trees and have noticed many dangerous ones.”
In a recent year Town Clerk told me we’ve nearly 3,000 citizens and 1,000 dogs — “Most families have one and many have two or more!” Lots of license paperwork, dog tags handed over the counter.
I wonder: what is our count of woodpeckers? Not a Town Report thing, but all these dead, standing trees with their growing-in-numbers, pecked holes verify woodpeckers’ success — Hairy, Downy, Pileated. Glory be!
I am in my hard-bottomed chair, metal tent poles holding up this artificial white sky and hearing a mic’s being accidentally knocked, sharp rap to my ear, so I consider how much we await to know.
LYNN RUDMIN CHONG, Sanborton, N.H.
In the article, “New Interior Secretary Deb Haaland is unprecedented” [5/1/21 TPP], Sonali Kolhatkar writes of this being the first time a Native America would head the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Not true. The first Native America to hold this post was Ely S. Parker, who was appointed by President Grant to be the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1869.
DAVID RAISMAN, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Editor Notes: Ely S. Parker was a Tonawanda Seneca who was a US Army officer, lawyer, engineer and tribal diplomat who was commissioned a lieutenant colonel during the Civil War, and served as adjutant and secretary to General Grant. Parker wrote the final draft of the Confederate surrender terms at Appomattox, Wikipedia noted.
During two years as Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Parker pursued a peace policy in relation to Native Americans in the West. The number of military actions against Indians were reduced and there was an effort to support tribes in their transition to lives on reservations, Wikipedia noted, citing “The Life of General Ely S. Parker,” by Arthur Parker (1919).
From The Progressive Populist, June 15, 2021
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us
PO Box 819, Manchaca TX 78652