Sorry I haven't written in a while. It's not that I haven't had thoughts about political events, but rather that I'm not sure what I'm adding to the discourse. Nothing I have written (and left unpublished) jumped out to me as something the world needed. I didn't know why I was writing beyond the desire to hear my own thoughts shouted into the ether.
Recently, Jewell hosted a good author, Tom Nichols, who wrote "The Death of Expertise." It was a fantastic lecture, and I encourage everyone to read his book. But one thing he said stuck out to me: Everyone needs an editor. I agree with that wholeheartedly. Unless I had an editor reining in my worst tendencies, this blog will cease to have reason, purpose and cohesion. So although it is, in itself, a tightrope, I'm trying to step back a bit and be my own editor, perilous as that may be. If I'm going to write something, it better be worth reading.
Thoughts on Justice Kavanaugh
I've written this portion probably a half-dozen times in the last two months. Yet while the event has passed, it is worth re-examining in the light of it now being a news cycle firmly rooted in the past.
Imagine a world in which Dr. Ford had been belligerent with questioners, agitated at the process, openly arguing partisan politics and refusing an FBI investigation. I have no doubt she would have been seen as overly emotional and her story would have been dismissed. Imagine Judge Kavanaugh had been the one who was calm, deliberate and open to an FBI investigation. I have no doubt he would have been seen as having the temperament for the highest court. And yet... he was approved anyway. His temperament and testimony and her temperament and testimony had little impact on the outcome.
For a while, I chalked this up to gender politics. The hearing was the first time I truly understood how deep the climb is for women in politics. An educated woman gave a powerful testimony about an event that happened to her. She said she was 100 percent confident. It was fine, even though it was decidedly the opposite of that. She sat in front of a committee that has never (!) had a female Republican among its ranks. Its Republican members were so worried about the optics of 11 male senators asking questions of a female victim that they brought in a special female prosecutor to ask her questions. This showed that the GOP committee members understood Dr. Ford's claims were serious, but did not trust themselves enough to show it. A hearing turned into a trial with the appearance of a prosecutor. Then, when Judge Kavanaugh arrived, they trusted themselves again. Along with Kavanaugh himself, they blasted partisan acts and pounded the metaphoric table. They turned a trial back into a hearing.
The most common refrain from the right is not over whether Ford was assaulted — that seems to be largely conceded. The argument was that yes, we believe she was assaulted, but we don't believe it was Kavanaugh. Which is a tremendous misinterpretation of her testimony. It says Dr. Ford was believable enough that she was assaulted, yet her statement that she was 100 percent sure that it was Kavanaugh was the bridge too far. And because we don't know for sure, we can do only one thing: grant Kavanaugh a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. Her pain is secondary to his rise to greater power.
We've already lost the woman whose claims are at the basis of the hearing. Dr. Ford is now a footnote to history, only to surface again when the next confirmation sexual assault case happens, much like Anita Hill before her.
It didn't have to be this way. Judge Kavanaugh did not have to be nominated. Amy Coney Barrett is a conservative female judge in the mold of Neil Gorsuch (and female). Heck, Gorsuch was opposed on partisan grounds, yes, but not because of his sexual assault past. Raymond Kethledge is as conservative as Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas. We could have had an in-depth FBI investigation if the facts were truly important. And yet we didn't.
A long time ago, I read Jeffrey Toobin's "The Nine." It was a look at the nine members of the Supreme Court as of that writing. Nearly half the court has turned over, but one thought from the book has stuck out to me ever since: If the GOP couldn't change the results of the Supreme Court, they could change the courts. That's what we're seeing with judicial appointments on the federal, state and local level. The GOP was in win-at-all-costs mode to make this happen. Be careful what you buy at the cost of your souls.
Emotions on Writing
For the last year and a half, I've been working on our church's 175th anniversary book. I say "I," but it's really been a team of about a half-dozen people. The book comes out in 10 days; it's done and at the printer, as far as I know. And... I thought I'd be happier. That's a weird thing to write or admit to myself, but it's true.
In the last year, I've written more than 90 pages of church history, combining two different eras of books (the 125th book and the 150th book, both written by college professors) into a thematic narrative rather than a chronological one. I've researched and delved into rabbit holes and dug deep into corners of church history that have fascinated and excited me. I've been exceedingly proud of the work I cheerily and willingly put into this project for free. Luckily, I am not the only person working on this project, because I am a newbie to our church. I've only been at this church for about 2-3 years. The team's input has been amazing and added depth and recent history that I could not possibly know or find. I know that what they had put in has made the book better.
Yet when I consider the most recent copy I had in my hands, I was frustrated. And I've had a hard time figuring out why. Maybe I'm mourning the loss of control of the copy. "My" writing became less recognizable by the end of the editing process. That ego-driven part is one that I am constantly having to put in check. But I think the bigger factor is that I can see all the decisions along the way. I can see the arguments over style, the chapters that have been worked and reworked, the editing and the rewrites. I can see only the struggle and the emotions from every step in the process and the scars and warts in the end copy. No one else knows those fights. The audience won't see it. They won't know. But I do. And that's hard to deal with.
Senate/House/Local Races
I'm convinced that the House is going to flip to the Democrats. I'll be shocked if it doesn't. That's a blue wave, mostly thanks to the suburbs. I'm also convinced the Senate won't flip. I think Arizona and North Dakota's flipped seats will cancel each other out. I also think 1-2 of these states will flip to the GOP: Florida, Missouri (my bet) or Indiana. Nevada miiiiight switch to the Democrats, but I don't think so right now. My gut is the GOP gains a seat or two, which isn't a terrible outcome for either side, considering. (LATE UPDATE: I think Nevada will flip, but I think Missouri will flip too. My ultimate call for Senate is 51-49, just as it is now.)
As for local races, Missouri's so gerrymandered that it's not interesting outside of the Senate race. Josh Hawley, I think, will win by 1-2 percent over incumbent Claire McCaskill. I wouldn't be surprised if the medical marijuana bill passes, the minimum wage passes and the political finance reform passes.
The more interesting races are in Kansas. We will see if being a Republican in Kansas is enough to carry them to a victory. I think Sharice Davids beats incumbent Kevin Yoder in Kansas House District 3. Ads against her have only made her look awesome (definitely winning a UFC-type fight), and that already was a district that voted against Trump in the last election. I also think Paul Davis is the favorite for Kansas House District 2. He beat Brownback in that district when he ran for governor. Watkins has not been a particularly inspiring candidate. I have met Paul Davis in my old office and found him to be smart and thoughtful, though I warned him that losing to Brownback would be a bigger loss than he understood. Losing to Watkins would be less damaging to the state, but it would show that a smart, moderate Democrat can't win in Kansas even in a pro-Democrat environment.
I hope that Laura Kelly can win the governorship over Kris Kobach. She is endorsed by all former governors but Brownback, including all the other GOP governors. If she can't win, then no Democrat will ever win in Kansas again, and the GOP can get away with murder in that state.
Summary Judgments
Elizabeth Warren revealed the results of a DNA test "showing" she is, actually part Native American. I understand why she did it, although I think it was a mistake to do so. She played Donald Trump's game. Anyone who is going to beat him in 2020 will not play his game. She was my odds-on favorite to win the Democratic nomination, but this was a case of winning the battle but losing the war. I now think she's not the favorite. Biden and Kamala Harris are probably the leading contenders at this juncture. • • • I have done something silly. I signed up for a half marathon. The Liberty Half Marathon, on March 2, 2019, has a route that goes from William Jewell through downtown Liberty, around Liberty Hospital, up near the kids' future elementary school, down through the local park, up the street next to ours and then back to downtown and Jewell. I'm already training, and I'm up to a 7-mile run. This is the longest I've ever run, and the half marathon will be the longest I've ever run. • • • Roland was Owlette and Evie was Pinkie Pie for Halloween. Roland has already told Alyson about his plans for next year's Halloween costume. normally, I wouldn't expect that to hold up, but he decided on Owlette in like, April. So if he's the Greatest Showman next year, he called it already.
