I was put here by God to assemble today's Picayune Plus

...... plus the manifest pugnaciousness of Trump's assertion of manifest destiny

To read this issue in your browser, click on the headline above.

Tuesdays at 11:30 a.m. I talk with WGN-AM 720 host John Williams about what’s making news and likely to be grist for the PS mill. The WGN listen-live link is here.

Where was God for Corey Comperatore?

Here’s President Donald Trump during his inauguration speech Monday:

Just a few months ago, in that beautiful Pennsylvania field, an assassin’s bullet ripped through my ear. But I felt then, and believe even more so now, that my life was saved for a reason. I was saved by God to make America great again.

The reason I find this so offensive is not that I loatheTrump — though surely I do — but that a bullet fired by the same would-be assassin took the life of 50-year-old Corey Comperatore, a churchgoing former US Army Reservist and volunteer firefighter. And it would be perverse and offensive to say God had a good reason for allowing Comperatore to die.

If God intervened to save Trump’s life, why didn’t God intervene to save Comperatore? Or those children at Sandy Hook Elementary School? Or those who have died in the Southern California fires? Or the tens of thousands of innocent civilians killed in recent wars?

It takes an unbecoming arrogance to see oneself as a special instrument of the divine. I will scour the internet for conservative evangelical Christians expressing disdain and dismay at Trump’s odious belief.

Manifestly provocative

Speaking of God, here’s another quote from the inaugural address:

The United States will once again consider itself a growing nation, one that increases our wealth, expands our territory, builds our cities, raises our expectations and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons. And we will pursue our manifest destiny into the stars, launching American astronauts to plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars.

“Manifest destiny” invoked the 19th century territorial expansionist philosophy that “America had a divine obligation to stretch the boundaries of their noble republic to the Pacific Ocean,” as USHistory.org puts it. “At the heart of manifest destiny was the pervasive belief in American cultural and racial superiority. Native Americans had long been perceived as inferior, and … the Hispanics who ruled Texas and the lucrative ports of California were also seen as ‘backward.’”

In “The Religious Origins of Manifest Destiny,” Queens College historian Donald Scott writes:

Manifest Destiny was not simply a cloak for American imperialism and a justification for America’s territorial ambitions. It also was firmly anchored in a long standing and deep sense of a special and unique American Destiny, the belief that in the words of historian Conrad Cherry, “America is a nation called to a special destiny by God.” … What emerged was a sacralized notion of the new nation and the development of what various scholars have termed a powerful “Civil Religion,” a particular form of cultural nationalism … (with a mission) at times if deemed necessary, to spread its form of democracy by force of arms to other parts of the world.

Trump’s glancing mention of territorial expansion was evidently the smallest of nods to his expressed desire to add Greenland and Canada to the U.S. portfolio of lands, and to his explicit reference in his speech to reclaiming the Panama Canal: “We’re taking it back.”

The leader of the self-styled party of law and order pardons cop beaters and traitors

This aspect of Monday’s festivities will sicken decent people:

Trump commutes sentences of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders as he pardons over 1,000 January 6 US Capitol rioters: Trump has granted full clemency to hundreds of people already convicted of felony crimes like assaulting police and destroying property as part of the effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. … The “full, complete and unconditional” pardons extend to people who were convicted of some of the worst crimes committed the day of the Capitol attack. … Video clips show Trump supporters beating police with flagpoles, batons, wooden clubs and baseball bats, deploying stun guns and chemical sprays, and engaging in hand-to-hand combat with police officers. … More than 140 police officers were injured during the seven-hour siege.

Earlier, Trump had said during his speech, “Under my leadership, we will restore fair, equal and impartial justice under the constitutional rule of law. And we are going to bring law and order back to our cities.”

What say you, Republicans who consider yourselves decent people?

Sammy is sorry, but he won’t say for what

Rick Morrissey in the Sun-Times:

For years, the understanding was that (retired Cubs superstar Sammy) Sosa could elbow his way back into the Cubs’ good graces by offering an apology. The apology would be for his alleged use of performance-enhancing drugs, the ones that “might’’ have helped him hit 545 home runs as a Cub and filled the club’s coffers. When Sosa released a statement last month apologizing for past “mistakes,’’ the team invited him to its convention (last weekend). … Um, one problem. When asked at the convention whether his “mistakes’’ included the use of PEDs, Sosa said, “No, no.’’

Sosa would not specify what “mistakes” he was referring to because he was and remains a weasel. I am wont to refer to those slippery “I’m sorry if anyone was offended..” mea culpas as “nopologies,” so what’s the term for a vague but blanket apology? A “shitpology”?

In 2010, former St. Louis Cardinal slugger Mark McGuire — with whom Sosa was in a titanic home run race in 1998 that captured the imagination of the nation — admitted to his steroid use. That the Cubs let Sosa back into the team’s good graces without such an admission is dismaying.

Notes and comments from readers — lightly edited — along with my responses

Tuning out the political blather

I received lots of response to my item last week, “Why I can't bear to watch MSNBC these days.”

Mark K— You wrote, “I’m discouraged and depressed by national political news, and find that getting spun up by the latest MAGA outrage and the latest failure of Democrats to blunt Trumpian initiatives simply exhausts me."

That describes my feelings perfectly. Before the election I watched MSNBC all the time, “Morning Joe” while eating breakfast, “Deadline: White House” with Nicole Wallace while making/eating dinner, etc. I thought it was important to keep track of and understand the threats, and to find an occasional reason for hope and optimism. I basically switched it totally off after the election. It's all ESPN for me now. There’s no point. I know the dangers are more real than before, but there’s nothing I can do now, and there is no reason for hope. It's infuriating and exhausting with no possible payoff.

Barron Hall — Well, geez, Eric! Are you going to just tune out and wait for Rachel Maddow, Kamala Harris, AOC, and Stacey Abrams to save Democracy? What happened to “be the change”? Not all of us can just retreat to our man caves and binge “The West Wing.” If we’re ancient Rome, are we the fiddlers or the fire?

Monica Metzler — This view of yours is a very common feeling among my close friends, casual acquaintances and those I follow online. I find it extremely difficult to square my strong desire to retreat with the great respect I have for folks like Joyce Vance, Heather Cox Richardson, Jennifer Rubin, et al who are not retreating at all. I believe they are correct that we in the opposition cannot just slink away and must continue to push back on the garbage policies from this incoming administration. If we give up, the long-term damage will be much, much worse than we can imagine. Based on the advice "action alleviates anxiety," I'm still struggling to find what the focus of my action will be but I know that consuming news the way I've done for the last many years is certainly not worthwhile action.

Richard Ramlow — I couldn't agree more about taking a break from the relentless drumbeat of news and the futility it represents. I don't watch MSNBC for the same reasons I don't watch Fox. They are both bubbles for a singular POV. But I have been a regular viewer of the PBS NewsHour for years and I have hardly watched it since the election. Between the weight they place on the victims of the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and the ridiculous pronouncements of the Trump regime, I just can't watch without contemplating how helpless I feel.

Still, I plan to resume watching after the inauguration in the hope that real effective opposition will develop and I don't want to miss that boat. I also know that I can't allow myself to withdraw forever. I just need to find something that is more effective than complaining about the opposition and waiting for a schadenfreude moment to enjoy.

Melinda A K. — You wrote that “not marinating nightly in impotent despair and gloom has become a form of self-care." This is my feeling exactly. The daily anxiety during the last Trump administration took a toll on my mental and physical health and I want to try to avoid that this time around. I still have a TV with news-ish shows in the morning on as my background noise while working, but I'm only half paying attention. I still listen to NPR when I wake up and as I make dinner. But I'm not swimming in the muck this time around as I try to detach from the expected daily horror. If I'm still kicking after the next 4 years, it will have worked.

Marc Martinez — I’ve concluded that MSNBC had four types of major losses in their viewer base.

1. The folks like EZ with a range of emotional exhaustion.

2. The group that has just checked out and says. “eff em all, they get what they deserve” regarding the other side.

3. The group that feel liberals are not left enough and includes all of those who sat out the election.

4. The group that feels betrayed because so many of the assurances and predictions of the stars and panelists were so completely wrong.

In any case, it will be interesting to see if MSNBC is able to bring viewers back or gain a new audience.

Steve T. — I can no longer tolerate the breathless gibberish about silly palace intrigue, personality quirks and polling data.

The dilemma of Michigan fans: Which was worse, rooting for Ohio State or rooting for Notre Dame?

Jay G. — Like you, I am a University of Michigan alum. But I’m married to a Notre Dame alum. But I was rooting heavily Monday night for OSU for reasons you mentioned: Conference loyalty (of dubious value in this era of mega-conferences); OSU's national championship being ever-sullied by its loss to the Wolverines; and the inevitable insufferability of so many Domers if Notre Dame had won (Although my spouse is not among those).

Zorn — Yes. Condolences to Buckeye fans for their unsuccessful season. Oh, sure, they won the national championship Monday night, but there are ashes in their mouths because of their team’s 13-10 loss to their dreaded, hated, despised rivals up north on Nov. 30.

Unpopular opinion?

Judging from the online reaction, my view that recall elections are a bad idea is not in step with the sentiments of the disgruntled voting population.

Read up on the pros and cons here if you’re undecided, but I would like your vote:

Last week’s result

423 votes

Here’s part of an interesting exchange in the comment thread:

Peter Zackrison — I see voting as a privilege and not a right. And the thought of folks like Charles Manson or Ted Bundy participating in our democratic process by exercising their right to vote does not excite me.

Joanie Wimmer —The distinction between a “privilege” and a “right” always seems artificial to me. There’s a constitutional right, for example, to interstate travel, but that right can be taken away if someone is incarcerated for a criminal conviction. So rights can be taken away by the government just as privileges can be taken away. The issue is should the particular right or privilege be taken away. I think everyone should be allowed to vote, whether they jaywalked, got a speeding ticket, rolled through a stop sign, possessed a small amount of a Schedule 1 or 2 drug, committed an armed robbery, or murdered someone. They are still citizens, and we live in a participatory democracy. What is the penological justification for taking away the right to vote? Do you think that will make them better citizens when they are released? Do you think that taking away their right to vote will reduce recidivism? It seems to me that participating in democracy would make someone less likely to be a repeat offender.

Peter Zackrison— But we live in a participatory democracy with limits. Should children be allowed to vote? After all, many laws have a direct impact on them. What about illegal immigrants? We have lots of them. Should they be allowed to vote? You ask if denying felons the right to vote will make them better citizens. My reply, absolutely. They learn they must pay for their crimes, that voting is a privilege, and they need to at least acknowledge that they will avoid criminal behavior in the future.

I don’t know about little children being allowed to vote, but in 2018 I wrote a column headlined “It’s only logical — 16-year-olds should have the right to vote.” Here’s a bit of it:

Most 16-year-olds aren’t very well-informed about current events and how their government works. But that’s also true of most Americans. Surveys show only 1 in 4 can name the three branches of government; more than half believe the Constitution affords no rights whatsoever to undocumented immigrants and that it specifies the U.S. is a Christian nation; roughly a third think the federal government spends more on foreign aid than anything else; and so depressingly on.

Ignorance has never been a barrier to voting. …

It may also be true that 16-year-olds are unduly influenced by their parents’ voting preferences. That argument against extending the franchise still carries a foul odor from when it was used against allowing women the right to vote on the grounds that their husbands would unduly influence their choices.

Sixteen-year-olds can be compliant or defiant. Your mileage may vary. But many pay taxes. They work. They drive. In most states they can marry. And, most urgently, all of them have a huge stake in the future — at least as large as the senior citizens who so enthusiastically cast ballots. …

Not only would such a change be logical and just, it would also stand to boost long-term civic engagement by creating a new cohort of habitual voters.

Will they look up from their phones and go to the polls if we give them the chance? Most probably won’t, of course, since not voting is the American way. …

It’s their world we’re living in, after all. They deserve to help shape it.

The week’s best visual jokes

Here are some funny visual images I've come across recently on social media. Enjoy, then evaluate:

There’s still time to vote in the conventional Quip of the Week poll!

Thank you for supporting the Picayune Sentinel. To help this publication grow, please consider spreading the word to friends, family, associates, neighbors and agreeable strangers.

Info

Eric Zorn is a former opinion columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Find a longer bio and contact information here. This issue exceeds in size the maximum length for a standard email. To read the entire issue in your browser, click on the headline link above. Paid subscribers receive each Picayune Plus in their email inbox each Tuesday, are part of our civil and productive commenting community and enjoy the sublime satisfaction of supporting this enterprise.

Contact

You can email me here:

I read all the messages that come in, but I do most of my interacting with readers in the comments section beneath each issue.

Some of those letters I reprint and respond to in the Z-mail section of Tuesday’s Picayune Plus, which is delivered to paid subscribers and available to all readers later Tuesday. Check there for responses.

If you don’t want me to use the full name on your email or your comments, let me know how you’d like to be identified.

Help?

If you’re having troubles with Substack — delivery, billing and so forth — first try “Picayune Sentinel Substack help, Frequently Asked Questions.” If that doesn’t work check out the Substack help page. And if that doesn’t work, shoot me an email and I’ll be happy to help.