Kamala Harris was a terrible district attorney in San Francisco; an abusive and failed California Attorney General; a nonentity as a U.S. Senator; and an embarrassment as Vice President. Still, she may "fail up" once again.
First, the argument against her. She is, or was, a terrible campaigner in 2020, dropping out in 2019 before a singe primary vote was cast. She is an awful speaker, repeating vapid platitudes ("unburdened by what has been" ).
He has a record of radicalism and failure, from bailing out rioters (and joining them), to failing to stop the migration crisis at the southern border, to... the list just goes on forever. She has no proven ability to do anything whatsoever.
Still: she is black (and Indian) and female. Amid all the cackling about DEI and its failures, politics does not really care about qualifications for office. She represents a chance for a historic first, which Democrats will feel good about.
The party has united behind her and its fear of defeat will motivate it to fight harder, not to capitulate. That is as it should be: we are Americans, and we do not go down easily. This will be a close election and Trump's victory is uncertain.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
