I am flying back to L.A. from Chicago, and I'm relieved the convention is over.
I had a great time in Chicago. The weather was great. I stayed with my parents; I went to Lake Michigan at sunrise each day; I admired the architecture downtown; I had great food; I fell in love with the place all over again, really.
Also, I enjoyed some of the politics, because I always like a little excitement. I worked really hard and slept little; I was exhausted at the end of each day.
But I hated this convention. It was probably the worst I've been to, ever.
Why?
Well, logistically, it was poor, compared to the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee last month. There was only one entrance, and long lines. There were poor food, bathroom, and workspace options inside, and the way the stadium was configured made it hard to move on the floor of the arena.
I also felt like Democrats were much more reluctant to talk to reporters -- especially from a conservative outlet like Breitbart, but also in general.
There was a sense that things were very tightly controlled. That was a necessity around pro-Israel and Jewish events, which had to be secretive, because they were being targeted by crazy pro-Palestinian (and antisemitic) protesters.
I do think Democrats had fun. They told each other how much fun they were having, how much they loved the speeches (which were generally not good), how much "joy" they were feeling. They hyped themselves up for this.
I think there was a genuine sense of relief at having a candidate who is not slipping into senescence -- someone who has a pulse, and someone who offers several "firsts" (women, black woman, Asian). Democrats love those "firsts."
But there was no substance to any of it. The only policy issue discussed at the convention was abortion, and that was a story of various bogeymen. Democrats attacked "Project 2025," which isn't Trump's policy, but it almost seemed like what they really objected to was having a policy about anything at all. What they wanted to talk about was "joy," and "coming together," and "historic," and ... Trump Trump Trump, terrible racist sexist bully Trump who hates America.
There'a a lot of bullshit at any political convention. And I didn't care for many of the speeches at the Republican convention, either. But there, the happiness and joy seemed authentic. Trump had just survived an assassination attempt!
At the Republican event, I heard people talking openly about faith, in a way I have never heard at any Republican or conservative event before. Also, people expected to win. (Biden was the candidate then; Republicans are nervous now.)
The Republicans also talked about policy, and about specific things they wanted to fix. The Democrats talked about people Trump had supposedly insulted and tried to pretend Kamala Harris had nothing to do with four years of bad policy.
So... I think Trump has the edge going into the fall. That is, if you assume that voting is still a fair process, and Democrats haven't figured out how to game the whole thing through vote-by-mail. Even if they have, I think Trump can win.
I think that because Trump is just ... bigger. On the way through the airport, I noticed that several stores -- in Chicago, in the week of the DNC -- had Trump (and Vance!) merchandise. There was nothing on Kamala or Democrats.
I think there's an American story we are watching, and telling, about Trump, and I think we want to see how it ends, where it takes us, and I don't think we want it to end in a prison cell, or in obsolescence, or bitterness. I think we want better.
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!
