Nothing much in the news surprises me anymore — mostly because I seldom pay much attention to anything beyond our local area. (As in what’s the use?) But there was a paragraph in this morning’s NYT article on Menendez which did catch my eye: When politicians are unlikely to be removed, they rarely quit, and Menendez faces little risk of removal. Only the Senate can expel one of its members. It has not done so since the Civil War. Really??? Not since the Civil War? Not for 161 years? When I looked up more about it, it all became clear — and made me more disgusted than ever. Basically, the ten senators who were removed at the beginning of the Civil War were from the southern states and they were removed for doing what their states had directed them to do. In other words, they were doing their jobs. Those opposed to the 1861 expulsion measure, argued that the southern senators followed the directions of their states and that no senator individually had conspired against the government. They suggested that the expulsion rule should be reserved for individual acts of misconduct, since formal expulsion of the southern senators would only exacerbate an already inflamed situation. One of those in opposition to expulsion said he believed expulsion implied moral turpitude, a stain upon the personal character of the individuals that most would agree was unjust [in this case.] My mind whirls and twirls. If I, as a teacher, had followed the directions of my principal, even though those directions were contrary to popular belief, should I have been fired? But then, how can a lowly teacher compare herself to a high and mighty senator — one with gold bars secreted in the clothes of his closet. No contest, folks. We are so screwed up. The mind boggles and the eyes overflow. I KNOW BETTER than to read the news. Shame on me!
|