Manifesto for an American Rose Revolution

*A new flag for a new movement? (Art: AI for TPP/ChatGPT)*

Jan. 2, 2026

The United States of America today has gone from a beacon of democracy to a dictatorship. The time has come to end that dictatorship.

This can be done non-violently, democratically, legally and constitutionally but it needs to be a revolution nonetheless.

This year’s political activity, whether grassroots street protests or midterm election efforts, whether rhetorical or physical, should be seen, not as fragmented, individual efforts but as part of a broad and reaching cultural, political and legal movement—and revolution.

Perhaps the best metaphor for this revolution and a physical expression of it lies in a small patch of ground, about 125 feet long and 60 feet wide (38 meters by 18 meters) outside the Oval Office of the White House.

It was known as the White House Rose Garden.

In 1961, First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, working with professional landscape architects and botanists, reshaped the space into a formal garden, bordered by flowers, primarily roses. It was a place of beauty, elegance and grace that reflected her own.

*Views of the White House Rose Garden in 2007. (Photos: National Park Service)*

In the first administration of President Donald Trump, a new limestone walk was installed, many of the previous trees were removed and flowers were consigned to the sides, all allegedly at the command of First Lady Melania Trump. Presidential historian Michael Beschloss called the alteration an “evisceration” and said that “decades of American history [was] made to disappear.”

In the second administration of President Donald Trump the Rose Garden was paved over entirely. It is now a Mar-a-Lago-style patio with a private “Rose Garden Club” to go along with it, restricted to Trump’s closest sycophants and enablers.

*The paving over of the White House Rose Garden in the second Trump administration. (Photo: Instagram)*

*President Donald Trump dines with co-conspirators on the White House patio. (Photo: White House)*

In the Rose Garden can be seen the struggle between Trump and the American people.

Trump believes that as President he owns the White House. He believes he can alter or destroy it as he pleases. He has demolished the East Wing, on his own authority, to replace it with an expensive, gargantuan ballroom bearing his name.

But the White House does not “belong” to the person who temporarily occupies it. It belongs to the American people whom each resident serves and holds in trust for the next occupant.

The same can be said of the country as a whole. Trump thinks he owns it.

The time has come for the American people to take back their house—and their homeland.

And it is time to restore the Rose Garden to its previous state of beauty, grace and elegance.

But it’s not just about restoring the Rose Garden itself; the time has come to restore democracy, dignity and decency to American public life.

The time has come for an American Rose Revolution.

A new color revolution

In the past, a wave of what were called “color revolutions” swept the world when people long deprived of freedom and democracy demanded it. The very first of these was in the country of Georgia, which had long been part of the Soviet Union. When Georgia regained its independence, its people mounted a Rose Revolution to say that they didn’t want the kind of dictatorship they had endured in the past, they wanted freedom for the future.

The Georgia Rose Revolution was followed by others as people strove for freedom and democracy: the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, the People’s Movement (Otpor! or “outpouring”) in Serbia and the Arab Spring in the Middle East.

When Trump descended the escalator in Trump Tower in July 2015 (a descending metaphor in itself!) no one believed that this one man would turn the greatest democracy in the world into a source of fear, oppression and threat reflecting his own hatreds, prejudices and rages. No one imagined that he would turn a people’s presidency into a despotic dictatorship.

But he has done that and the time has come to end it.

What is the American Rose Revolution?

The American Rose Revolution needs to be an effort that transcends political party or past allegiances. It should be the effort of every single American at all levels to right the wrongs that have been done and restore democracy—and not just its outward forms but its inner values: civility, respect and allegiance to the Constitution and its Bill of Rights and the rights to participate, enjoy and contribute to the common good of each and every American, regardless of his or her race, creed, or place of birth.

It needs to be a revolution to gain freedom from fear as Americans cease to cower in the face of insults, threats and bullying by Donald Trump and his regime.

One of democracy’s great strengths is that it provides hope—hope that things can change for the better, that there will always be new chances and new opportunities to improve one’s own life and the lives of others. Dictatorship, by contrast, thrives on hopelessness—crushing any hope that anything can change without the intervention or approval of the dictator. Americans have always rejected this and they must reject it again.

So an American Rose Revolution needs to be a cultural revolution of hope and joy against hopelessness and despair.

An American Rose Revolution should be a revolution in which every American can participate by simply being civil to neighbors, by fully, actively and legally participating in political activities and civic life in contrast to the threats, insults and lying of Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) cult; by calling out obvious wrongs and exposing wrongdoing.

This year the first opportunity to support the American Rose Revolution comes with the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. If still in office on July 4th 2026, there can be no doubt that Trump will try to hijack and make this celebration about himself. There is no other possibility. He cannot abide a situation where he is not the center of attention and flattery and that will certainly apply to the observation of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

But for all other Americans, the 250th anniversary has to be a time to rediscover and remember the ideals and principles that led to the first American revolution; that all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights and these include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—and that no one man should be able to take them away.

It will also be a time to read some of the original complaints that impelled that Declaration when they wrote about King George III: “He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither;” he has “obstructed the Administration of Justice;” he “has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures;” he was “cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world.”

And it is worth remembering the conclusion that the Founders reached: “A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Fortunately, the American Constitution provides a civil and peaceful means to enact change and the next chance for that will come in elections slated for November. By vigorously participating in election activities, supporting campaigns, working for democratic candidates, registering voters, working at the polls and then being sure to vote, all Americans can contribute to making the change that’s needed.

These are traditional, legal and legitimate activities that have long been the essence of democratic, elected government. But this year not only are they more important than ever, they are revolutionary. It won’t just be an election, it has to be turned into an American Rose Revolution.

And those who wish to show their support and approval can use the rose as a symbol of their defiance, courage and hope, wherever, whenever and however they choose to do so.

New amendments

But beyond the general commitment to restoring American dignity and decency, there are some specific proposals that would improve and protect the United States, built from the experience of Trump’s tyranny. These presume that the Constitution remains in force and the procedure for amendments intact.

Passage of a 28th Amendment

The President of the United States shall be subject to the laws and penalties of the United States in his or her official and personal capacities.

On July 1, 2024 the majority of the United States Supreme Court ruled that presidents have immunity from the law for their official actions in the case of Trump vs. United States.

In practice, this ruling gave Donald Trump, then a presidential candidate for the second time, immunity from American laws when he gained the presidency. He won the presidency and began governing—actually, ruling—without regard to law, precedent or the Constitution, secure that nothing he did would face legal restraint or recrimination. It effectively led to a dictatorship.

Not only that, Trump vs. United States violates the very principle emblazoned on the lintel of the Supreme Court building: “Equal Justice Under Law.” The ruling creates a single, unaccountable individual above and beyond the reach of the law that applies to all others, in effect, a king. It violates the very first truth of the Declaration of Independence: “All men are created equal.”

It is time to correct this. In the future, everyone, whether president or everyday citizen, must be subject to the same laws. Since the inherent meaning of the Declaration is unclear to the majority of the current Supreme Court, it must take a constitutional amendment to state this principle outright. All people are created equal in the eyes of the law and that is what the 28th Amendment will do. No kings.

Passage of a 29th Amendment

No Person shall be eligible to the Office of President who has not served in a prior elected office or held a military position of command. No Person previously found guilty of a crime by a jury of his or her peers, or found guilty of insurrection, or previously impeached and removed from office for high crimes and misdemeanors, shall be qualified to hold the office.

When ratified in 1788, the only qualifications for the position of President were that the individual be a natural-born citizen, at least 35 years old and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years.

Those requirements were sufficient to ensure that relatively qualified people filled the office. Given that there had not been a United States before ratification of the Constitution, a prior-office qualification could not be included.

But after 250 years it is time to add to the qualifications for president. It seems a rather low bar to require that a person qualified for President should have the experience of serving in at least one prior elected position—and the position can be anything, from school board to dog catcher. The main point is that the person should have at least one experience of winning the approval of voters and experience the responsibility of serving them before aspiring to the highest office in the land.

As with a prior elected position, the amendment includes holding a military command as a qualification. From such a command the person in question, who has already proven his or her service to the country, will have the experience of being in a position of responsibility and authority. The amendment does not designate a rank, it just requires the experience of command at some level as a qualification.

This amendment is intended to ensure that never again can an utterly inexperienced, grossly unqualified, completely unfit individual attain the power of the presidency. Never again should the American people face the prospect of a candidate running—or governing—from prison. And it says: criminals need not apply.

Other measures

There are many other issues that need to be addressed and what follows are only a few of them, in no particular order. This list does not go into details, it simply proposes principles that all reasonable people can work toward as part of an American Rose Revolution.

Immigration: “To bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance”

America is special because it’s not just a country, it’s also an idea. In the past, America’s ideals of life, liberty and the free pursuit of happiness were considered so compelling and attractive that any thinking human could grasp them, live by them and become an American by adhering to American laws and contributing to American society.

Trump and his regime not believe this. They believe in hatred, prejudice and rage. But more, they no longer believe that American ideals and values are sufficiently compelling to inherently attract the allegiance and support of immigrants once they’re American citizens. Nor do they want non-white immigrants to become Americans and live by American laws and principles. They reject these ideals and express their rejection with brutality, threats and violence.

This should not continue. Borders need to be secure, the law must be enforced and those currently in the country without documentation need to comply with American requirements—but they should also have an incentive for compliance and lawful behavior and be treated with due process and reasonable humanity. Those undocumented migrants who came to the United States as children through no volition of their own deserve to have an opportunity for citizenship if they seek it as long as they have clean criminal records.

This all can be done in a rational, humane and lawful way. Requests for asylum should be evaluated on reasonable, humanitarian grounds with the wellbeing and dignity of the requestor as key factors. Citizenship should be granted on the basis of knowledge of the country, its laws and an oath of allegiance.

This was a key point in President George Washington’s 1790 letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, RI.

Asked what the attitude of the new United States might be toward the Jewish community, Washington replied that in America, toleration extended to all.

As he wrote: “For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”

Every American, every naturalized immigrant, as long as he or she performs as a good citizen, obeys the laws and gives the country “their effectual support” should be welcomed and protected by the United States.

It is time that the United States once again, “gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.”

All this requires comprehensive immigration reform and the federal government—both legislative and executive branches—should work toward a solution that secures the country, provides a legal path to citizenship, allows for guest workers and treats migrants and asylum seekers with dignity and respect.

Ending ICE

Every sovereign nation must secure its borders, protect them, allow legitimate trade and travel while filtering out criminals and contraband, and have a mechanism to enforce its laws.

This is ostensibly the job of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) directorate of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

However, ICE has been vastly misused and its mission twisted into pursuing mass ethnic and racial population changes. Its warrantless searches and seizures, its masked and unidentified agents, its lack of legal approval, its concentration camps, its absence of due process, its secret transportations and deportations and its deliberate efforts to instill fear are all in contravention of not only the letter of the Constitution but its spirit. It has gone from a form of law enforcement to a paramilitary tool of terror.

ICE cannot be allowed to continue in its current form and is so tainted by its conduct it cannot be sufficiently altered to regain public confidence. It should be abolished as a DHS directorate and taken out of DHS. The previously independent Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) should be revived to serve immigrants and the American public. Enforcement should be handed to the Border Patrol or Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) with creation of an internal enforcement element in whatever agency is appropriate. INS and Border Patrol or the FBI can then coordinate with DHS for other homeland security functions.

All anti-immigrant concentration and deportation camps must be closed, starting with Florida’s infamous Alligator Alcatraz.

Real Americans don’t build concentration camps—real Americans liberate them.

Reaffirmation of birthright citizenship

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution states that anyone born under the jurisdiction of the United States is an American citizen: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Period. And that should be the end. However, birthright citizenship has been under assault by Donald Trump from the first days of his candidacy. He has tried to overthrow it every way he can and can be expected to continue the effort in the future.

That should not be allowed to happen. The United States Congress needs to resoundingly reaffirm its support for the 14th Amendment with its grant of birthright citizenship so that there can be no mistake about where the United States stands. Full stop.

Restraints on tariffs

There must be some form of oversight and restraint on the imposition of tariffs. While any President must have some leeway and flexibility to respond to changing conditions there clearly has to be some enhanced form of congressional oversight and restraint.

This could take the form of a congressional veto: If the president proposes a tariff then Congress has 30 or 60 days to stop it. This could take place in one chamber or both. But the kind of wild, unnecessary and very personal and whimsical tariffs that Donald Trump imposed cannot be allowed to disrupt American trade and impoverish Americans again.

Healthcare as a right

The American people have a right to expect that their government will aid the state of their health to the greatest extent possible, through all possible means.

The Affordable Care Act must be repaired from the damage done to it during the Trump presidency.

Reliance on science

Throughout its history the people of the United States have relied on the scientific method to determine the physical state of the world around them and to safeguard their health and wellbeing. As a basic principle of governing, the United States needs to return to reliance on rigorous, unbiased scientific research and investigation in making the decisions affecting its policies and the welfare of its people.

Protecting public health

The government of the United States has a duty to protect and improve the health of the people of the United States based on sound science and rigorous research independently pursued without political or ideological interference.

The United States had the most robust, reliable and principled public health system in the world before Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Elon Musk attacked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration and the entire health infrastructure and the people who served it.

The damage done to these critical institutions must be repaired and the research that was under way restored. Sound science and the health of the American people must be the principles that guide the protection of Americans’ health and wellbeing and government of the people has a responsibility to do that.

Supporting climate science

Before the Trump presidency the United States was the world’s leader in the objective study and evaluation of the world’s climate and the changes occurring to it through either human or natural processes.

Because the results were unfavorable to current practices and prejudices, this effort was denounced by opponents as a “climate alarm industry” and its conclusions rejected in favor of old energy uses and routines.

This is unsustainable and will cost lives. It is a course that will ultimately destroy the planet. The United States must restore its efforts to scientifically study and respond to climate changes and prepare for their effects. It must once again take a leadership role in protecting and nurturing all life on the planet and its continuation. The United States must rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, adhere to its principles and recommit to doing what it can to slow damaging climate change.

Helping in disasters and building resilience

Because the climate is changing Americans need to prepare for its impacts and their government needs to assist them in every way possible.

The chief agency for aiding Americans in the event of disaster is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As imperfectly as it may have functioned in the past, over time it became the most effective possible mechanism to respond to natural and man-made disasters and then assist in resilient rebuilding after they passed. As its motto stated, it helped Americans before, during and after disasters.

FEMA became a target of Donald Trump’s unreasoning hatred for partisan political reasons during the 2024 election campaign. He wanted to abolish it. His Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was similarly critical, personalized disaster aid and added an approval requirement that virtually stopped the agency from functioning altogether.

FEMA needs to be restored because its mission is too important to the American people and will become even more vital as a changing climate imposes new contingencies.

FEMA should be broken out of DHS and made a full Cabinet department. The experiment of having it part of DHS has failed and the Trump regime has made clear that it is too prone to abuse in its current form. Its head should report directly to Congress and the President and it needs the latitude of independence to completely and neutrally fulfill its mission.

An independent, Cabinet-level FEMA, responsibly managed, will truly help the American people prepare, respond and recover from disasters and emergencies.

Cleaning up corruption

The Trump regime is notorious for its dubious deals, questionable pardons, personal enrichment and commercial schemes—and those are the practices that are blatantly obvious in public. There’s no telling what has gone on below the surface.

Corruption and crime in the presidency, among high officials and their accomplices must be exposed, investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law by an impartial, incorruptible and objective federal government and law enforcement establishment motivated by adherence to the law and commitment to seeing justice done on behalf of the American people. All ill-gotten gains at the expense of the American taxpayer must be clawed back.

Supporting and encouraging education

Ignorance is not strength. Ignorance leads to disaster. America should strive to return to being the world’s leader in thought, inquiry and free expression.

The Trumpist assault on education has to be stopped. Teachers should no longer be treated as enemies. Institutions of higher learning are not piggy banks for extortion and targets for threats. American higher education has to resume its place as a leader in the world, a center for inquiry and knowledge, pursuing truth wherever it leads, without political interference.

Public primary and secondary education is essential to a free, healthy and prosperous society. Public schools need to be supported, encouraged and improved to as great a degree as the federal government can provide. While private and non-public schools are welcome they should in no way damage or detract from the quality of public education.

Restoring a free media

As the Framers were well aware, a free media is critical to maintaining a free society. Presidential bullying, extortion and threats to an independent media must come to an end. Journalists and communicators in all media and on all platforms must be able to pursue, report, analyze and comment on the truth as best they are able to determine it. This is a fundamental to American right as part of the 1st Amendment but it needs to be re-learned and renewed.

America abroad

The Framers of the Constitution gave the power to declare war to Congress, which is where it belongs. When it is necessary for the nation to enter into armed conflict it should do so united and with the advice, consent and approval of representatives of the people and states, who after all, will be providing the blood and treasure required.

Pressing contingencies will always require a quick response. But wars of necessity nonetheless require congressional approval under the Constitution and that requirement must be respected when American lives are being put in harm’s way.

But America should always try to make its way in the world without conflict, violence or threats. War and conflict must always be a last resort. The strength and power of the United States should be vested in a Department of Defense that protects the American people and looks after American interests.

Nonetheless, for all its wealth and power, the United States is a nation among nations and it needs to treat all other nations, large and small, rich and poor, with the respect and dignity they deserve.

The United States needs to repair its relations with its closest neighbors, Canada and Mexico, and earn back the respect, friendship, trade and mutual prosperity it previously enjoyed with them. Their security contributes to the security of the United States.

The United States needs to recommit to its friends and allies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and again stand as a pillar for democracy, freedom and peace through strength against aggression, autocracy and tyranny. An attack on any of them is an attack on the United States and should be treated as such.

The United States should return to its previous place in the world by aiding the development, health and welfare of all people, assisting in responding to disasters, promoting democracy, and being a responsible role model and steward of the planet.

The front line of Ukraine is the front line of the United States and should be regarded as such. A peaceful and internationally recognized Ukraine was the victim of unprovoked, unjustified and unacceptable aggression by Russia. The United States needs to totally recommit to the defense, independence and sovereignty of a free, democratic and independent Ukraine, which should be enabled to achieve its victory conditions and pursue its own destiny as its people see fit. The United States should aid Ukraine in defeating Russian aggression and provide whatever material, intelligence and strategic assistance it can offer.

American democracy and opposition to tyranny inspired Ukraine’s Orange Revolution—now Ukraine’s Orange Revolution should inspire America’s Rose Revolution. As the Ukrainian people ejected a Putin puppet, the American people need to now reject another on their own soil.

Borders should never be changed through acts of aggression and invasion and that principle applies to the United States as it does to all nations. And the United States should always support fellow democracies when they are threatened with conquest, invasion or suppression.

Begin the beginning

This is hardly an exhaustive list—indeed, it barely scratches the surface of what needs to be done to make America good—and thereby great—again.

What is more, its suggestions—apart from the constitutional amendments—are not completely original and are in no way radical. They are firmly rooted in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the rule of law, democracy and American history.

Nonetheless, perhaps this manifesto can provide at least some ideas for a revolution that will expunge tyranny and restore democracy to the United States of America.

There is much to be done and little time to do it but the American people, when they are mobilized, determined and awake have always shown themselves unstoppable.

The American Rose Revolution should manifest itself in daily actions and commitment, political and personal. It will express itself in elections at all levels.

But it will truly know success when the American people again take possession of their White House and make clear that presidents serve them rather than rule them, when they emerge from the toilet to which Donald Trump has consigned them and regain their place as the owners and arbiters of their home, their White House and their destiny.

That moment will be known when the ugly and oppressive stones of the Trump patio are dug up and smashed and their pieces distributed as souvenirs and Jacqueline Kennedy’s White House Rose Garden is replanted and restored. When those flowers burst into glory again, the American people will know that they have regained their freedom and liberty. It is a goal to be sought and not an easy one to achieve.

But to bring forward that day, let a billion roses bloom.

The time for an American Rose Revolution has arrived.

Coming Jan. 5: The Year Ahead: Swamp or Sunshine? Florida’s choices

The year ahead: Keeping the light alive

Liberty lives in light

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

From White House to Gold House: Trump, Nero and remodeling madness

*An angry mob of betrayed Trump supporters attack the White House Ballroom in the artificial intelligence-generated video “MAGA Ballroom 2028.”*

Aug. 11, 2025 by David Silverberg

On July 31, President Donald Trump announced that he had ordered the building of a new $200 million ballroom onto the White House.

The official announcement stated that Trump was “solving” the problem of too little White House event space and the ballroom was “much-needed.” It would be “exquisite,” “ornately designed” and “carefully crafted,” according to the announcement.

He also stated that the ballroom would be paid for by private donations.

The proposed White House ballroom as conceived by the architect, viewed from above. The new ballroom is at the center, connected to the existing White House (on the right) by a columned patio or corridor. (Art: McCrery Architects)

*The proposed White House ballroom as conceived by the architect, viewed from the southwest. The new ballroom is the square addition on the right. (Art: McCrery Architects)*

*The interior conception of the proposed White House ballroom.* *(Art: McCrery Architects)*

The ballroom is hardly the first physical change Trump has made to the White House. He had the famous Rose Garden paved over to create a plantless patio.

*Before and after photos of the Rose Garden.*

He’s festooned the Oval Office and the rest of the building with the garish gold ornamentation for which he is known.

*Gold flourishes on the walls and ceiling of the Oval Office.*

*President Donald Trump walks through an Oval Office door with gold decorations he had installed.*

Trump’s building and gilding of the White House is reminiscent of another potentate who extravagantly built an elaborate domicile—and who had gold as his dominant decorating scheme.

The Gold House

A profile of Nero on a Roman gold coin called an “aureas.” (Photo: American Numismatic Society)

Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus is better known to the world as Nero, and is one of the most infamous Roman emperors for his madness, extravagance, unpredictable and arbitrary rule and extreme and indiscriminate cruelty. He served as Rome’s leading politician and decisionmaker from the years 54 to 68 of the Common Era.

Starting in 64 Nero built a palace for himself named the Domus Aurea in Latin, or Golden House in English. It was constructed on land burned by the Great Fire of 64 that leveled enormous portions of Rome—and which many critics suspected Nero had ordered set in order to clear the space.

Nero thought he was invincible and untouchable. He murdered or forced the suicide of the most distinguished and able Roman politicians and statesmen and replaced them with his own sycophants and toadies. As the historian Suetonius put it: “Transported and puffed up with such successes, as he considered them, he boasted that no princeps had ever known what power he really had… .”

Nero wanted to surpass the Hellenistic palaces of overseas kingdoms and he had a grandiose, malignantly narcissistic sense of himself, so he built to impress. The land for the Gold House is estimated by some scholars to have covered a massive 300 acres in the heart of Rome. It had 150 large and small rooms and a footprint of 16,000 square meters (over 172,000 square feet, about the equivalent of three football fields). Some rooms had ceilings 12 feet high, all of them decorated and embellished with gold and jewels, with one, a circular dining room, that had ceiling panels that could be opened to shower flower petals and perfume on diners as they revolved around Nero in the center like the sun.

*A tour guide in the remains of the Gold House displays a schematic of its plans. (Photo: Author)*

*An overhead visualization of the complete Gold House and grounds. (Art: JR Casals)*

Not one to keep his light under a bushel, Nero commissioned a 120-foot high statue of himself to stand at the entrance (the Statue of Liberty is 305 feet high).

*Visualization of the Colossus of Nero with other buildings of the time, for scale.*

He also had an immense, artificial lake built surrounded by miniature cities and landscapes of fields, farmlands, vineyards and forests populated with every sort of animal.

After a mere four years, the house was completed in 68. When Nero dedicated it, he remarked, “Good! Now I can at last begin to live like a human being.”

Nero didn’t have much time to enjoy his power or his monster mansion because that same year, faced with his misrule, extreme taxation, public discontent, provincial uprisings and mutinies by discontented generals, even the otherwise subservient and bullied Senate revolted and declared him an enemy of Rome. Now the target of all Romans, after trying to escape the city he chose to die by his own hand.

The Gold House was a huge embarrassment to all subsequent Roman emperors, who did what they could to obliterate it—and did so by overbuilding it with structures that the entire Roman public could enjoy.

On the giant lake the emperor Vespasian ordered the building of the Flavian Amphitheater, or what is today called the Colosseum. Other emperors like Titus and Trajan built huge public baths.

Nero himself was subject to a “hostis iudicatio,” a posthumous trial for treason, and he was subject to the Roman practice of “damnatio memoriae,” the damnation of his memory. His name was erased from monuments and records and his statues removed or defaced. While his giant colossus remained standing, its head was replaced with a representation of the sun god Sol Invictus.

Today there’s barely any hint of the Gold House. Tourists enter it through an otherwise obscure entrance in a hillside. Tours are underground but visitors can get a sense of its vastness in the dimly lit corridors and chambers.

*The modern entrance to the Gold House. (Photo: Author)*

*During tours visitors and guides wear hardhats in the enormous rooms. (Photo: Author)*

The Golden House is an object lesson that excess and insanity may ultimately bring about a reckoning that topples both the ruler and the buildings he constructs.

The White House

The American Executive Mansion—it wasn’t formally called the White House until 1901—while hardly a hovel, was a relatively modest presidential home for its time and so it has remained since it was first occupied in 1800.

When designed it was intended to reflect republican simplicity and virtue in contrast to the grandiose monarchical palaces of Europe. It was also intended to convey the dignity and stability of the American executive and inspire respect rather than awe. Its classical proportions and symmetry symbolized the rationality and enlightenment of the American government itself.

The design was selected in a 9-way competition. Thomas Jefferson entered anonymously but lost out to Irish-born immigrant architect James Hoban.

While the White House has been renovated many times—including a complete gutting and structural rebuilding between 1949 and 1951—the renovations were always made with respect for the building’s history, significance and the intentions of its founders, which included George Washington.

One of the most notable renewals was overseen by first lady Jaqueline Kennedy, who unveiled her efforts to the world in a television tour on Valentine’s Day, 1962. She’d overseen an interior redesign that reflected the building’s past and its historic meaning, enhancing its elegance and stature, brought back significant objects, invited widespread public participation and drew on the knowledge of experts and historians.

By contrast, Trump’s changes, including his announced ballroom, have been unilateral, secret and one might say, dictatorial. Given his almost total lack of historical perspective, knowledge or interest, they pay no respect to the building’s past or its meaning.

When Trump announced his ballroom, he had already selected McCrery Architects as designer, Clark Construction for the building and AECOM for the engineering. There were no public requests for proposals, design competitions, competitive bids, transparent selections or publicly accessible contracts. (Given Trump’s past record of non-payment, one hopes for the contractors’ sake that they’re getting their cash up front!)

As a result, the mockery began almost immediately.

*An AI image mocking the Trump ballroom. (Art: AI/anonymous)*

It has also sparked resentment, as have his other changes. Nowhere was this more clearly expressed than in an AI-generated video titled “MAGA Ballroom 2028,” created by Ari Kuschnir, a digital consultant and founder of the company “m ss ng p eces.”

This 1-minute, 45-second video depicts angry, resentful MAGA supporters suffering while Trump and his Cabinet members feast in the new ballroom. The people ultimately revolt and attack the building the same way the Trump-incited rioters attacked the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021.

*Windows shatter inside the Trump ballroom as rioters attack it in the AI video “MAGA Ballroom 2028.”*

While “MAGA Ballroom 2028” may appear extreme and emotional, it’s a good reminder that leaders, like Nero, who behave erratically, spend extravagantly and flaunt their imperiousness in the form of ostentatious, egotistical buildings, may ultimately face a very nasty comeuppance at the hands of the people they seek to dominate.

To read a detailed account of Nero and the Great Fire of Rome, click the button below.

Nero and the Great Fire of Rome Download

Liberty lives in light

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

Trump, Biden and Florida’s Gulf shore oil war

Pro-Trump boaters take to the waters along southern Collier County on May 23.

June 6, 2020 by David Silverberg.

This year’s Memorial Day weekend began on Saturday, May 23 with hundreds of boaters in Southwest Florida launching a “Making Waves” boat parade to show their support for President Donald Trump and his re-election.

They had clear sailing on pristine waters from Naples Bay to Marco Island.

The irony is that if they get their wish and Trump is re-elected, those waters won’t be so pristine anymore.

That’s because if Trump is re-elected the eastern Gulf of Mexico will be opened to oil exploration and exploitation. In a second Trump administration, any future flotilla will have to dodge tankers, tugs, barges, tenders, lighters, shuttles, seismic testing boats and drilling ships among other vessels. Most of all, they would be maneuvering amidst immense drilling rigs. And the water will be slick with debris, pollution and—most of all—oil.

This is not fantasy or some conspiracy theory.

In 2019, after considerable confusion and mixed signals from the Trump administration whether the eastern Gulf would be opened to oil lease sales, Congress concluded, “the Trump Administration intends, if the President is reelected, to include the Eastern Gulf of Mexico in its final Five-Year Program and to hold lease sales in the Eastern Gulf as early as 2022.”

That’s stated in a July 16, 2019 report from the US House Natural Resources Committee. It goes on to say: “Given the widespread belief that a tweet from [Interior] Secretary [Ryan] Zinke declaring Florida off-limits to offshore oil and gas leasing was issued to support Florida Governor Rick Scott in his Senate race, the Committee is concerned that the Administration is playing similar games with its 2019–2024 program and intends to wait until after the 2020 presidential election, in which Florida may be a key swing state, before revealing an unpopular plan to lease off of Florida’s shore.”

Those are pretty strong words for a relatively obscure congressional report accompanying a piece of legislation.

What is more, they were not the statements of cranky Democrats taking potshots at Trump. In fact, they were issued to explain a piece of legislation introduced by a Republican.

And that Republican was Southwest Florida’s own Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.).

Rooney’s crusade

11-16-19 Francis_Rooney_official_congressional_photo cropped — Rep. Francis Rooney

On Sept. 11, 2019, the US House of Representatives voted 248 to 180 to pass the Protecting and Securing Florida’s Coastline Act of 2019 (House Resolution (HR) 205)).

The bill is pretty simple: it “permanently extends the moratorium on oil and gas leasing, preleasing, and related activities” in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. It prohibits sale of leases, oil exploration, drilling or extracting oil along Florida’s Gulf coastline in perpetuity.

That moratorium had been in place in one form or another since 1982, maintained by congressional action and presidential decisions, which applied not just in Florida but in a wide variety of waters around the North American continental shelf, including Alaska. However, in one of his earliest acts, in April 2017 Trump issued an executive order opening up American waters to oil exploitation. The order was challenged in court but the Trump administration proceeded with planning for the sale of oil leases beginning in 2022 when the current moratorium expires.

Rooney was elected in 2016 on the same platform—literally, they stood on the same stage—as Trump. What was more, Rooney and his construction companies had extensive ties to the oil and gas industry and much of his fortune resulted from work for it. One of his earliest political donors was the consortium building the controversial XL Pipeline. And even Rooney’s origins are in Oklahoma’s oil patch.

So perhaps Rooney had a better sense than most people of what was involved in offshore oil exploitation and how it would affect Southwest Florida’s tourism, hospitality, and retail businesses and overall quality of life. After all, he lives on the water in Naples’ Port Royal.

That’s why it was particularly interesting when, after Trump’s executive order, regardless of his other activities, Rooney began working to protect the Gulf coast from oil exploitation.

But in this effort Rooney was opposed by the oil industry, which wants the option to drill everywhere and anywhere, and his fellow Republicans, in particular the powerful Rep. Steve Scalise (R-1-La.), the Minority Whip in the House.

It’s worth noting the unique role of Louisiana in this: politically, the state and the oil industry are virtually one and the same. Offshore oil exploitation has brought great wealth and employment to the state and the people involved in the industry. However, it has also brought pollution and the occasional disaster, most spectacularly the 2010 Deepwater Horizon blowout and the subsequent nearly five month-long oil spill—really more of an oil eruption.

In Congress, Rooney couldn’t make headway on maintaining the moratorium and one day he confronted Scalise directly, as he related to a small group of constituents meeting at the Alamo gun range and store in Naples in 2018.

“I was on the House floor with Steve Scalise and I got in his face and I said, ‘You’re telling me that the industry won’t go for protecting the Eastern Gulf in Florida? What industry are you talking about? I’m talking about tourism. I’m talking about why we’re all here, okay? Just because Louisiana is a pit, doesn’t mean we want to become a pit. Okay?’” said Rooney.

Nor could Rooney make any headway with Trump’s Interior Department. He found that officials in the Department of Defense supported maintaining the moratorium because they trained pilots over the eastern Gulf. “…So the military is our ally on this,” he said. “The Department of the Interior is not. They want to ‘drill-baby-drill.’ They are Republicans, right?”

While Republicans were in power, Rooney and the moratorium made no progress.

USCG photo oil rig cropped 11-7-17

Vessels service offshore oil rigs. (Photo: USCG)

Enter the Democrats

Then, in 2018 the House changed hands and suddenly Rooney faced a new Democratic power structure and a new Speaker of the House—Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-12-Calif.).

On the first day of the session, Jan. 3, 2019, he introduced HR 205 with Rep. Cathy Kastor (D-14-Fla.), who represents Hillsborough County in the Tampa area, as his first co-sponsor. The legislation gained momentum, picking up other members of the Florida delegation from both parties as co-sponsors until by June he had nine Democrats and nine Republicans.

Pelosi agreed to move the bill forward and on Sept. 11, the same day he called on his Republican colleagues to acknowledge climate change in an essay in Politico magazine, Rooney also saw his bill passed in the House. All of Florida’s representatives, both Republican and Democratic, voted for it with only one dissenter, Rep. Ted Yoho (R-3-Fla.).

From there it went to the Republican Senate where it was introduced the next day by Florida’s two Republican senators, Marco Rubio and Rick Scott, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. There it has languished to this day.

Why? Because with Republicans in charge, the odds were stacked against it: Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wasn’t inclined to move it and the Trump White House threatened to veto it. The Interior Department, the fossil fuel industry, the offshore drilling industry and the Republican leadership are against it.

Rooney has kept working for its passage.

“I’ve been working with Senators Rubio and Scott, as well as others whose support will be needed to advance HR. 205 in the Senate,” Rooney stated in response to questions from The Paradise Progressive. “They’re making sure that the Senate realizes the military, economic, and ecologic significance of banning offshore drilling east of the Military Mission Line” (the geographic line in the Gulf where the military trains)

There are possibilities that the legislation could still advance: “We’re keeping all options on the table for ways to advance HR 205, as stand-alone legislation, or as a potential amendment to other legislation. I’m optimistic that we can still be successful in this congressional session,” he stated.

On May 29, The Paradise Progressive asked the following questions about HR 205 of Sens. Rubio and Scott in a message to their offices:

1. Since its arrival in the Senate, have you taken any actions to advance this bill?
2. Do you plan to take any actions to move this bill to full consideration by the Senate before the end of the year?
3. If you plan to take any actions, what do you plan to do?

As of this writing, no response has been received.

Logic and illogic

Conventional political logic would dictate that if you’re a sitting president who must win the state of Florida to be re-elected, you do something that will make you popular in that state and gain you votes—like supporting HR 205. That would mean an endorsement from the president, breaking the legislation out of committee and getting it enacted into law before the general election on Nov. 3.

“The people of Florida have made it clear that they don’t want offshore drilling in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico,” stated Rooney. “It endangers our tourism and real estate-based economy, and it adversely affects military readiness. There will be a political price to pay if the will of the people is ignored. The Trump administration can move this forward if they want to protect Florida.”

True enough. But conventional political logic has not been a hallmark of the Trump administration and it’s not in evidence now.

Of course, there are bigger issues dominating the landscape at the moment than drilling for oil off Southwest Florida—like whether America will remain a democracy and whether racism can be uprooted. Still, oil is an issue that particularly matters to the people, the region and the environment.

“It’s my hope that our next representative will exhibit the same commitment and have the successes that we’ve had over these last four years in fixing our water and protecting our environment,” stated Rooney, who is retiring after this term.

But with all of the Republicans vying for his seat pledging their blind obedience to Donald Trump, that’s not likely.

However, one person who has paid attention to the topic of offshore drilling is Democratic presidential challenger former Vice President Joe Biden.

On March 15, Joe Biden debated Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in Washington, DC. In a discussion of climate change Biden said: “Number one, no more subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, no more drilling on federal lands, no more drilling, including offshore, no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period, ends, number one.”

Subsequent analysis indicated that Biden meant no new offshore drilling; not that he would close down existing wells. But that was good enough for Florida’s Gulf coast.

However, this was not something that was going to be taken lying down by the offshore drilling industry.

On Tuesday, May 26, the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA), the organization of the offshore oil industry, hit back by releasing a study, “The Economic Impacts of the Gulf of Mexico Oil & Natural Gas Industry,” warning of dire consequences if there was no new leasing or permitting in the Gulf of Mexico. Projecting out to the year 2040 it predicted losses in oil extraction, jobs, industry spending, gross domestic product and government revenues. It pointed out that the industry is a pillar in the state economies of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas.

Florida is not yet on the list—but it is certainly in the industry’s sights.

And incredibly, like a raid deep into enemy territory, on May 27 an article reprinted from the Lafayette Daily Advertiser of Lafayette, La., of all places, appeared in Naples, Fla., in an across-the-page headline on the front of the Naples Daily News Business section: “Gulf drilling restrictions could prove damaging.” It put forward NOIA’s propaganda without comment or question.

With this the industry proved that it really did have a long reach—right into Rooney’s own eyeballs and the heart of the opposition.

Joe Biden at the moment in his debate with Bernie Sanders when he uttered the words “no more drilling, including offshore.” (Image: CNN)

Analysis: Boatin’ for Biden

“I’m thankful that the Florida delegation, with the exception of one member, came together in a bipartisan way to pass HR 205 out of the House,” stated Rooney to The Paradise Progressive. “This shows the strong commitment that Floridians have to protecting our waters, our economy, and our military preparedness.”

Many Floridians do indeed have a commitment to Florida’s natural environment and they will keep working to protect it. But it’s also very clear that the only hope Southwest Florida—indeed, all of the Florida Gulf coast—has to protect its shores, its environment and its current economy is the election of Joe Biden as president.

Floridians of all political persuasions will get no succor or satisfaction on this issue from President Trump or his administration. He and his minions are just waiting for his re-election to pounce and then it’s “drill-baby-drill.” And the offshore oil and gas industry will certainly show no mercy.

So those in the flotilla of south Collier County boaters who took to the water on Memorial Day weekend should think very carefully about what they’re wishing for. If they really got their wish and Donald Trump was re-elected, the Florida waters and beaches they so enjoy will likely become a dystopian hellscape of oil rigs, ships and slicks.

But of course, that’s not the future that has to be. Perhaps just enough Floridians will realize that their best interests, the interests of their state, their country, their environment and their future lies in electing Joe Biden.

And then they’ll vote.

Offshore oil rigs 11-2-17

Liberty lives in light

The hidden story of the Democratic presidential primary–and the party’s future UPDATED

04-08-20 Beto O'Rourke high school 04-08-20 Julian Castro high school cropped 04-08-20 Eric Swalwell high school 04-08-20 Pete Buttigieg high school

High school photos of Beto O’Rourke, Julian Castro, Eric Swalwell and Pete Buttigieg.

April 9, 2020 by David Silverberg.

Updated 10:45 am with additional concluding analysis.

With the withdrawal yesterday of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the Democratic presidential nomination is now in former Vice President Joe Biden’s hands; all that remains is an official party coronation.

But amidst the excitement and heartbreak of the Democratic presidential primaries there’s another story that needs to be told. It may be the biggest to come out of the presidential campaign to date—and the most overlooked and hidden.

The coming presidential battle between Joe Biden and Donald Trump is probably the last struggle of Baby Boomers over political power. Donald Trump is 73 and Joe Biden is 77. Sanders is 78 and, just to add them to the mix, Michael Bloomberg is 78 and Elizabeth Warren is 70.

But amidst the brawling debates and the stabbing sound bites, something else happened: a new generation of Democratic leaders emerged and these are the ones who will ultimately lead the nation in the years to come. They were all on display in the first rush of candidates to seek the presidential mantle. None of them succeeded—but they stepped into the limelight, no matter how briefly, and we all got a first look at them.

If the United States remains a democracy, continues to operate under its Constitution and has regularly scheduled elections as in the past—things that can’t be taken for granted if this president remains in office—then these under-50 Democratic leaders will be on the political stage for a long time to come. All are elected officials, all are now veterans of a presidential campaign and all are likely to be back in one form or another. It gives the Democrats a deep bench.

They’re worth looking at, each in turn and examining their electoral records, their prospects and—subjectively—what they might do next to further their political careers.

So, from oldest to youngest:

Beto O’Rourke

Age: 47 years old, born September 26, 1972.

Education: Columbia University

Previous offices: El Paso City Council, 2005 to 2011; won US House Representative, Texas 16th Congressional District with 65 percent of the vote and served 6 years, 2013 to 2019.

In 2018 O’Rourke ran against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and came within 3 percentage points of defeating him, raising $80 million in the process, the most ever raised by a Senate candidate to that time. He also created enormous enthusiasm for his candidacy, appearing as a fresh, exciting candidate who appealed to younger voters

O’Rourke announced his candidacy for president on March 14, 2019. He never inspired the enthusiasm he had in his Senate race and he announced termination of his campaign on Nov. 1, 2019, well before the first primaries and caucuses. On Super Tuesday, March 3, he briefly made headlines when he dramatically endorsed former Vice President Joe Biden for president.

Next steps: Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) is up for re-election this year but last February O’Rourke flatly decided not to challenge him in order to concentrate on his presidential run. The next possible move is the Texas governorship, which opens in 2022. The current governor, Republican Gregg Abbott, could run for a third term and there are numerous other potential Democratic candidates (more below). When O’Rourke dropped his presidential bid there was talk among the punditry and party activists about his serving as Biden’s vice president, though Biden announced that a woman would be his running mate.

Analysis: If O’Rourke doesn’t go into the executive branch he needs to win the next election he enters to stay a credible prospect for higher electoral office.

Julian Castro

04-08-20 Julián_Castro's_Official_HUD_Portrait — Julian Castro

Age: 45 years old, born Sept. 16, 1974

Education: Stanford University, Harvard Law School

Previous offices: San Antonio City Council, 2000 to 2005 (at 26, the youngest person ever to hold that position); unsuccessful run for mayor of San Antonio, Texas, 2005; in 2008 elected mayor with 56 percent of the vote and served 2009 to 2014; US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development from 2014 to 2017 under President Barack Obama. He also gave the keynote address at the 2012 Democratic National Convention and was considered as a vice presidential running mate for Hillary Clinton.

Castro announced his run for president on Jan. 12, 2019. Although he participated in several debates, his campaign never caught fire and he dropped out almost exactly a year after he started, on Jan. 2, 2020. He endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) four days later.

Next steps: If he seeks Texas office, Castro’s way forward could run into Beto O’Rourke as a rival for the Texas governorship in 2022 or he could take on Sen. Ted Cruz in 2024. Until Joe Biden announced that he would be selecting a woman as running mate, Castro was seriously considered as a vice presidential candidate. Depending on the outcome of the 2020 election, he could try another presidential run in 2024.

Analysis: With his past service in the executive branch, Castro is a real possibility for a Cabinet position in a Democratic administration. Clearly a politician of both electoral and administrative ability with appeal to the Hispanic community, he has numerous options and roads open to him.

Eric Swalwell

Age: 39, born November 16, 1980

Education: Campbell University, NC, transferred in junior year to University of Maryland, College Park, BA; University of Maryland, Baltimore, JD

Previous offices: Alameda County deputy district attorney; city council, Dublin, Calif., 2010; US representative California 15th Congressional District, starting 2012.

Swalwell announced his candidacy on April 8, 2019 and made addressing gun violence the centerpiece of his campaign. His most prominent moment came in the first presidential debate when he observed that he was six years old when Joe Biden spoke of passing the torch to a new generation. His presidential campaign never caught fire, though, and he withdrew in July, before he could be disqualified for the next round of presidential debates.

Next steps: A logical next step would be for Swalwell to pursue a US Senate seat. However, both of California’s Senate seats are held by fellow Democrats. The seat of Kamala Harris, who also ran for president, is up for election in 2022. Depending on the outcome of the 2020 election, Harris could either enter a Democratic administration or seek re-election in 2022. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has held her seat since 1992, may retire when her term is up in 2024. A run for governor in 2022 seems a stretch since current governor Gavin Newsom is a Democrat. If he seeks a second term it would be difficult for Swalwell to unseat him.

Alternatively, Swalwell could continue to build his career in the House of Representatives. He has graduated to increasingly important roles and committee assignments in his three terms to date as a representative and there may be party leadership openings in the future. He defeated two Democratic primary challengers in his congressional district on March 3 and is in a strong position to win re-election in November.

Though Swalwell did not go far as a presidential candidate, he appeared on the national stage as an intelligent and articulate politician. In the past he has proven an innovative campaigner. As a millennial himself, he made outreach to his generation a central pillar of his presidential campaign and that may pay dividends in the future. In 2015 he founded the Future Forum Political Action Committee, aimed at millennials and their issues. It raised more than $542,000 during the 2017-2018 election cycle — a significant jump from the $62,400 it raised in the 2016 election cycle, according to the Center for Public Integrity.

Whatever he does in the future, Swalwell is definitely a Democrat to keep an eye on.

Pete Buttigieg

Age: 38, born January 19, 1982

Education: Harvard University, BA, magna cum laude; Rhodes Scholar; Pembroke College, Oxford, UK, MA with a first in politics, philosophy and economics.

Military service: Joined US Naval Reserve, 2009 as ensign, promoted to lieutenant; 2014 deployment to Afghanistan, recipient Joint Service Commendation Medal.

Previous office: Mayor, South Bend, Indiana 2011-Jan. 1, 2020.

Analysis: Of all the candidates under 50, Buttigieg emerged as the media standout. He won the Iowa caucuses after a murky primary process and participated in numerous debates where he came across as very intelligent and articulate. His campaign lasted longest and for a time he seemed to have a real shot at the nomination. His options seem limitless.

Next steps: It’s doubtful that Buttigieg would have much of a political career in very conservative Indiana—then again, just becoming mayor of South Bend and going as far as he did as a presidential candidate seemed improbable. Both current Indiana senators are Republicans and their seats are not up until 2023 and 2025 respectively. The governor, Eric Holcomb, who took over when Mike Pence assumed the vice presidency, is up in 2020, but given his concentration on the presidency, Buttigieg showed no interest in pursuing the office and Indiana pundits think he would have a difficult time if he did.

Buttigieg might have a variety of possible positions in a Joe Biden administration or he could pursue a Democratic Party position.

Buttigieg came out as gay in 2015 and is married to Chasten Glezman, a sexual orientation that will certainly sway some voters against him. However, it didn’t seem to affect his presidential run much and it was never cited as a major issue by the other candidates—although it might have been had he stayed the front runner.

Of all the presidential candidates under 50 who ran in 2019 and 2020, Buttigieg’s star shown brightest. If the Democrats win the presidency and he stays healthy and politically involved, there’s no telling where Buttigieg might go.

* * *

Another Democratic presidential candidate was Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, 38, of Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District. A three-term representative with military service, Gabbard showed promise of political leadership despite some controversial actions, like meeting with Syria’s President Bashar al Assad.

But Gabbard really took herself out of the running for Democratic leadership when she voted “present” on the impeachment vote of President Donald Trump on Dec. 19, 2019, saying she could not in good conscience vote for either side. The animosity resulting from that stance has likely doomed any further advancement in Democratic Party politics. Gabbard also announced that she would not seek re-election to her congressional seat in order to pursue the presidency, leaving her without elected office.

The other bright young star in the Democratic firmament is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 30, of New York’s 14th Congressional District. AOC, as she is widely known, will first be eligible to run for president in the 2028 presidential election. Before she does that, however, she must win re-election this year to a second term in her home district.

Liberty lives in light

National spotlight focuses on Rooney as he breaks Republican ranks on impeachment

CNN’s Poppy Harlow interviews Rep. Francis Rooney yesterday.

604 days (1 year, 7 months, 27 days) since Rep. Francis Rooney has faced constituents in an open, public town hall forum.

Oct. 19, 2019 by David Silverberg

The national political spotlight shifted to Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) yesterday, Oct. 18, as he broke ranks with the near-solid unanimity of his House Republican colleagues and stated that President Donald Trump may have committed impeachable offenses. Rooney said he would be open to voting for impeachment if warranted—although he’s not yet convinced it’s warranted.

Rooney made his remarks following revelations by Mick Mulvaney, White House chief of staff, that Trump did indeed press Ukraine’s president for a political quid pro quo in exchange for US military assistance.

In a 10:20 am interview with CNN’s Poppy Harlow, Rooney stated:

“Whatever might have been gray and unclear before is certainly clear right now, that the actions were related to getting someone in the Ukraine to do these things. As you put on there, Senator Murkowski said it perfectly: ‘We’re not to use political power and prestige for political gain.’” (The reference is to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who had stated, “You don’t hold up foreign aid that we had previously appropriated for a political initiative.”).

(The full Rooney interview can be seen at “GOP lawmaker on quid pro quo: It’s serious and troubling.”)

Rooney, who has served as a US ambassador, was careful to say that he wanted more information before deciding that impeachment was warranted.

“I don’t know. I want to study it more,” he stated. “I want to hear the next set of testimony next week from a couple more ambassadors. But it’s certainly very, very serious and troubling.”

Rooney also drew a telling parallel to Watergate, which President Richard Nixon had denounced as a witch hunt.

“I don’t think this is as much as Richard Nixon did,” Rooney said. “But I’m very mindful of the fact that back during Watergate everybody said it’s a witch hunt to get Nixon. Turns out it wasn’t a witch hunt but it was absolutely correct.”

He also acknowledged that House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-12-Calif.) “had a point” when she told Trump in a meeting that “with you all roads lead to Putin.”

“I was skeptical of it, like most Republicans,” he noted of Pelosi’s remarks. “But I have to say this business about the Ukraine server, which no one heard about until it was mentioned recently, tells me what—are we trying to exculpate Russia, who all our trained intelligence officials have consistently corroborated that Russia was behind the election meddling, not the Ukraine?”

Rooney’s openness and independence from the Trump line generated headlines in the political media.

“I didn’t take this job to keep it’: GOP Rep. Rooney hints he’s open to impeachment,” said a headline in the Washington Post. “GOP Rep. Rooney Won’t Rule Out Impeachment: It’s ‘Certainly Clear’ There Was Quid Pro Quo,” stated The Daily Beast.

Rooney further broke Republican-White House ranks when, as Politico put it: “First Republican calls for Rick Perry to answer House subpoena.” Rooney had called on the Energy Secretary to comply with the House impeachment investigation.

“Everybody that can bring any information to the table ought to testify, so that some huge mistake is not inadvertently made,” Rooney told Politico. “I’d like to see any evidence that needs to be adduced brought up and made available to people.”

Rooney’s remarks and his low fundraising totals for the past quarter have fueled speculation that he may not run again in 2020. However, his office denied this to NBC2 reporter Dave Elias in a report broadcast Thursday, Oct. 17: “Despite low fundraising, Congressman Rooney will run for office again.”

As of this writing, a query on this topic to Rooney’s office by The Paradise Progressive has not received a response.

Analysis

Under normal circumstances, Rooney’s careful, cautious expression of openness to the evidence and independent thought might not be extraordinary—but these are no ordinary times.

By simply, carefully expressing a willingness to consider the evidence and where it might lead, Rooney broke the largely solid Republican phalanx protecting the President.

But Trump is demanding what’s nearly impossible in a free, independently thinking society. He wants absolute, mindless loyalty to whatever he’s spouting at the moment, which, like the Ministry of Truth in the novel 1984, can suddenly and unexpectedly shift to its polar opposite.

After the President’s emphatic insistence that there was no quid pro quo, the White House completely altered its stance and Mulvaney said that even if there was a quid pro quo, it was no big deal. Then the White House reversed direction again and denied Mulvaney’s original statement.

All that was clearly more than Rooney could swallow.

“The president has said many times there wasn’t a quid pro quo . . . and now Mick Mulvaney goes up and says, ‘Yeah, it was all part of the whole plan,’” Rooney complained to a reporter according to Politico.

Asked by a reporter if he didn’t buy the White House walk-back on Mulvaney’s remarks, Rooney replied, “What is a walk-back? I mean, I tell you what, I’ve drilled some oil wells I’d like to walk back — dry holes.”

Several factors make Rooney’s heretical receptivity to impeachment even more significant.

First, prior to his 2016 election and all through his first term in the House, Rooney was a staunch and outspoken Trumpie, going so far in 2017 as to call for a political purge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to fill it with Trump loyalists. When Trump came to Fort Myers on Halloween, 2018, he praised Rooney’s active defense of him. “He’s brutal,” Trump said of Rooney. “He gets the job done.” For such a past loyalist and self-described conservative to now admit doubts is truly seismic.
Second, pro and anti-Trump partisans are intensely scrutinizing Republican House members for any sign of change in their positions. “REPUBLICANS MUST STICK TOGETHER AND FIGHT!” the president hysterically tweeted late yesterday. For Rooney to even admit that the evidence may lead to impeachment when the President insists on a near-Papal infallibility and unquestioning loyalty is major heresy indeed. In the media, writers are using the metaphor of a dam to describe the Republican position. Rooney may be the first crack.
Third, in a Florida Republican congressional delegation whose attitudes are marked by the extreme Trumpism of Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-1-Fla.) and Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.), Rooney’s doubts shake the very redness of the Sunshine State. With Florida an absolute must-win for Trump in 2020, if there are defections in Republican ranks, which is based on a razor-thin majority anyway, the state could go blue in 2020, ensuring a Republican presidential defeat.

Late last night, Rooney attempted to clarify his position using the current political lingua franca, a tweet: “I am in favor of finding out all of the factual information available in this process that is already underway. I did not endorse an impeachment inquiry,” he tweeted.

But at a time when the concept of “factual information” itself is in dispute, even the idea of pursuing truth makes Rooney a revolutionary.

Liberty lives in light

US House passes bill condemning Trump’s Kurdish decision; Diaz-Balart, Steube split, Rooney absent

House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi confronts President Donald Trump over his Syrian withdrawal decision at a White House meeting. (Photo: White House)

Oct. 17, 2019 by David Silverberg

In a definitive, bipartisan, overwhelming vote, the US House of Representatives yesterday condemned President Donald Trump’s precipitous withdrawal of US forces and betrayal of its Kurdish allies.

The bill, House Joint Resolution (HJRes) 77, “Opposing the decision to end certain United States efforts to prevent Turkish military operations against Syrian Kurdish forces in Northeast Syria” required a two-thirds vote to pass and did so decisively by 354 to 60 votes.

Southwest Florida’s congressional delegation split on the motion. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-25-Fla.) joined 128 other Republicans in voting for the bill. Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) joined 59 other Republicans in opposing it. Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) was absent.

As of this writing, none of the congressmen had issued statements explaining their actions or absences.

In addition to opposing Trump’s decision and calling for an end to Turkish operations the bill also called on the administration to aid the Kurds with humanitarian assistance and restrain the Turkish military. Lastly, it called “on the White House to present a clear and specific plan for the enduring defeat of ISIS.”

The bill has now gone to the Senate for consideration.

Following passage of the bill, House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-12-Calif.) and Democratic lawmakers went to the White House to discuss the Syrian situation. That meeting devolved into a stormy confrontation between Pelosi and Trump, with Trump calling her a “third rate” or “third grade” politician and Pelosi telling Trump: “all roads with you lead to Putin.” Both sides characterized the other’s behavior as a “meltdown.” (An in-depth account of the meeting as reported by The New York Times can be read here.)