[ Reader Comments: Trump Right to Run -- The 14th Amendment -
Readers Debate; A Just Peace in Ukraine - Readers Respond, Author
Responds; Claudine Gay resignation letter; Minn Community & Labor
Escalation; Emergency Summit for Gaza -Jan 12-13]
[[link removed]]

TIDBITS – JAN. 4, 2024 – READER COMMENTS: TRUMP RIGHT TO
RUN–THE 14TH AMENDMENT – READERS DEBATE; A JUST PEACE IN UKRAINE
– READERS RESPOND, AUTHOR RESPONDS; CLAUDINE GAY RESIGNATION LETTER;
EMERGENCY SUMMIT FOR GAZA -JAN 12; MORE…  
[[link removed]]


 

January 4, 2024
xxxxxx
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Reader Comments: Trump Right to Run -- The 14th Amendment - Readers
Debate; A Just Peace in Ukraine - Readers Respond, Author Responds;
Claudine Gay resignation letter; Minn Community & Labor Escalation;
Emergency Summit for Gaza -Jan 12-13 _

Tidbits - Reader Comments, Resources, Announcements, AND cartoons -
Jan.4, 2024, xxxxxx

 

* RE: FIRST THINGS FIRST: DON’T OPPOSE TRUMP’S RIGHT TO RUN
 (BRUCE DUNN; KEN LAWRENCE; EMMETT PITTMAN)
* RE: HALEY DECLINES TO SAY SLAVERY WAS CAUSE OF CIVIL WAR
 (MAURICE WADE; LAWRENCE ROCKWOOD)
* RE: LIBRARIANS, WHO LOST JOBS FOR NOT BANNING BOOKS, ARE FIGHTING
BACK  (NORM LITTLEJOHN)
* THE DECIDER  --  CARTOON BY MIKE LUCKOVICH
* RE: IN THE WEST BANK, I SAW HOW PEACE WILL REQUIRE CONFRONTATION
WITH ISRAEL  (HAROLD DYCK)
* THERE'S NO ROOM AT THE INN  --  CARTOON BY DR. JAMES MACLEOD
* RE: LABOR & PALESTINE: JEFF SCHUHRKE & BILL FLETCHER ON HOW U.S.
UNIONS ARE RESPONDING TO WAR IN GAZA  (GREGORY KESTEL)
* OUT WITH OLD  --  CARTOON BY BILL BRAMHALL
* RE: THIS WEEK IN PEOPLE’S HISTORY, JAN 2 – 8  (PETER KINOY)

READERS DEBATE:

* THE 14TH AMENDMENT  (JACK RADEY)
* ENDGAME, LUNACY  (BRUCE G. SHAPIRO)

* RE: REPLACING A DISASTROUS WAR WITH A JUST PEACE IN UKRAINE  (JOHN
TARLETON; JEFF JONES; JOHN MUDD; NATALIA KUZMYN; AUTHOR RESPONSE -
LAWRENCE WITTNER)

RESOURCES:

* READ CLAUDINE GAY’S RESIGNATION LETTER

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

* WEBINAR: MINNESOTA COMMUNITY & LABOR ESCALATION  - JANUARY 9
 (BARGAINING FOR THE COMMON GOOD)

* EMERGENCY SUMMIT FOR GAZA  -  CHICAGO AND VIRTUAL  --  JANUARY
12 AND 13  (RAINBOW PUSH COALITION)

* “WAGING ART” EXHIBITION OPENING AND BOOK EVENT  --  JANUARY
14  (PUFFIN FOUNDATION)
 

RE: FIRST THINGS FIRST: DON’T OPPOSE TRUMP’S RIGHT TO RUN  
 

C'mon. He tried to overthrow the very government he was in charge
of...because he lost an election by more than 7million votes and lost
by 4 1/2 percentage points! This is a rediculas point that you are
trying to make. Treason is Treason!

Bruce Dunn
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

      =====

When did any respectable leftist derive her/his political line based
on an expectation of what the corrupt United States Supreme Court
probably will eventually rule, especially when the issue the court
will decide itself requires a political conclusion?

No court convicted Jefferson Davis of insurrection against the United
States. Did he enjoy or should he have enjoyed the privilege of
holding public office in the United States after 1865, absent a
criminal conviction in a court of law?

I'm no fan of the U.S. Constitution, but for anyone who chooses to
participate in presidential electoral politics, one must take for
granted that every legitimate candidate must meet that document's
minimum qualifications for that office to qualify for listing on a
ballot: i.e., must have been born in the United States, must be at
least 35 years of age, and must not have engaged in insurrection
against the United States.

Is it an affront to democracy to deny someone below the age of 35 or
someone born in a foreign land the right to run for president? Of
course it is. But who ever thought the Constitution established a
democracy? To play a game, you must obey its rules, or (as I hope we
shall) change them.

Should any ordinary person who claims that a candidate fails to meet
those qualifications be disparaged simply because her/his claim might
be "doomed to fail." How often have we leftists been told that almost
everything we fight for is doomed to fail? When has that persuaded us
not to fight?

It's legitimate to debate whether people ought to spend time and
resources challenging Donald Trump's qualification to stand for public
office, but predictions of how the Supreme Court and aggrieved
right-wingers might react to the challenge ought not determine the
choice.

Ken Lawrence
Spring Mills, Pennsylvania

      =====

Trump is a traitor and a Domestic Terrorist--and so is anyone who
supports this Antichrist! And he lost the election, too! BY A WIDE
MARGIN! The voters spoke, And Trump tried to overthrow Democracy! He's
still trying! He still can't admit he LOST!
So much for letting the voters decide!!! Shut up, you Trump Nazi
freaks!

Emmett Pittman
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

 

RE: HALEY DECLINES TO SAY SLAVERY WAS CAUSE OF CIVIL WAR
 

She doesn't want to lose the white supremacist vote!

Maurice Wade
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

      =====

This says "everything" about the moral character of a person.

Lawrence Rockwood
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

 

RE: LIBRARIANS, WHO LOST JOBS FOR NOT BANNING BOOKS, ARE FIGHTING BACK
 

Librarians in at least three states are asking the federal Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission to intervene after they were fired
for refusing to ban books.

Norm Littlejohn
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

 

THE DECIDER  --  CARTOON BY MIKE LUCKOVICH

 

 

Mike Luckovich
December 31, 2023
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
[[link removed]]

 

RE: IN THE WEST BANK, I SAW HOW PEACE WILL REQUIRE CONFRONTATION WITH
ISRAEL
 

Given the extremist fanaticism and violent nature of the illegal
settlers, I find it hard to imagine accomplishing even the limited
step of restoring the West Bank to Palestinian sovereignty without a
brutal civil war accompanied by acts of settler terrorism and genocide
that would make Hamas look like amateurs.

Harold Dyck
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

 

THERE'S NO ROOM AT THE INN  --  CARTOON BY DR. JAMES MACLEOD

 

 

Dr. James MacLeod
December 31, 2023
MacLeod Cartoons
[[link removed]]

 

RE: LABOR & PALESTINE: JEFF SCHUHRKE & BILL FLETCHER ON HOW U.S.
UNIONS ARE RESPONDING TO WAR IN GAZA
 

Blank checks and green light from the United States for ethnic
cleansing of Gaza and West Bank. Non-stop war crimes.

Smotrich touts revival of Gaza settlements after war, wants Gazans
encouraged to leave

Finance minister advocates for ‘voluntary emigration’ of
enclave’s residents, opposes fuel going into Strip; stands by 2015
comment calling PA a ‘burden’ and Hamas an ‘asset’
[[link removed]]

Gregory Kestel
Posted on xxxxxx's Facebook page
[[link removed]]

 

OUT WITH OLD  --  CARTOON BY BILL BRAMHALL

 

 

Bill Bramhall
January 3, 2024
New York Daily News
[[link removed]]

 

RE: THIS WEEK IN PEOPLE’S HISTORY, JAN 2 – 8
 

Great column. Just wondering, what was Tom Moody doing that got him
thrown in jail for all those years?

Peter Kinoy

 

THE 14TH AMENDMENT

 

14th Amendment.  Passed by Congress after a bloody war ripped our
country apart at a cost of over half a million lives.  Because it was
felt persons who decide to overthrow the will of the people violently
should not be subsequently allowed to take public office.

"Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector
of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or
military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having
previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of
the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an
executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the
Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection
or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies
thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House,
remove such disability."

Some are arguing that the orange shit hog should be allowed on the
ballot, because either

1) They're afraid his followers will make the streets run with blood

2) They feel it is unfair because he has not been convicted of
insurrection or rebellion yet, or even charged, and he didn't himself
lead the assault on the capital in person.  Bone spurs were acting up
or something.  Poor guy.

3) They feel it will increase his support, as he can claim democracy
is being subverted by the deep state because they want to deny real
Americans their choice.

In a word, poppycock.  There is only one way you have a country where
we stick to the electoral process..  No Brooks Brothers mobs at the
counting stations.  No MAGA Lardos kicking in the doors of
Congress.    No secretaries of state finding another 14,873 votes.
 No phony electors presenting credentials.  A stop to all that.

The way you do that is you prosecute the people responsible for trying
it to the fullest extent of the law, and come down on them like a ton
of bricks.

The phoniest argument of all is the one that says "The 14th Amendment
has never been invoked like this before, this is unprecedented!!"
 Yeah.  Like a President who has lost an election whipping up a mob
to storm Congress to prevent the certification of the election is
something we've seen all the time?

Trump has been indicted for 91 felonies not because some secret cabal
is out to get him.  It is because the man has committed so many
crimes that he won't live long enough to pay for all of them.  Come
on, this is the guy who has never, ever, kept a promise to anyone.
 Phoney cancer charity, for kids yet.  Phoney college.  Stiffing
suppliers, workers, lawyers, police departments, wives, calling people
the greatest when he hires them and calling them stupid and jerks when
he fires them.

We didn't put Nixon, (yes, he was a crook) in slam.  We should have.
 We SHOULD live in a nation where even the wealthy get properly
handled, after the cops have chased after and caught them, and that
the ladder of law has no top and no bottom.

To let him on the ballot is to accept this country's decline into
fascism.  Hey, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you
can't have a fascist!  Well, in this case?  There is.

Jack Radey

      =====

ENDGAME, LUNACY

Many media commentators have been relishing the irony that Trump might
be undone by the very weapon he used unsuccessfully against President
Obama, a presidential eligibility clause (Article II, Section 1,
Clause 5) in the United States Constitution.

They have lightheartedly implied that a parity exists between Clause 5
and the provisions of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
While the comparison between the Articles may be interesting it is
also inapposite. Reading either text in the context of the other, that
is, intertextually, renders the meanings of both as far away from
their intended truths as anything the former president is wont to
utter. Clause 5 merely establishes the requirements for a person to be
eligible to become President, essentially that they are a natural born
citizen, not under 35 years of age, and have been resident in the US
for fourteen years.

By contrast, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment establishes a punitive
measure against anyone who while in office violated their oath to
support the Constitution. The punishment is that no such quisling
shall hold office, unless a two-thirds majority vote of both Houses of
Congress "removes the disability," that is, rehabilitates them.

Thus, when read side-by-side, these two Articles have nothing in
common. First, eligibility and ability are not precisely synonymous
and the subtle difference between them is important in this case.
Section 3 says that a no person who has done what Trump did, that is,
engaged in insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution, shall
hold office. However, while Trump has lost his fitness to hold office,
he nevertheless remains eligible for office and the people remain free
to elect or choose him for office, because Section 3 also provides for
his rehabilitation to hold office. Thus, so long as the provision for
his possible rehabilitation, that is, removing the disability, remains
in Section 3 of the Amendment, no matter how remote that possibility
may be, it would be unconstitutional to remove Trump any presidential
election ballot. He remains eligible and his supporters retain the
right to elect or choose him, so long as the law holds out the
possibility for his rehabilitation. Recently, in the light of Trump's
lawyer's similar argument against the Maine decision to remove Trump
from the primary ballot in that state, an eminent historian has
denigrated this reasoning by labeling it a "word salad," but he is
mistaken, and with all due respect to his knowledge, he simply must
consider the text of the Section more closely.

Second, while the Eligibility Clause applies to a person seeking
election to the presidency, Section 3 the 14th Amendment applies not
only to persons who might seek to hold office in the future but also
to those officers who might presently be holding office. This
crucially important aspect of the Amendment has been completely
overlooked by those scholar/commentators who are proponents of using
the Amendment to prevent Trump from running for office. However,
Section 3 clearly states, "No person shall...hold any office...." In
fact, Trump was holding office at the time of the insurrection and
rebellion, and soon afterwards some of the most eminent members of his
own party characterized his actions as criminal. That being the case,
the time to enforce the provisions stated in Section 3 of the 14th
Amendment began on the evening of January 6, 2020, when Trump was
holding office. From that night onwards, he was no longer able to hold
office under the 14th Amendment, but no one at that time saw fit to
argue the point. Even today the most respected scholars evade this
point. For example, J. Michael Luttig and Laurence H. Tribe, in their
August 2023 essay for the Atlantic write, "the amendment's
often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future
office...." No matter the other merits of their argument, they are
simply incorrect about this point. The Amendment neither says not
implies "future office," it says only "office," which must include not
only future office but also present office.

The reason Trump was not immediately removed from office in January
2020 was that Congress had not and still has not resolved the single
issue of Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, which delivers to Congress
the power of enforcement through legislation of the provisions of the
Amendment.

Several media commentators, many of whom are in the legal profession,
have also been asserting that when it comes to the 14th Amendment and
its relevance to the current candidacy of former president Trump, the
question is whether, as President, Trump violated Section 3 by
engaging in insurrection or rebellion, citing the events of January 6,
2020, as evidence that he did. On the other hand, they have also
suggested that special counsel Jack Smith's four-count indictment
against Trump appears not to include the charge of insurrection.
Likewise, many of Trump's defenders say that not only has he not been
indicted for or convicted of insurrection but also the president is
not an "officer" of the United States. However, most of these
individuals have failed to note that the 14th Amendment clearly
specifies that the insurrection or rebellion shall be against the
Constitution, and not necessarily the Capitol or any other physical
arm of the government. Consequently, all four counts in the Smith
indictment constitute instances of insurrection against the
Constitution, which is precisely the crime referred to in the 14th
Amendment

However, even though Section 3 of the Amendment asserts that a person
shall not hold any office under the United States if they have
previously taken an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged
in insurrection of rebellion against it, or gave aid or comfort to the
enemies of the Constitution, the issue at hand is not whether Trump
should be disqualified as an insurrectionist. Rather, and for two
reasons, the question is whether the States have the Constitutional
power to enforce the provisions of the Amendment. First, Section 3
also asserts that Congress can revoke the disability to hold office by
a two-thirds majority vote in each House; and, second, Section 5 of
the Amendment asserts that only Congress through legislation has the
power to enforce its provisions. The States do not have the power of
enforcement, which means that it is unconstitutional for any State to
take any enforcement actions relative to the 14th Amendment, such as
preventing Trump from appearing on the ballot or running for office.

In other words, and again despite what many media commentators have
implied, the 14th Amendment does not assert that to run for office a
person must be able to hold office. Therefore, even if Trump did
violate the provisions of Section 3, barring him from appearing on a
ballot and, thereby, barring the People from reelecting or not
reelecting him to office is unconstitutional.

In addition, Section 3 also asserts that Trump may again hold office
if two-thirds of each House of Congress votes to allow him to do so,
despite his previous acts of insurrection or rebellion. That is, the
Amendment clearly states that although Trump would not initially be
able to hold office again, he might ultimately be able to hold office
again if a successful vote by Congress enables him to do so. However,
Congress cannot assert its power of the vote on the case if some other
authority has barred Trump from running for office. In other words, by
removing Trump from the ballot, supposedly under the provisions of
Section 3 and, thereby, hobbling Trump's chances of being reelected,
the States of Colorado and Maine are subverting the privilege Section
3 grants to Congress to vote on whether to allow Trump to hold office
again. Congress would only have a reason to take that vote if Trump
were reelected to office, and that cannot happen in states which have
stricken his name from the ballot.

Consequently, the whole issue of Trump's candidacy vis-a-vis the 14th
Amendment is presently irrelevant and will remain so unless and until
Trump is reelected in November 2024. Congress would then probably want
to vote on whether to rehabilitate Trump so he can hold office
sometime after the new Congress is sworn in on January 3, 2025 but
before they count the Electoral College votes on January 6, 2025.

Of course, the present Congress could vote on removing Trump's
disability to hold office any time before the election. However,
bringing that vote to the floor of both Houses is not likely to happen
anytime soon because if it did, Trump would never get the required
two-thirds vote to remove the disability. Theoretically that could
change after the next election. Hence, a major issue for 2024 could be
which party controls each of the Houses because both Houses must vote
to remove the disability. Assuming the Houses vote along party lines,
it is very unlikely that they will remove the disability if the
majority parties remain different for each House. In which case, the
20th Amendment would likely come into play.

The 20th Amendment deals with situations in which "the President-elect
shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President-elect shall act
as President until a President shall have qualified." The presence of
the 20th Amendment further reinforces that idea that Trump remains
eligible to be on the ballot even when he cannot hold office. In a
sense, one could say that the 20th Amendment holds Trumps place while
he waits to be requalified, i.e., rehabilitated.

It seems obvious that not being able to hold office under Section 3 of
the 14th Amendment is prima facie the same as having failed to qualify
to hold office, as described in the 20th Amendment, and perhaps the
difference in wording is merely rhetorical. However, the point is that
Congress can vote as often or as many times as they want to remove the
disability, which would then qualify President-elect Trump to again
hold office. The voting could go on for weeks, turning into a mammoth
series of negotiations and compromises, before Trump could finally be
rehabilitated and returned to office.

On the other hand, if the voting to remove the disability is
ultimately unsuccessful, then under the 20th Amendment President-elect
Trump would remain unable to hold office, leaving the vice-president
elect to act as president and in that capacity nominate an acting
vice-president for Congressional approval. Since the Constitution does
not provide a guide for how to elect a qualified president in those
circumstances, the acting president and vice president would likely
hold power for one full term.

Presently, it appears that the actions of some states are likely to
draw the Supreme court into the controversy over Trump's candidacy and
the 14th Amendment. However, the Court can and probably will sidestep
the question of whether Trump violated his oath to support the
Constitution by participating in insurrection or rebellion against it,
because the only issue the Court needs to determine is whether, given
Section 5 of the Amendment, the States have the power to enforce the
provisions of the 14th Amendment and in that capacity remove Trump's
name from the ballot.

Finally, even after Congress enacts legislation under Section 5 to
enforce the provisions of the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court still
will not need to decide the issue of whether Trump's actions violated
his oath of office and, therefore, prevent him from holding office
again, because Trump can merely challenge the enforcement legislation
by appealing any unfavorable actions taken against him all the way to
the Supreme Court. Each court would then stay the legislation, thereby
stifling the actions of both the 14th and the 20th Amendments and
allow Trump to take office. Given this wearying carrousel of lunacy is
the most likely endgame of trying to defeat Trump Constitutionally in
advance of election day, it would be best to let our free and fair
presidential election process play out normally while doing everything
possible to ensure that sanity prevails.

Bruce G. Shapiro

 

RE: REPLACING A DISASTROUS WAR WITH A JUST PEACE IN UKRAINE

 

This article
[[link removed]]
is delusional. Even if most Ukrainians support in the abstract a
no-concessions stance toward giving up land already conquered by the
Russians, in reality the Ukrainian government is having an
increasingly difficult time finding military-age males who are willing
to do the fighting and dying that would be required to make that
pipedream have a chance of coming true. Instead, let's encourage all
parties to advance to the negotiating table and end this bloody
stalemate. The balance of forces on the ground is not going to get
better for the Ukrainians. It's time they (and their American
benefactors) make some hard choices about how this war should end.

John Tarleton

      =====

This is so weak it defies description.  We have genocide going on in
Gaza right now.  This article mentions it only in the last sentence.
 Would the US abstain?  We know the answer.

Jeff Jones

      =====

How could you possibly print such a US propaganda serving article.
It's complete garbage. And particularly in this late stage. The
complete condemnation of our participation must happen. These games if
permitted is doomed to repeat itself, and it has over and over. Your
participation is clear. And your participation will obscure the good
articles you print, and to continue support for our hegemony will
eventually make you useless. Independent needs to be reliable.

John Mudd

      =====

Lawrence S. Wittner's piece
[[link removed]],
from Dec. 14, 2023, Replacing a Disastrous War With a Just Peace in
Ukraine, is well-intended, but almost seems to suggest Russia's
entitlement to a peace deal, and second, suggests that Russia could
possibly view a UN-authored peace deal as just. Where Putin's ego is
involved, there can be no settlement, nor justice served that does not
fork over the coveted oil, gas, and coal reserves of Eastern
Ukraine--along with all related ports and trade routes for shipping
them. Consideration of peace will only come about once Russian defense
resources are drained, and their fictitious economy is finally exposed
to Putin loyalists, locally and abroad.

Recent increased Russian aerial attacks on Ukraine are far from a
display of strength or success; rather, they should be viewed as part
of Putin's re-election strategy. Since the invasion began, over a
thousand international companies have pulled out of the Russian
economy--industries necessary for supplying the war machine, but also
vital to the chief sector feeding Russian GDP. Its oil production and
output has, as a result, plummeted to about half, thereby negating any
gains by having started the war in the first place. But Putin doesn't
dare to publish these figures, as is internationally expected.

Putting faith in UN peace treaties is admirable, as we all fervently
wish that they could have weight, but most Russian presidents' track
records for abiding peacefully by them, and then later resisting
genocidal urges to realize self-serving goals, leave much to be
desired. Further, the UN itself, as Wittner points out, needs to stick
to its own rules if it is to arrive at peaceful outcomes before
victimized countries are shattered. Allowing the bully to participate
in votes on such decisions is clearly self-serving on the part of
Security Council nations who fail to object. Yet, because of this
lapse in integrity, an entire people further endures brutal attacks
and infrastructural devastation.

How is "a just peace" to come about if peace can only come to Ukraine
after Russia is soundly chased out of its territories? Ukraine owes no
concessions to Russia whatsoever. Russia, however, owes much to
Ukraine for restoration, for lives lost or ruined, and for tens of
thousands of children kidnapped. Russia must ultimately concede that
it can no longer afford to invest in stealing through genocide. Of
course, once UN restorations are ordered, the Russian economy will
then also have to be restructured to compensate Ukraine--and to
effectively pacify struggling Russians. Though wounds will run deep in
Ukraine, peace will come, and prosperity with it. Russia will be
resuscitated, without crediting the West. Hopefully, substantive
corrections to the Russian economy can help steer its leaders to
peacefully develop its own resources and encourage international
investors to return.

Please, ask your UN representatives for settlements that have real
teeth.

Natalia Kuzmyn,
Vancouver Island

      =====

The author responds:

If we are going to end the "might makes right" approach to
international relations that has destroyed so many lives and disgraced
humanity for so many centuries, then it is necessary to agree upon and
abide by rules for international behavior.  The UN Charter, developed
and agreed to by the nations of the world, represents a major attempt
to develop such rules.  Surely it's time to implement them, whether
in the case of Russia's military invasion of Ukraine or  in the case
of the bloody Israel/Palestine conflict.  Unfortunately, the use of
the veto in the UN Security Council is preventing this implementation.

If there is a better way to end war and imperialism than empowering
the United Nations to take action, please proceed with it.
 Otherwise, it's time to abandon overheated partisanship and turn to
the hard task of seeing to it, through UN action, that nations live up
to their professed principles and international agreements.

Lawrence Wittner

 

READ CLAUDINE GAY’S RESIGNATION LETTER

Claudine Gay

January 2, 2024
New York Times
[[link removed]]
 

Claudine Gay, the first black president of Harvard, resigned from her
position on Tuesday.  (Photo: ABC)
Dear Members of the Harvard Community,

It is with a heavy heart but a deep love for Harvard that I write to
share that I will be stepping down as president. This is not a
decision I came to easily. Indeed, it has been difficult beyond words
because I have looked forward to working with so many of you to
advance the commitment to academic excellence that has propelled this
great university across centuries. But, after consultation with
members of the Corporation, it has become clear that it is in the best
interests of Harvard for me to resign so that our community can
navigate this moment of extraordinary challenge with a focus on the
institution rather than any individual.

It is a singular honor to be a member of this university, which has
been my home and my inspiration for most of my professional career. My
deep sense of connection to Harvard and its people has made it all the
more painful to witness the tensions and divisions that have riven our
community in recent months, weakening the bonds of trust and
reciprocity that should be our sources of strength and support in
times of crisis. Amidst all of this, it has been distressing to have
doubt cast on my commitments to confronting hate and to upholding
scholarly rigor — two bedrock values that are fundamental to who I
am — and frightening to be subjected to personal attacks and threats
fueled by racial animus.

I believe in the people of Harvard because I see in you the
possibility and the promise of a better future. These last weeks have
helped make clear the work we need to do to build that future — to
combat bias and hate in all its forms, to create a learning
environment in which we respect each other’s dignity and treat one
another with compassion, and to affirm our enduring commitment to open
inquiry and free expression in the pursuit of truth. I believe we have
within us all that we need to heal from this period of tension and
division and to emerge stronger. I had hoped with all my heart to lead
us on that journey, in partnership with all of you. As I now return to
the faculty, and to the scholarship and teaching that are the
lifeblood of what we do, I pledge to continue working alongside you to
build the community we all deserve.

When I became president, I considered myself particularly blessed by
the opportunity to serve people from around the world who saw in my
presidency a vision of Harvard that affirmed their sense of belonging
— their sense that Harvard welcomes people of talent and promise,
from every background imaginable, to learn from and grow with one
another. To all of you, please know that those doors remain open, and
Harvard will be stronger and better because they do.

As we welcome a new year and a new semester, I hope we can all look
forward to brighter days. Sad as I am to be sending this message, my
hopes for Harvard remain undimmed. When my brief presidency is
remembered, I hope it will be seen as a moment of reawakening to the
importance of striving to find our common humanity — and of not
allowing rancor and vituperation to undermine the vital process of
education. I trust we will all find ways, in this time of intense
challenge and controversy, to recommit ourselves to the excellence,
the openness, and the independence that are crucial to what our
university stands for — and to our capacity to serve the world.

Sincerely,
Claudine Gay

 

WEBINAR: MINNESOTA COMMUNITY & LABOR ESCALATION  - JANUARY 9
 (BARGAINING FOR THE COMMON GOOD)

 

Minnesota organizers come together to discuss collective power and
organizing a mass strike as they gear up for an unprecedented 2024

TUESDAY, JANUARY 9 · 6PM EST  (1 hour 30 minutes)

REGISTER HERE
[[link removed]]

Minnesota labor unions and their community partners are gearing up for
an unprecedented compression of potential strikes and community
actions with a deadline of the first week of March 2024. Representing
tens of thousands of workers with contracts expiring and other
deadlines at that time, the groups are working together to align their
demands and narratives to win at the bargaining table and push
politicians at city hall and the state capitol.

Join Bargaining for The Common Good
[[link removed]], In These Times
[[link removed]], The Center for Innovation in Worker
Organization
[[link removed]], CUNY
School of Labor and Urban Studies [[link removed]], The Action
Center on Race and The Economy [[link removed]], The
Kalmanovitz Initiative [[link removed]], Workday
Magazine
[[link removed]], SEIU
[[link removed]] and other partners for a webinar featuring labor
and community leaders from across the movement, including:

* GREG NAMMACHER, President of SEIU Local 26
[[link removed]]
* JENNIFER ARNOLD, Co-Director of Inquilinxs Unidxs por Justicia
[[link removed]]
* VERONICA MENDEZ MOORE, Co-Director of CTUL [[link removed]]
* MARCIA HOWARD, First Vice President of Minneapolis Federation of
Teachers and Educational Support Professionals
[[link removed]]
* JANAÉ BATES, Director of Communications of ISAIAH
[[link removed]]
* PHILLIP CRYAN, Executive Vice President, SEIU Healthcare MN & IA
[[link removed]]

MN has inspired workers and communities across the country by building
powerful union and community alignments that can win big at the
bargaining table, in the community, and in the legislature. Our
speakers will give us an insider's look at what it took to build this
alignment over the last few decades, and what’s possible in this
spring’s escalation.

 

EMERGENCY SUMMIT FOR GAZA  -  CHICAGO AND VIRTUAL  --  JANUARY 12
AND 13  (RAINBOW PUSH COALITION)

 

 

Rainbow PUSH Coalition
930 East 50th Street Chicago, IL 60615

ALONG WITH REV. JACKSON, THE SUMMIT WILL FEATURE SUCH ESTEEMED
SPEAKERS AS Dr. James Zogby, Peter Beinart, Congressman Jonathan
Jackson, Rabbi Brant Rosen, Rev. Fahed Abu Akel, former Ohio State
Senator Nina Turner, Illinois State Representative Abdelnasser Rashid,
Rev. Frederick Haynes, author Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, Dr. Cornel
West, and IfNotNow national spokesperson Eva Borgwardt. 

Hear from Rabbi Arthur Waskow and Rabbi Phyllis Berman
[[link removed]] on
why they are joining Rev. Jackson, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, the Arab
American Institute, Churches for Middle East Peace, Faith for Black
Lives, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, IfNotNow, the Jewish Voice
for Peace Rabbinical Council, Jewish Voice for Peace Action, the
Muslim Civic Coalition, Progressive Democrats for America, Red Letter
Christians, Tsuru for Solidarity, Sojourners, and the U.S. Palestinian
Council in Chicago. 

Along with a death toll of over 20,000, this war has also had a deeply
troubling polarizing impact at home. Hate crimes and discrimination
against American Jews and Arab Americans has risen horrifically. We
will not be divided. JOIN US IN CHICAGO AND ONLINE TO COME TOGETHER
TO SAY, “ENOUGH.”
[[link removed]] Enough
to the relentless destruction in Gaza. Enough to the decades of U.S.
unconditional aid in the form of instruments of death. Enough to the
occupation. ENOUGH TO WAR. ENOUGH TO VIOLENCE. ENOUGH TO HATE. IT’S
TIME FOR PEACE. 

RSVP IN PERSON OR ONLINE NOW
[[link removed]]

Agenda:

* BUILDING ON THE LEGACY OF DR. KING AND REV. JACKSON
* WHAT PALESTINIANS ARE ENDURING
* THE MASS MOBILIZATIONS OCCURRING IN OUR CITIES & ON OUR CAMPUSES 
--  THE MASS/DIVERSE MOBILIZATIONS OCCURRING IN OUR CITIES & ON OUR
CAMPUSES: A NEW GENERATION SPEAKS
* CEASEFIRE, SAVING LIVES AND BUILDING PEACE
* WHAT CAN BE DONE?
 

[[link removed]]

Watch here [[link removed]]  

 

“WAGING ART” EXHIBITION OPENING AND BOOK EVENT  --  JANUARY 14
 (PUFFIN FOUNDATION)

 

January 14, 2024 4:00 pm
Cost: $10 Suggested Donation
Location: 20 Puffin Way Teaneck, NJ 07666
Tickets and Reservations [[link removed]]

ENJOY THE ART AND POETRY OF JAN BARRY AND MANY OTHER MILITARY VETERANS
AS THEY PROCESS THEIR NIGHTMARES OF WAR THROUGH CREATIVITY.

The Puffin Cultural Forum celebrates the publication of _Waging Art:
Tackling Grief and Trauma with Creative Arts_, a collection of essays
and art by author, activist, and veteran Jan Barry. _Waging
Art_ conveys extraordinary stories and life lessons from writing and
art programs for military veterans and family members wrestling with
the nightmares of war.

Poetry performances by Jan Barry, Jennifer Pacanowski, James Yee, Walt
Nygard, and Tara Krause will be featured.

The event also serves as an exhibition opening for the accompanying
art show of the same name. The show will feature artwork by military
veterans affiliated with Frontline Arts and the Secaucus Vet Center
Art Group. Invited artists include Jim Fallon, Tara Krause, David
Keefe, Walt Nygard, Ron Erickson, Barry Jensen, Walter Mack, Mark
Oldland, Nate Lewis, Eli Wright, and James Yee. THE EXHIBITION WILL
BE ON VIEW FROM JANUARY 13TH TO FEBRUARY 29TH.

PLEASE NOTE: N95 or equivalent masks are required. A limited quantity
will be available at the door for those without one.

SUGGESTED DONATION: $10 (can be paid in cash or check at the door)

RSVP AT: [link removed]
[[link removed]]

Reservations can also be made via: 201-836-3499

_“Waging Art… is a heartrending portrait of America today, and the
harm too many ‘perpetual’ wars have inflicted upon the hearts and
souls of our veterans… Having waged war, these veterans are now
creating art with the same intensity and fervor, and it is a patriotic
and very humanistic fervor…”_ —John Ketwig, author of _Vietnam
Reconsidered: The War, the Times, and Why They Matter._

JAN BARRY, a Teaneck resident and retired reporter for the _Bergen
Record_, is the New Jersey coordinator for the Warrior Writers
project. A US Army veteran of the Vietnam War, he recently served a
term as the Veterans For Peace Poet Laureate. An author of more than a
dozen books of poetry and prose, his recent works include _Earth
Songs II: Poems of Love, Loss, and Life,_ and _Sound Off: Warrior
Writers NJ_ (co-editor). He creates art with Frontline Arts (formerly
Combat Paper NJ) and the Secaucus Vet Center Art Group. He has
performed spoken word poetry at many locales, most recently at the
Newark Public Library and Pan Asian Repertory Theatre off-Broadway in
New York, in collaboration with Iraq War veteran Jennifer Pacanowski.

* Reader Comments
[[link removed]]
* Donald Trump
[[link removed]]
* 14th amendment
[[link removed]]
* Fascism
[[link removed]]
* GOP
[[link removed]]
* Jan. 06 Capitol Insurrection
[[link removed]]
* Republican Party
[[link removed]]
* MAGA
[[link removed]]
* Make America Great Again
[[link removed]]
* 2024 Elections
[[link removed]]
* Right-wing politics
[[link removed]]
* Right-wing agenda
[[link removed]]
* slavery
[[link removed]]
* Nikki Haley
[[link removed]]
* Racism
[[link removed]]
* Israel
[[link removed]]
* Palestine
[[link removed]]
* Gaza
[[link removed]]
* anti-Semitism
[[link removed]]
* Claudine Gay
[[link removed]]
* Harvard
[[link removed]]
* war crimes
[[link removed]]
* Ceasefire
[[link removed]]
* Palestine solidarity
[[link removed]]
* Labor Movement
[[link removed]]
* literature
[[link removed]]
* Veterans
[[link removed]]
* Cartoons
[[link removed]]
* resources
[[link removed]]
* Announcements
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]