.
Quote of the Month
“It is never too late to be what you might have been.”
I Beg Your Pardon?
A headline in the New York Times this past month read: IN A SWEEPING ACT, BIDEN COMMUTES 1,500 SENTENCES. With “sub heads” then going on to note: A RECORD FOR ONE DAY. Followed by… Most Had Been Placed in Home Confinement During Pandemic.
What da?
Some further clarification is forthcoming in the first couple of paragraphs, telling us that 39 of those had been convicted of non-violent crimes, with the remainder consisting of those being those released from prison and placed in home confinement during the corona virus pandemic.
In so doing Biden issued this statement: “America was built on the promise of possibility and second chances.” And he offers a further explanation by way of…”to help reunite families, strengthen communities and reintegrate individuals back into society.”
It is suggested that as a Senator, Biden championed a crime bill in 1994 that he has since expressed regret for. Subsequently, he was committed during the 2020 campaign, to addressing the long drug sentences that resulted. Then most controversial, and just recently added, being his transferring all those on death row— but three— to a life in prison with no chance for parole. And on the cusp of a new year, today is not a day in which I am inclined to get into polemics on the death penalty.
Prominently noted of course, is that Biden pardoned his son Hunter; convicted of gun possession and pleaded guilty to tax evasion. Given its scope and unusual terms (it covers any crimes Hunter may have committed between January 1, 2014 and December 1st of this year—11 years?!), it is particularly curious. Bernie Sanders has said: ”I think the precedent being set is kind of a dangerous one. It was a very wide open pardon which could, under different circumstances, lead to problems in terms of future presidents.” (John Stewart too wondered, comedically of course, about the specificity of that time factor).
Then in some depth, the nuances associated with pardons and commutations by Biden specifically, and of presidents in general, are addressed. And for the record, a pardon wipes out a conviction, while a commutation leaves the guilty verdict intact but reduces some or all of the punishment. And that there is a filing process which goes through the Office of the Pardon Attorney, a part of the Justice Department. Which received 12,000 requests for clemency during Biden’s 4 years in office. While that’s a high number, maybe not so, when considered in the context of the almost 1.9 million incarcerated in the U.S.?
And if you’ve ever been curious as to who is locked up, and for what, and are a lover of colorful pie charts— as I am regardless of subject matter— "this one's a beaut." As an old uncle would say.
Of course, looming up ahead is Trump’s vow to issue pardons “on day one” in his return to the presidency, to all those who attacked the Capital on that infamous January 6th. Which resulted in over 900 convictions. Folks he has called “heroes.” (Wonder what Mike Pence calls them?).
What set me to wonder after reading this article, was not the issue of who should or shouldn’t be pardoned. But rather, that which has always grabbed me as regards to this practice in presidential largesse: What gives the President the sole power to issue pardons? A question I can never remember being discussed anywhere.
Given our heralded three branches of government, the executive, judicial and legislature, a presidential pardon seems antithetical to our beloved “checks and balances,” does it not? But there it is, right in the constitution: Article II, Section 2, Clause 1. Which gives the president the power to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."
It started with, as one might guess, George Washington. Who in 1795 gave amnesty to participants in the Whiskey Rebellion; a violent protest against a tax on whiskey. “The alarm was raised, and more than 500 armed men attacked the fortified home of tax inspector named John Neville” (Wikipedia). Holy Bourbon Batman! That must have been some home. Larger than Mar-a-Largo? 500 armed men? (And nary a woman?)
Library of Congress
Doesn't this invite abuses of power? Something apparently the Founding Fathers did not consider to be that threatening in the overall scheme of things, as invariably they felt it involved individuals and not the nation’s issues at large. But certainly, it can and arguably has. Depending of course on what side of the political fence one has pitched one’s tent.
As to what can be done about it? Congress could limit the pardon power legislatively. One such bill was issued on that score during the 117th Congress (2001-2003), first session in H.J. RES4, but apparently went nowhere. And just last month, Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., who has introduced a constitutional amendment limiting presidential pardon powers in several congressional terms defended Biden’s decision, but said he hoped those who were critical of the decision would co-sponsor his measure. Good luck with that.
Just one more quirky thing we’ve seen come to the forefront of our system of government in recent times. With all the attendant false equivalencies that come along for the ride. But pardoning, whether of a few or many, strikes me as an action more befitting a despot; not any president of the United States. Happy New Year.
Word of the Month
polemics po·lem·ics/pəˈlemiks
noun
1: an aggressive attack on or refutation of the opinions or principles of another
2: the art or practice of disputation or controversy —usually used in plural but singular or plural in
construction
Etymology
French polémique, from Middle French, from polemique controversial, from Greek polemikos warlike, hostile, from polemos war; perhaps akin to Greek pelemizein to shake.
First Known Use
1626, in the meaning defined at sense 1:
Used in a sentence
An enduring example of polemics in American history are The Federalist Papers, which contain essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison.
or
Today is not a day in which I am inclined to get into polemics on the death penalty.
Inauguration Flagellation
We the effete
failed to compete
battleground defeat
the body politic not going our way.
Nothing left for a wiseman to say
nor a donkey given to bray.
Another Christmas Arriving, in Passing
As taken unedited from first thoughts in a journal entry, on the morning of...
YouTube
!
I recently read somewhere, about something, of which I can’t remember (“Hon, where did I put that magazine? Or was it online?”), except that somewhere within the essay, about making one point or another, the writer said that such and such... “had gone the way of the exclamation point.” Really?!
First off, were I to make an analogy on extinction, I would have used the phone booth. Of which I’ve written a poem about in fond remembrance. Especially those made of wood with folding doors. A private domain. And with a stack of nickels and...where was I? Oh, but as for the exclamation point going away? No way. If anything, the opposite is true in my view.
Though it’s not as though I’ve counted them. Well, except in my own MuseLetters. Being borderline OCD does have its limits. In eleven issues in 2024, the exclamation point pops up only 43 times, over the course of what? An estimated 30,000 words? And often in quoting or referencing others. Though on social media that's another story.
Oddly enough, this somewhat flamboyant piece of punctuation has stirred a lot of passion throughout its life. You might even say polemics. The first record of ! and with an ellipsis becoming my favorite form of punctuation...
“Note of exclamation is from a 1656 guide to rhetoric, and indeed the field of influence of ! enlarged, encompassing any eruption or “pathetical sentence” as Dr. Samuel Johnson writes in his Dictionary of 1765. ! has finally made its mark.”(Source: I forget)
A man who strikes me as having a face made for punctuation.
F. Scott Fitzgerald was not a fan of them. Even when sober. Once reputedly said that the use of an exclamation point was like laughing at your own joke. Of course, if we could write as he, with such poetic eloquence, there would be no need for them. Just imagine if he had closed out The Great Gatsby with …”So we beat on! Boats against the current! Born back ceaselessly into the past!” Ugh.
Though I wonder what he thought about Faulkner, who was no writing slouch, using one right there in the title no less, of his novel Absalom, Absalom! Right up there on any list of the greatest American novels of all time.
One nattering nabob of negativism (to borrow a phrase once alliterated by Spiro Agnew), writer and physician Lewis Thomas (a Princeton and the Harvard Medical School grad), was even more emphatic in his disdain for this piece of punctuation. He went on about it:
“Look! they say, look at what I just said! How amazing is my thought! If a sentence really has something of importance to say, something quite remarkable, it doesn't need a mark to point it out. And if it is really, after all, a banal sentence needing more zing, the exclamation point simply emphasizes its banality!”
On the other (writing) hand, Tom Wolfe, American author and journalist widely known for his association with New Journalism, has no problem with ! “People complain about my exclamation points, but I honestly think that's the way people think. I don't think people think in essays; it's one exclamation point to another.”
He’s right about that, as they have more less permeated the pop culture for a long time now. Even popping up on titles of familiar entities. Think... Yahoo! Jeopardy! Moulin Rouge! Mamma Mia! Oliver! Oh, God! To name a few.
Though Jazz musician Jackie McClean in his 1960’s album, might have gone a bit overboard with it on the jacket.
And in the department of overboard, there’s the late Terry Pratchett of the U.K. He, a knighted English author, humorist, and satirist, best known for the Discworld series of 41 comic fantasy novels published between 1983 and 2015, once said: “Five exclamation marks: the sure sign of an insane mind.”
Well, there must be a lot of insanity out there. Especially on social media. Where there aren’t enuf !!!!!! to
express one’s support and enthusiasm for that, which in my POV, don't warrant this excessiveness. A lazy
way to express oneself in lieu of words? Or should I say, a lazy way to express oneself in lieu of words!
And speaking of lazy, this all reminds me too, that I can’t wait for another season of watching baseball
As for the onslaught of emojis in our lives?! That for another day.
January in Amsterdam
A bicycle outside the Anne Frank Huis
Sits enchained in a virgin snow.
The canal, like hell, has frozen over.
Whose bike? Not hers. She may never even
Have learned how to ride. What with
The war; the hiding; the being found out.
Though surly Otto must have taught her—
Sundays in Merwedeplein?
Steadying the seat as she wrestled with her balance?
I was once given a ride down those streets
On the back of a bike
Of a girl so angelic I almost cried.
My arms wrapped about her as our laughter shattered
The delicate glass of a summer night.
We woke up the kinfolk
When we arrived at the house.
One ride of passage...
One ride never taken.
MuseLetter \’myüz-‘le-tər noun
1: a personal message, inspired by a muse of one's own creation, addressed to a person or organization, in the course of which, the sender becomes absorbed in thought; especially turning something over in the mind meditatively and often inconclusively.
2: a letter from a poet, or one who envisions oneself as such, in which he or she “muses” on that which is perceived to be news, or newsworthy, usually in some ironic or absurd way.
MuseLetter \’myüz-‘le-tər noun
1: a personal message, inspired by a muse of one's own creation, addressed to a person or organization, in the course of which, the sender becomes absorbed in thought; especially turning something over in the mind meditatively and often inconclusively.
2: a letter from a poet, or one who envisions oneself as such, in which he or she “muses” on that which is perceived to be news, or newsworthy, usually in some ironic or absurd way.
no September issue
MuseLetter \’myüz-‘le-tər noun
1: a personal message, inspired by a muse of one's own creation, addressed to a person or organization, in the course of which, the sender becomes absorbed in thought; especially turning something over in the mind meditatively and often inconclusively.
2: a letter from a poet, or one who envisions oneself as such, in which he or she “muses” on that which is perceived to be news, or newsworthy, usually in some ironic or absurd way.
The date is February 22, 2022. When you write it, 2/22/22, it’s a palindrome, meaning it reads the same forward and backward. It also falls on a Tuesday, which is now referred to as Twosday.
It’s the most exceptional date in over a decade, according to palindrome enthusiast Aziz Inan. He’s a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Portland in Oregon, and he has been studying palindrome dates for over 14 years.
The last time there was a ubiquitous six-digit palindrome date was November 11, 2011, Inan noted. It’s written 11/11/11.
That a professor actually “studies” palindromic dates? The piece goes on to note that...
In Sacramento, California, 222 couples will participate in a wedding at the State Capitol. The ceremony starts at 2 p.m. PT and will conclude at precisely 2:22 p.m PT.
A sort of OCD on steroids.
My notice of numerical patterns goes beyond just date recognition. And when they occur, I might be given to reaching for my cell phone or pen to capture it.
Living in a high-rise of twenty floors with two elevators, I’d often have to wait in the lobby for a while, looking above the doors to get a sense of when the next elevator would be arriving. Within the seven years I'd lived there, I’d never seen this till one day not long before I moved out of the building. And it especially caught my eye what with that highly anticipated, alliterative, year up ahead. And it also representing the standard for good vision. Click!
When I reported this in the context of some MuseLetter piece I was doing at the time, I heard from many people recounting their own experiences with improbable numerical alignments in their lives. Nothing was too trivial to mention either.
In a situation years before, while driving my car, I noticed that I was approaching an odd (literally and figuratively) alignment on my odometer. One I’d never seen before or will ever again. I pulled over to not only capture it, but as it was suggestive to me of a line from a classic Robert Frost poem, I later added it to the photo.
This next, falls into the proverbial “What are the odds !?" As I recorded it in my journal in part...
2/2/2
In this, a palindromic year...on this Groundhog Day... on a day with
deuces wild... I came back from the mailbox with a check written out
to me, for $2.22!
“Dear Cardmember:
Enclosed is a refund check for a credit balance on your account.”
I still have it.
Which brings me to the arrival of August, the 8th month of the year.
My birthday is on the 20th. My father’s (he passed away almost 50 years ago), is on the 24th. So in this year of 2024, both of these dates are numerically intertwined. As if carved in stone, this is why I
identify the date in this manner at the top of this month's MuseLetter. A sequence in chronology that can only occur once for all time. Though in effect for 31 days.
Again, I don’t see any absolute meaning in numbers as do those in the three categories I’ve outlined. But rather a sense of something that you can’t quite put into words. It jumping out at me, as if to ask rhetorically, "how about that."
I will now think about him in a way that I never quite do, even on those special days that come and go each year. Father’s Day, his birthday, the anniversary of his death. And it seems to tie back as well to the time that has passed; the distance travelled.
But of course, in going beyond the numbers, your “mileage” will vary. And I'm all eyes if you would like to share. I think it fascinating and fun stuff. Obviously.