“So for a Republican senator, what’s the political calculation on impeachment?” There is part of the problem, isn’t it, Dr. Richardson? Not how to uphold the oath they swore, not how to best serve their state, not how to best serve the country, but what is the political cost. They need to have their oaths repeated to them over and over…
“So for a Republican senator, what’s the political calculation on impeachment?” There is part of the problem, isn’t it, Dr. Richardson? Not how to uphold the oath they swore, not how to best serve their state, not how to best serve the country, but what is the political cost. They need to have their oaths repeated to them over and over and over. “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
Nauseous politics as usual no more. Wasn't this a prime pillar of trumpism? Wouldn't it be down right refreshing if politicians put country over party?
I wonder what kind of impact these words, the oath, would make on the general voting populace? Would it make more of them pause and think about who they are voting for? How much of the general populace is even familiar with this oath? Maybe it needs to be put out there and discussed more than it is.
Sadly, I believe that few people understand the gravity of an oath. I distinctly recall as I was being sworn into my position of a deport sheriff wondering if the “keep my private life unsullied” portion would ever be used as termination fodder simply because I am gay. It wasn’t, I am completely out at the Office, and am into my 36th year of service.
The act of oath-taking is serious and not pro-forma.
Our City Manager had everyone witness new employees oath taking. I do have to say I still get a chuckle out of the phrase "without mental reservation". I wondered what I was getting myself into that I was not aware about! But the public oath taking kept it current for all employees.
This is the problem. Oaths are simply the price of admission to a prestigious club. Easily sworn and quickly forgotten.
“Republicans must focus all their energy on regaining the majority in Congress. To do so, consult a third Victorian-era prime minister, Benjamin Disraeli, who believed in party loyalty. “It is not becoming in any Minister to decry party who has risen by party,” he declared. “We should always remember that if we were not partisans, we should not be Ministers.”
Thank you for the reference to the book about Disraeli and Gladstone, which I found a review of in The New York Times; I remember reading a biography of Disraeli in high school. But while I spent quite a bit of time searching for the meaning of "GOM," I could not find a definition appropriate to what I suspect is its context.
“So for a Republican senator, what’s the political calculation on impeachment?” There is part of the problem, isn’t it, Dr. Richardson? Not how to uphold the oath they swore, not how to best serve their state, not how to best serve the country, but what is the political cost. They need to have their oaths repeated to them over and over and over. “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
Nauseous politics as usual no more. Wasn't this a prime pillar of trumpism? Wouldn't it be down right refreshing if politicians put country over party?
I wonder what kind of impact these words, the oath, would make on the general voting populace? Would it make more of them pause and think about who they are voting for? How much of the general populace is even familiar with this oath? Maybe it needs to be put out there and discussed more than it is.
Sadly, I believe that few people understand the gravity of an oath. I distinctly recall as I was being sworn into my position of a deport sheriff wondering if the “keep my private life unsullied” portion would ever be used as termination fodder simply because I am gay. It wasn’t, I am completely out at the Office, and am into my 36th year of service.
The act of oath-taking is serious and not pro-forma.
Congratulations on your version of oath keeping. An also on being at ease with who you are.
Our City Manager had everyone witness new employees oath taking. I do have to say I still get a chuckle out of the phrase "without mental reservation". I wondered what I was getting myself into that I was not aware about! But the public oath taking kept it current for all employees.
This is the problem. Oaths are simply the price of admission to a prestigious club. Easily sworn and quickly forgotten.
“Republicans must focus all their energy on regaining the majority in Congress. To do so, consult a third Victorian-era prime minister, Benjamin Disraeli, who believed in party loyalty. “It is not becoming in any Minister to decry party who has risen by party,” he declared. “We should always remember that if we were not partisans, we should not be Ministers.”
Hugh Hewitt in today’s Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/07/republicans-stop-fighting-among-yourselves/
Gladstone was a well-meaning drip; Disraeli was witty and incisive, a better dinner guest. But for policy and principle I'll take the GOM any time.
R Aldous, The Lion and the Unicorn
Thank you for the reference to the book about Disraeli and Gladstone, which I found a review of in The New York Times; I remember reading a biography of Disraeli in high school. But while I spent quite a bit of time searching for the meaning of "GOM," I could not find a definition appropriate to what I suspect is its context.