#there’s nothing good democracies r doing for world. zero

[letterboxd]

Quarantine Rentals.

Ten indie films you can rent right now, as recommended by Letterboxd members.

Sure, Scoob!. Yes, Extraction. The Wrong Missy, okay. On the other hand, there are plenty of interesting indie films available for VOD and virtual screenings right now that haven’t necessarily had the benefit of studio backing, big stars, film festivals, red carpets or other ‘normal-circumstances’ coverage to build word-of-mouth.

So, because these are abnormal circumstances, we sent our West Coast editor Dominic Corry on a hunt through your recent reviews to find ten under-seen but enthusiastically received indies that you can rent today.

Thanks to our partnership with JustWatch, you can find availability details on each film’s Letterboxd page—and Dominic has also helpfully provided further links to make it that much easier to support these indie films.

Powerbomb Directed by R. Zachary Shildwachter and B.J. Colangelo

Starring Matt Capiccioni (better known Matt Cross, or M-Dogg 20, or Son of Havoc) as an up-and-coming wrestling star, and Wes Allen as the obsessive fan who kidnaps him, Powerbomb is “The King of Comedy set in the indie wrestling scene, which is a cool fucking concept if nothing else,” according to Dustin Baker. “Luckily, there’s some witty writing and good performances to back up that concept to create something that’s surprisingly a lot of fun.”

Don’t worry if you know nothing about wrestling, writes Justin Nordell: “As someone who has zero reference point for wrestling, this film not only made it accessible but enthralling!”

A guide to where you can watch Powerbomb can be found on the film’s website.

Arkansas Directed by Clark Duke

Quietly ubiquitous comedic actor Clark Duke (Kick-Ass, Hot Tub Time Machine) directed and co-wrote this neo-noir in which he stars alongside such high-profile talent as Vince Vaughn, John Malkovich and Liam Hemsworth. Everyone agrees that the film wears its influences on its sleeve. Chainsaw Massacre “loved nearly every minute of this deliberately paced descendant of Tarantino and the Coen brothers. [But] comparing it to those […] filmmakers does it a disservice though, because, while you can feel their influence, first-time director Clark Duke does have his own distinct style”.

While noting that it marks another interesting performance in Vaughn’s recent emergence as a worthy cinematic lowlife, Tummis would also “like to point out that Liam Hemsworth was great in this”.

Arkansas is available via various digital outlets, as indicated on its official website.

What She Said: The Art of Pauline Kael Directed by Rob Garver

Before the Letterboxd era, film criticism was a much more exclusive realm, and no one critic loomed larger in that realm than The New Yorker’s Pauline Kael—so iconic that true cineastes of her time referred to her simply by her first name. So it behooves you, good Letterboxd member, to familiarize yourself with this master of the form via this new documentary.

In a review that feels like it could apply to any number of Letterboxd members, kmarus says “From what I’ve encountered of her criticism, Kael and I disagree on a lot of things, but one thing that is readily apparent to anyone who reads her writing is that she genuinely cares about movies”.

Letterboxd’s London correspondent (and professional critic) Ella Kemp felt personally validated watching the film. “It’s magic, she’s magic, this is why we needed her and why we always need movies, and why I want to keep talking about them. It’s nice if you read me, if you like me or if you agree with me—but even if you don’t, I know I’ll be sticking around for a while anyway. I’m nowhere near done yet.”

You can rent the film here.

Slay The Dragon Directed by Barak Goodman and Chris Durrance

The insidious and nebulous practice of gerrymandering is the focus of this acclaimed documentary. As member Andrew Chrzanowski ominously intones, the film is “never more timely than right here and right now” and “demands you to watch, so you may witness in a comprehensive and detailed way the metastasis of the most malignant cancer on our democracy: gerrymandered districts and redrawn borders by Republicans, especially after the 2010 elections”.

Guyatthemovies says the film “does a phenomenal job of taking a topic that may seem confusing for most who are not familiar and breaking it down to simplistic terms, explaining the impact of gerrymandering [through] well-known examples” and that “this is a must-watch for anyone concerned about the state of politics today”.

You can support your favorite theater by renting the film here.

Judy & Punch Directed by Mirrah Foulkes

Mia Wasikovska and Damon Herriman, two of the more interesting Australian actors working in film today, and each possessed of a fantastically cinematic face, star in this one-of-a-kind film as a couple operating a marionette show in a town about to bubble over with tension. Like the classic puppet characters that title the film, they come to blows.

The film is the feature-directing debut of Aussie actor and filmmaker Mirrah Foulkes, and Letterboxd member CJ Johnson says she “announces herself as a feature auteur of serious talent and limitless potential with […] a film whose great artfulness is only outdone by its sheer, breath-taking originality”.

Jess V.K. warns us to “go into this film with no expectations, because whatever you were expecting is not what you will see”.

Rent the film here.

On A Magical Night Directed by Christophe Honoré

This French comedy (of sorts) presents a fresh perspective on a very French activity: infidelity. It begins with a woman, Maria (Chiara Mastroianni, daughter of Italian-French acting royalty Marcello Mastroanni and Catherine Deneuve) deciding to leave her husband, and taking up residence across the street where she can observe him.

As Allison M. explains, “like a modernized version of A Christmas Carol, spirits living and dead come to haunt Maria to help her make a decision about whether or not she should return to her husband. It is complete with a phantom baby, reference to a past threesome, and kissing cousins”.

The film caused Gmacauley to ruminate: “Have you ever thought to yourself that when you get old you’d like to travel to the past and sleep with your significant other while they’re young again? Well now I have.”

Watch it here; and also seek out Nicolas Bedos’ marital fantasy romp, La Belle Époque.

The Assistant Directed by Kitty Green

This austere take on the #MeToo era stars Ozark breakout Julia Garner as a bottom-rung assistant to a never-seen, New York-based film producer clearly modeled on Harvey Weinstein. Through one long workday, we are witness to the manipulative practices that enable such a figure, without ever landing on a single incident that she can cite as tangible proof of his behavior, which helps detail the impossibility of her—and countless others’—situation.

While the film’s understated style has thrown some viewers off, that’s entirely the point according to Ryne Walley, who says it “aims true with unwavering confidence. The calculated pace and concise nature of The Assistant hides very little, echoing the countless cases of abuse and depravity that’ve been disclosed… an agonizingly taut feat of filmmaking… Your heart sinks with each passing hour”.

“So quietly powerful, this is a female film through and through. Gut wrenching in the simplest way,” writes Letterboxd member Katie.

Ella Kemp interviewed Green about The Assistant for Letterboxd. The film’s official website lists various VOD options.

Capital in the Twenty-First Century Directed by Justin Pemberton

French economist Thomas Piketty’s 2013 book about income equality forms the basis of this documentary, which takes on a new pertinence in the coronavirus era.

“It’s a sobering trip,” says Joey Jepson. “As if Covid-19 wasn’t enough to send you into a deep depression, Capital in the Twenty-First Century presents a thesis that seems to indicate that if we don’t course correct, we will see a further divide and evaporation of the middle-class.”

Michael agrees: “Very clearly and lucidly explains why we’re fucked if we don’t start regulating capital.” Eep.

Rent the film here.

Spaceship Earth Directed by Matt Wolf

The 1991 biosphere experiment—in which a group of people sealed themselves off from the world (hey!) to investigate human self-sustainability—is the subject of this documentary, which, like Capital in the Twenty-First Century, also hits a little different in the current moment.

Kellyabailey is on board: “I’m fuckin inspired, man. I wanna see what I’m capable of and finally start that commune I’ve been dreaming up.”

Smooz was impressed with how the film didn’t make fun of its subjects: “It’s rare for a documentarian […] dealing with kooks to produce a movie with any sort of empathy. This movie takes the kooks involved in one of the kookiest, most ridiculed projects in recent decades and honestly shows their successes, visionary moments, shortcomings, and failures while resisting the urge to dunk on them and give them swirlies.”

Letterboxd editor-in-chief Gemma Gracewood spoke to Wolf about his film—and what movies he’d choose to take with into a biosphere—in this interview. Rent the movie here.

Aren’t You Happy Directed by Susanne Heinrich

Those in the mood for something different might do well to check out this aesthetically bold German film—think Wes Anderson meets The Love Witch meets the movie Robert De Niro takes Cybill Shepherd to see on their ‘date’ in Taxi Driver—following a young woman named Mädchen (Marie Rathscheck) through various strange encounters.

Arvid Schmiedehausen says it “might be the most artistic film I have ever watched. It is highly ambitious in its attempts to deconstruct society and western values through fourteen episodes, with each being a persiflage on one unique aspect of it”. [We had to look up “persiflage” too.]

Ian A. Chapman writes that “not in anyway adhering to convention, Aren’t You Happy melancholically meanders through rendezvous allowing time for delicious dialogue. Visually pleasing, the colour choices neatly frame the scenes and set the tones allowing for a shorthand into the vibe”.

Rent the movie here.

Related content

Our list of art house films screening online now.

#indie film #independent film #indie films to rent #vod #streaming #virtual screening #virtual release #quarantine films #letterboxd #letterboxd recommendations #spaceship earth #the assistant #kitty green #vince vaughn

[sthayil]

2020 Reading Goal Outcomes

Goal: 52 books in 2020, re-reads don’t count, romance novels don’t count, and read at least half non-fiction.

Result: 53 books, but only 14 non-fiction. Will try again next year!

Half girlfriend, by Chetan Bhagat. My first time reading this author, which half of India seems to love to hate. An easy read that still had me reflecting on elitism, English, and privilege in India.

Coming out as Dalit, by Yashica Dutt. A heartfelt memoir on caste-based discrimination in India. A very close-hitting book, and I had never thought about caste until I attended the Jaipur Literary festival and heard Dutt speak. I didn’t know the caste of any of my Indian friends, and realised that I probably did not know anyone who was Dalit, and didn’t know anyone who was “out” as Dalit. I thought that the Syrian Christian community was post-caste, but actually we are complicit in upholding caste-based discrimination through the centuries. This book will stay with me for a long time.

The Receptionist, by Janet Groth. A memoir of the author’s decades as receptionist at the New Yorker. I didn’t realise how segregated New York used to be. Got the feeling that this was written for a specific group of people. Favourite quote: “Anyone who cries as easily as you do is pretty tough. You don’t give an inch; you give only tears.”

First They Killed My Father, by Loung Ung. Devastating account of the author’s childhood in Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge regime and genocide.

Bright Stain, by Francesca Bell. Brutal, graceful collection of poetry. “Let me tell you, at forty-two, it is a deep delicious pleasure not to be dewy or fresh as a fucking daisy.”

Homeland, by R. A. Salvatore.

Exile, by R. A. Salvatore.

Sojourn, by R. A. Salvatore. Found a new fantasy author I want to keep following! Only new to me though, R. A. Salvatore is one of the masters of fantasy and his world The Forgotten Realms is apparently very popular in games. This is the first trilogy in his series and I really enjoyed it. Will continue to read from this world.

Dreamer’s Pool, by Juliet Marillier.

Tower of Thorns, by Juliet Marillier.

Den of Wolves, by Juliet Marillier. Rediscovered one of my favourite authors from high school, when I realised the New York public library has a search and hold system so I can request particular books I want! This series was deeply satisfying, there’s nothing better than reading a new series by a beloved author.

The Reproach of Hunger, by David Rieff. A searing critique of the current global food system and the world of development. One hand trying to fix problems the other created. Nothing but a strengthening of the state and deepening of democracy will fix the mess we are in.

Roar, by Cecelia Ahern. A collection of wonderful short stories of women in magical realist situations based on common expressions. Eg. The Woman Who Wore Her Heart on Her Sleeve is a small story about a medical miracle who literally wore her heart on her sleeve. The Woman With A Strong Suit is about a woman who literally searches an entire department store for the perfect suit. Adorable but powerful stories of the voices of women and the bizarre lives we lead in the modern world.

Can You Tolerate This, by Ashleigh Young. A poet’s first non-fiction work, a collection of essays about her life and memories in mainly NZ, along with interesting stories she hears/reads about from elsewhere. I most liked the first story about the skeletal disease, and the long memory of her brother’s Big Red sweater.

A New Dawn, by Various. I feel like I’m cheating by adding this to my non-fiction count. It’s a collection of essays by popular authors, reacting to the Twilight series. Very light reading.

The Fork, the Witch, and the Worm, by Christopher Paolini. A set of short stories that takes place after the Inheritance cycle! I didn’t know he kept writing! This was so exciting to find. A lovely return to a series I read and reread for years when growing up.

Catwoman Soulstealer, by Sarah J. Maas. Saw another book by Maas at the library and had to pick it up. She is always a winner.

The Uses and Abuses of History, by Margaret MacMillan. Never take history simplistically, and that if you go in looking for proof for your plan, there are sufficient examples in history to find what you are looking for. So always be careful.

The Financial Diet, by Chelsea Fagan and Lauren Have. I watch their Youtube channel, so it was nice seeing their book on the shelf here at my sublet. A quick and easy read especially if you watch their videos. Intuitive and reassuring stuff.

Men Explain Things to Me, by Rebecca Solnit. Collection of feminist essays.

Poison Princess, by Kresley Cole

Endless Knight, by Kresley Cole

Dead of Winter, by Kresley Cole

Day Zero, by Kresley Cole

Arcana Rising, by Kresley Cole

The Dark Calling, by Kresley Cole. Kresley Cole’s first YA series, still quite good, but the final book is still not out! Will have to wait for next year to finish this. I would not have started if I realised it wouldn’t end in time.

One Day We’ll All Be Dead And None Of This Will Matter, by Scaachi Kaul. Collection of essays by an Indian Immigrant to Canada. I was fortunate to grow up in Asia. What is my dominant exposure? Did I ever have one?

Doing It, by Hannah Witton. A good book for folks with limited sex ed. My main takeaway is how depressing the side effects list is for almost all methods of female contraception.

Post-Truth, by Matthew D’Ancona. A political and philosophical manifesto, examining what is going on today, and a call for us to challenge it. Facts must be presented in both an emotional and rational way in order to prevail.

Dark Currents, by Jacqueline Carey

Autumn Bones, by Jacqueline Carey

Poison Fruit, by Jacqueline Carey. Found another author whose YA fiction I hadn’t read before. The Terre D’Ange series is still my favourite, but this is good too.

Santa Olivia, by Jacqueline Carey

Saints Astray, by Jacqueline Carey. Another win for Carey!

The Dragon Keeper, by Robin Hobb

Dragon Haven, by Robin Hobb

City of Dragons, by Robin Hobb

Blood of Dragons, by Robin Hobb. So happy to have found a new author! This was a great fantasy series, and for once the dragons were not perfect glorious creatures, but just another species in the world. Will keep reading Hobb.

Eating Animals, by Jonathan Safran Foer. This was good but the topic is so awful. I was off chicken for weeks after reading this and still haven’t fully come back. I’m really thinking about going more and more towards vegetarianism now. 

Pop Empires: Transnational and Diasporic Flows of India and Korea, edited by Allison Alexy, Monika Mehta, Robert Ji-Song Ku, S. Heijin Lee. I finally got around to reading this after attending the book signing in NYC ages ago, and this was such a good collection! I so much enjoyed the different slices of analysis from film, anthropology, history, etc.

The Crystal Shard, by R. A. Salvatore

Streams of Silver, by R. A. Salvatore

The Halfling’s Gem, by R. A. Salvatore. I can see why people like this author, but I wish I had found him earlier, maybe in my early teens. Then I think I would have really loved it. Reading this as an adult just makes me think of other fantasy series where there were higher stakes and the characters were not so perfect all the time. There is a lot of good adventure here, but not much emotion.

Canticle, by R. A. Salvatore

In Sylvan Shadows, by R. A. Salvatore. I spoke too soon. I complained of perfection with Drizzt, but Cadderly’s sheer wimpyness is driving me insane. He’s too good for war, he has “compassion”, but it’s all well and good for all his friends to go to war and kill people, just not precious Cadderly.

Night Masks, by R. A. Salvatore. Alright, he’s starting to grow up, but he is still incredibly squeamish about getting his own hands dirty and the hypocrisy of it is very irritating.

The Fallen Fortress, by R. A. Salvatore.

The Chaos Curse, by R. A. Salvatore.

The Legacy, by R. A. Salvatore.

Starless Night, by R. A. Salvatore. I think I’ll pause here for a bit. Too much Salvatore for me. There are 30 books in this series alone. 

Zelaldinus, by Irwin Allen Sealy. A wonderful amalgamation of bits and pieces of prose and poetry to do with a ghost of Jalaluddin Akbar.

Blood Rights, by Kristen Painter. Started a new series to feed my Maas withdrawals. It’s just okay so far.

Flesh and Blood, by Kristen Painter.

#reading goals #bookworm

[maysoper]

Your Taxpayer Dollars At Work

If you're a US citizen who pays taxes, your tax dollars go towards helping to fund the world's largest military service. Taxes also go to many other places, of course, but US taxes are directed, in part, to funding the military, its staff, and its operations. This isn't Economics 101, so you probably already knew that, but how would it make you feel to know that your tax dollars are going to professional sports franchises in the form of celebrations and honours for the various branches of the military that you already support? Yes, even though you've already poured in a ton of money to build that shiny new arena or stadium, your tax dollars are being given to franchises already owned by billionaires in honour of the military! According to a 2015 report from US Republican Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake entitled Tackling Paid Patriotism, there were a whole bunch of professional sports leagues and teams that benefited from some Department of Defence spending on getting the military a little more of the spotlight. The report goes over each of the "Big Four" sports and how much each team benefited from a Department of Defence contract. Hockey, as it stands, was not immune as six of the 24 NHL teams based in the United States got a little richer thanks to their military demonstrations from 2012-15. Before we look at which teams were contracted by the Department of Defence to celebrate the military and all of its accomplishments, let me say that I have zero stake in this as a political speech. I'm not American, and I certainly don't identify myself as Democrat or Republican. It should be noted, however, that I'm writing this as a simple exercise in information - that American taxpayers should know that they're funding the military to pay professional sports franchises millions of dollars to trot out the flag and wear camouflage. This is the importance of democracy in that you should get a say where your money is being spent, and that say comes in the form of a vote. Aside from that, this article is merely an examination on how much money was spent by the Department of Defence to celebrate their military efforts in professional sports venues. According to the report linked above, the Boston Bruins received payments from the Massachusetts Army National Guard in 2012 and 2013 totalling $280,000 for doing their patriotic duty by celebrating the military. What does $280,000 buy from the Boston Bruins? According to the report found on page 61, among the numerous items that were bought included "[r]ecognition of two MAARNG soldiers and their guests during each home game in November" for both years, "[a]ccess to one luxury box for 18 people and one executive suite for 25 people on military appreciation night" in 2013, "[f]our loge tickets to 10 regular season home games" in 2013, "[f]orty tickets for soldiers recognized during military appreciation month" in both years, and "[f]orty general tickets to Bruins home games" in both years. If you ask me, that sounds a lot like the Bruins charging the Department of Defence for tickets for members of the military who are being honoured by the Bruins. In 2015, there was a Reddit thread that spoke of Jacobs accepting money for the Department of Defence celebrations, but it seems like the people commenting on that forum aren't bothered by the money being spent to buy tickets at the Bruins games. Rather, the one serviceman who does comment is bothered more by the lack of genuine support than he is the spending of taxpayers' money. To me, I'm not sure that this should be mutually exclusive. The other teams included in Senators McCain's and Flake's report include the Carolina Hurricanes ($75,000 over three years), the Florida Panthers ($40,000 over two years), the Minnesota Wild ($570,000 over three years), the Detroit Red Wings ($41,500 over two years), and the Dallas Stars ($34,000 over two years). The one that obviously stands out of these numbers is the amount paid to the Minnesota Wild as the Wild franchise pocketed over half a million dollars for virtually nothing in return.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that those military personnel that were honoured also got tickets to the game so perhaps those costs were rolled into one charge, but $235,000 for the same thing that the Bruins did for $150,000 shows that these contracts are negotiated independently with the individual teams as opposed to the Department of Defence having a blanket contract with terms it would like. Further to the point above, if the Wild offer so little for $235,000 while the Panthers offer seemingly everything and the kitchen sink for the $20,000 they were paid, it seems like some teams do genuinely want to hold these appreciation ceremonies while covering costs for tickets and staffing while others are simply there to pad the owner's wallet. I get that business is business, but that's not the intention of these evenings where fans are asked to honour the men and women serving in the military on behalf of the team. In total, the Department of Defence spent $1,040,500 with six US NHL teams to get varying degrees of military appreciation support. While the current US administration has proposed a budget of $681.1 billion in Department of Defence spending, $1 million spent on getting the servicemen and women a little recognition seems like a drop of water in the ocean. That is, however, still a good chunk of taxes that the government has to raise to do a little advertising that probably should be used elsewhere. Bill Astore, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who writes about the increased militarization of sports, told Howard Bryant of WBUR 90.9 in Boston, "I think our military has made a conscious decision, and that decision was, as much as possible, to work with strong forces within our society. I think our military made a choice to work with the sporting world — and vice versa. I think that's something that's in response to 9/11." Was he surprised by how much money was being spent by the Department of Defence on military appreciation ceremonies? "I hate to say it, but I wasn't completely surprised," Astore told Bryant. "But I was disgusted by it. Patriotic displays, they mean a lot more to me when they're spontaneous. But to learn that these had been paid for — that corporate teams, teams owned by billionaires, basically, were collecting money from the military. Paid for, obviously, by you and me, by the American taxpayer. Well, it was sad." Maybe the serviceman on Reddit was right: the fact that these ceremonies aren't done genuinely as opposed to them being manufactured like a live-action advertisement may actually be worse than the payments for these ceremonies themselves. If there's one thing that I've learned in being the most civilian of civilians, it's that servicepeople take serving their nation very seriously. This was best identified in Rob Reiner's A Few Good Men where the two marines charged with the crime of murder explain to Lt. Caffey about "the code".

If there's one thing you don't do, you do not ignore the code. That's the entire foundation of what these Marines, and the servicepeople in the military today, believe in and entrust when it comes to their existence. Nick Francona, son of MLB manager Terry Francona, is a retired serviceman, and his work with Major League Baseball has left a sour taste in his mouth when it comes to how these professional sports leagues and teams honour the military service personnel. Howard Bryant writes,

"... if you look at kind of the tone of what Memorial Day has become about, it's pretty gross," Nick says. "Even on the teams' official Twitter accounts — a flame emoji for, like, 'Look how hot these camo hats are.' And it's, like, 'Really, guys? That's the plan?' I mean, you can imagine how some of these Gold Star families reacted to that. They were not remotely amused. "I might have asked the question 100 times and said, 'OK, if you're selling a $40 hat, how much of this is going to charity, and where is it going?' I think it's fair to say, if you're an average fan watching Major League Baseball, you're going to be, like, 'Man, these guys are really supportive of the military.'"

And that's the rub. It looks like professional sports leagues and teams ARE supportive of the military when they're actually just conducting business by selling the Department of Defence tickets, luxury suites, and private boxes. And I can't fault the professional sports teams for conducting business - they're businesses, after all - but I do fault them for not being genuine in their support of the military. If there was a payment for tickets to a game for servicepeople and the team turned around and donated that payment to a charity for Veterans or military people, I'd say that's pretty genuine. But when you see the Minnesota Wild pocketing $570,000 over three years, this is nothing more than "paid patriotism" as the McCain/Flake report pointed out.

Unsuspecting audience members became the subjects of paid-marketing campaigns rather than simply bearing witness to teams' authentic, voluntary shows of support for the brave men and women who wear our nation's uniform … [I]t is hard to understand how a team accepting taxpayer funds to sponsor a military appreciation game, or to recognize wounded warriors or returning troops, can be construed as anything other than paid patriotism.

Let me be clear here: I am not saying that professional sports leagues or teams should stop honouring the men and women of the military who risk their lives for the freedoms that we enjoy. What I am saying is that the teams need to be more genuine in taking that large bag of money that the Department of Defence gives them and giving it back to the very men and women they are honouring in their ceremonies through charities that help servicepeople and Veterans. Otherwise, these teams should stop accepting the money - YOUR taxpayer money - and profiting off of it. If you're against giving taxpayer money to billionaires to build rinks and stadiums, you should also be against this suckling off the taxpayers' teat. Ceremonies honouring our countries' bravest men and women shouldn't be financial windfall for pro sports. Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice! from Sports News http://hockey-blog-in-canada.blogspot.com/2018/07/your-taxpayer-dollars-at-work.html

[anchorarcade]

Read Sen. Jeff Flake's full speech from the Senate floor

https://ryanguillory.com/read-sen-jeff-flakes-full-speech-from-the-senate-floor/

Read Sen. Jeff Flake's full speech from the Senate floor

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., gave an emotional speech from the Senate floor on Tuesday, announcing that he will not seek re-election and lashing out at President Donald Trump.

Read his full remarks below:

“Let me begin by noting the somewhat obvious point that these offices that we hold are not (our) offices indefinitely. We are not here simply to mark time. Sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office. And there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles.

Now is such a time.

It must also be said that I rise today with no small measure of regret. Regret because of the state of our disunion. Regret because of the disrepair and destructiveness of our politics. Regret because of the indecency of our discourse. Regret because of the core regret because of the coarseness of our leadership. Regret for the compromise of our moral authority. And by our, I mean all of our complicity in this alarming and dangerous state of affairs. It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end. In this century a new phrase has entered the language to describe the accommodation of a new and undesirable order. That phrase being “the new normal.”

But we must never adjust to the present coarseness of our national dialogue with the tone set at the top. We must never regard as normal the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals. We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country. The personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms and institution, the flagrant disregard for truth and decency, the reckless provocations most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have been elected to serve. None of these appalling features of our current politics should ever be regarded as normal.

We must never allow ourselves to lapse into thinking that, that is just the way things are now. If we simply become inured to this condition thinking that it is just politics as usual, then heaven help us. Without fear of the consequences, and without consideration of the rules of what is politically safe or palatable we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and the conduct of some in our executive branch are normal. They are not normal. Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as telling it like it is, when it is actually just reckless, outrageous and undignified. And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else. It is dangerous to a democracy.

Such behavior does not project strength because our strength comes from our values. It instead projects a corruption of the spirit and weakness. It is often said that children are watching. Well, they are. And what are we going do about that? When the next generation asks us, why didn’t you do something? Why didn’t you speak up? What are we going to say? Mr. President, I rise today to say, enough. We must dedicate ourselves to making sure that the anomalous never becomes the normal. With respect and humility, I must say that we have fooled ourselves for long enough that a pivot to governing is right around the corner. Return to civility and stability right behind it. We know better than that. By now, we all know better than that.

Here today, I stand to say that we would be better served, we would better serve the country by better fulfilling our obligations under the Constitution by adhering to our Article 1, old normal, Mr. Madison’s doctrine of separation of powers. This genius innovation which affirms Madison’s status as true visionary and for which Madison argued in Federalist 51, held that the equal branches of our government would balance and counteract with each other if necessary, he wrote. But what happens if ambition fails to counteract ambition? What happens if stability fails to assert itself in the face of chaos and instability? If decency fails to call out indecency? Were the shoe on the other foot, would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course we wouldn’t.

And we would be wrong if we did.

When we remained silent and failed to act when we know that silence and inaction is the wrong thing to do because of political considerations, because we might make enemies, because we might alienate the base, because we might provoke a primary challenge, because ad infinitum, ad nauseam, when we succumb to those considerations in spite of what should be greater considerings and imperative in defense of our institutions and our liberty we deny our institutions and forsake our obligations.

Those things are far more important than politics.

Now I’m aware that more politically savvy than I will caution against such talk. I’m aware that there is a segment of my party that believes that anything short of complete and unquestioning loyalty to a president who belongs to my party is unacceptable and suspect.

If I have been critical, it is not because I relish criticizing the behavior of the president of the United States. If I have been critical, it’s because I believe it is my obligation to do so, and as a matter and duty of conscience.

The notion that one should stay silent as the norms and values that keep America strong are undermined and as the alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters, the notion that we should say or do nothing in the face of such mercurial behavioral is ahistoric, and I believe profoundly misguided.

A president, a Republican president named Roosevelt had this to say about the president and a citizen’s relationship to the office. Quote: “The president is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole.”

He continued: “Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be — that there should be a full liberty to tell the truth about his acts. And this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.”

President Roosevelt continued: “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by a president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Unquote.

Acting on conscience and principle in a manner — is the manner in which we express our moral selves. And as such loyalty to conscience and principle should supersede loyalty to any man or party.

We can all be forgiven for failing in that measure from time to time. I certainly put myself at the top of the list of those who fall short in this regard. I am holier than none. But too often we rush to salvage principle — not to salvage principle but to forgive and excuse our failures so that we might accommodate them and go right on failing. Until the accommodation itself becomes our principle. In that way, and over time, we can justify almost any behavior and sacrifice any principle. I’m afraid that this is where we now find ourselves.

When a leader correctly identifies real hurt and insecurity in our country and instead of addressing it goes to look for someone to blame, there is perhaps nothing more devastating to a pluralistic society. Leadership knows that most often a good place to start in assigning blame is to look somewhat closer to home. Leadership knows where the buck stops. Humility helps. Character counts. Leadership does not knowingly encourage or feed ugly or debased appetites in us. Leadership lives by the American creed, E Pluribus Unum, from many, one. American leadership looks to the world, and just as Lincoln did, sees the family of man. Humanity is not a zero-sum game. When we have been at our most prosperous, we have been at our most principled. And when we do well, the rest of the world does well. These articles of civic faith have been critical to the American identity for as long as we have been alive. They are our birthright and our obligation. We must guard them jealously and pass them on for as long as the calendar has days. To betray them or to be unserious in their defense is a betrayal of the fundamental obligations of American leadership. And to behave as if they don’t matter is simply not who we are.

Now the efficacy of American leadership around the globe has come into question.

When the United States emerged from World War II, we contributed about half of the world’s economic activity. It would have been easy to secure our dominance keeping those countries who had been defeated or greatly weakened during the war in their place. We didn’t do that. It would have been easy to focus inward.

We resisted those impulses. Instead, we financed reconstruction of shattered countries and created international organizations and institutions that have helped provide security and foster prosperity around the world for more than 70 years. Now it seems that we, the architects of this visionary rules-based world order, that has brought so much freedom and prosperity, are the ones most eager to abandon it.

The implications of this abandonment are profound. And the beneficiaries of this rather radical departure in the American approach to the world — are the ideological enemies of our values.

Despotism loves a vacuum, and our allies are now looking elsewhere for leadership. Why are they doing this? None of this is normal.

And what do we, as United States senators, have to say about it? The principles that underlie our politics, the values of our founding, are too vital to our identity and to our survival to allow them to be compromised by the requirements of politics.

Because politics can make us silent when we should speak, and silence can equal complicity.

I have children and grandchildren to answer to, and so, Mr. President, I will not be complicit or silent.

I decided that I would be better able to represent the people of Arizona and to better serve my country and my conscience by freeing myself of the political consideration that consumed far too much bandwidth and would cause me to compromise far too many principles. To that end, I am announcing today my service in the Senate will conclude at the end of my term in early January 2019. It is clear at this moment that a traditional conservative who believes in limited government and free markets, who is devoted to free trade, who is pro immigration has a narrower and narrower path to nomination in the Republican party — the party that has so long defined itself by its belief in those things. It is also clear to me for the moment that we have given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfied anger and resentment.

To be clear, the anger and resentment that the people feel at the royal mess that we’ve created are justified. But anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy.

There is an undeniable potency to a populist appeal by mischaracterizing or misunderstanding our problems and giving in to the impulse to scapegoat and belittle. The impulse to scapegoat and belittle threatens to turn us into a fearful backward-looking people.

In the case of the Republican Party, those things also threaten to turn us into a fearful backward-looking minority party.

We were not made great as a country by indulging in, or even exalting, our worst impulses — turning against ourselves, glorifying in the things that divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake.

And we did not become the beacon of freedom in the darkest corners of the world by flouting our institutions and failing to understand just how hard won and vulnerable they are. This spell will eventually break. That is my belief. We will return to ourselves once more. And I say the sooner, the better. Because we have a healthy government, we must also have healthy and functioning parties. We must respect each other again in an atmosphere of shared facts and shared values, calmity and good faith.

We must argue our positions fervently and never be afraid to compromise. We must assume the best of our fellow man and always look for the good. Until that day comes, we must be unafraid to stand up and speak out as if our country depends on it. Because it does.

I plan to spend the remaining 14 months of my senate term doing just that.

Mr. President, the graveyard is full of indispensable men and women. None of us here is indispensable, nor were even the great figures of history who toiled at these very desks in this very chamber to shape the country that we have inherited.

What is indispensable are the values they consecrated in Philadelphia and in this place — values which have endured and will endure for so long as men and women wish to remain free. What is indispensable is what we do here in defense of those values. A political career does not mean much if we are complicit in undermining these values.

I thank my colleagues for indulging me here today. I will close by borrowing the words of President Lincoln, who knew more about healthy enmity and preserving our founding values than any other American who has ever lived.

His words from his first inaugural were a prayer in his time and are now no less in ours:

‘We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of our affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely as they will be by the better angels of our nature.’

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.”

Source link

[awesomefelicitylewis-blog]

Read Sen. Jeff Flake's full speech from the Senate floor

https://ryanguillory.com/read-sen-jeff-flakes-full-speech-from-the-senate-floor/

Read Sen. Jeff Flake's full speech from the Senate floor

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., gave an emotional speech from the Senate floor on Tuesday, announcing that he will not seek re-election and lashing out at President Donald Trump.

Read his full remarks below:

“Let me begin by noting the somewhat obvious point that these offices that we hold are not (our) offices indefinitely. We are not here simply to mark time. Sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office. And there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles.

Now is such a time.

It must also be said that I rise today with no small measure of regret. Regret because of the state of our disunion. Regret because of the disrepair and destructiveness of our politics. Regret because of the indecency of our discourse. Regret because of the core regret because of the coarseness of our leadership. Regret for the compromise of our moral authority. And by our, I mean all of our complicity in this alarming and dangerous state of affairs. It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end. In this century a new phrase has entered the language to describe the accommodation of a new and undesirable order. That phrase being “the new normal.”

But we must never adjust to the present coarseness of our national dialogue with the tone set at the top. We must never regard as normal the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals. We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country. The personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms and institution, the flagrant disregard for truth and decency, the reckless provocations most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have been elected to serve. None of these appalling features of our current politics should ever be regarded as normal.

We must never allow ourselves to lapse into thinking that, that is just the way things are now. If we simply become inured to this condition thinking that it is just politics as usual, then heaven help us. Without fear of the consequences, and without consideration of the rules of what is politically safe or palatable we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and the conduct of some in our executive branch are normal. They are not normal. Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as telling it like it is, when it is actually just reckless, outrageous and undignified. And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else. It is dangerous to a democracy.

Such behavior does not project strength because our strength comes from our values. It instead projects a corruption of the spirit and weakness. It is often said that children are watching. Well, they are. And what are we going do about that? When the next generation asks us, why didn’t you do something? Why didn’t you speak up? What are we going to say? Mr. President, I rise today to say, enough. We must dedicate ourselves to making sure that the anomalous never becomes the normal. With respect and humility, I must say that we have fooled ourselves for long enough that a pivot to governing is right around the corner. Return to civility and stability right behind it. We know better than that. By now, we all know better than that.

Here today, I stand to say that we would be better served, we would better serve the country by better fulfilling our obligations under the Constitution by adhering to our Article 1, old normal, Mr. Madison’s doctrine of separation of powers. This genius innovation which affirms Madison’s status as true visionary and for which Madison argued in Federalist 51, held that the equal branches of our government would balance and counteract with each other if necessary, he wrote. But what happens if ambition fails to counteract ambition? What happens if stability fails to assert itself in the face of chaos and instability? If decency fails to call out indecency? Were the shoe on the other foot, would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course we wouldn’t.

And we would be wrong if we did.

When we remained silent and failed to act when we know that silence and inaction is the wrong thing to do because of political considerations, because we might make enemies, because we might alienate the base, because we might provoke a primary challenge, because ad infinitum, ad nauseam, when we succumb to those considerations in spite of what should be greater considerings and imperative in defense of our institutions and our liberty we deny our institutions and forsake our obligations.

Those things are far more important than politics.

Now I’m aware that more politically savvy than I will caution against such talk. I’m aware that there is a segment of my party that believes that anything short of complete and unquestioning loyalty to a president who belongs to my party is unacceptable and suspect.

If I have been critical, it is not because I relish criticizing the behavior of the president of the United States. If I have been critical, it’s because I believe it is my obligation to do so, and as a matter and duty of conscience.

The notion that one should stay silent as the norms and values that keep America strong are undermined and as the alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters, the notion that we should say or do nothing in the face of such mercurial behavioral is ahistoric, and I believe profoundly misguided.

A president, a Republican president named Roosevelt had this to say about the president and a citizen’s relationship to the office. Quote: “The president is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole.”

He continued: “Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be — that there should be a full liberty to tell the truth about his acts. And this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.”

President Roosevelt continued: “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by a president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Unquote.

Acting on conscience and principle in a manner — is the manner in which we express our moral selves. And as such loyalty to conscience and principle should supersede loyalty to any man or party.

We can all be forgiven for failing in that measure from time to time. I certainly put myself at the top of the list of those who fall short in this regard. I am holier than none. But too often we rush to salvage principle — not to salvage principle but to forgive and excuse our failures so that we might accommodate them and go right on failing. Until the accommodation itself becomes our principle. In that way, and over time, we can justify almost any behavior and sacrifice any principle. I’m afraid that this is where we now find ourselves.

When a leader correctly identifies real hurt and insecurity in our country and instead of addressing it goes to look for someone to blame, there is perhaps nothing more devastating to a pluralistic society. Leadership knows that most often a good place to start in assigning blame is to look somewhat closer to home. Leadership knows where the buck stops. Humility helps. Character counts. Leadership does not knowingly encourage or feed ugly or debased appetites in us. Leadership lives by the American creed, E Pluribus Unum, from many, one. American leadership looks to the world, and just as Lincoln did, sees the family of man. Humanity is not a zero-sum game. When we have been at our most prosperous, we have been at our most principled. And when we do well, the rest of the world does well. These articles of civic faith have been critical to the American identity for as long as we have been alive. They are our birthright and our obligation. We must guard them jealously and pass them on for as long as the calendar has days. To betray them or to be unserious in their defense is a betrayal of the fundamental obligations of American leadership. And to behave as if they don’t matter is simply not who we are.

Now the efficacy of American leadership around the globe has come into question.

When the United States emerged from World War II, we contributed about half of the world’s economic activity. It would have been easy to secure our dominance keeping those countries who had been defeated or greatly weakened during the war in their place. We didn’t do that. It would have been easy to focus inward.

We resisted those impulses. Instead, we financed reconstruction of shattered countries and created international organizations and institutions that have helped provide security and foster prosperity around the world for more than 70 years. Now it seems that we, the architects of this visionary rules-based world order, that has brought so much freedom and prosperity, are the ones most eager to abandon it.

The implications of this abandonment are profound. And the beneficiaries of this rather radical departure in the American approach to the world — are the ideological enemies of our values.

Despotism loves a vacuum, and our allies are now looking elsewhere for leadership. Why are they doing this? None of this is normal.

And what do we, as United States senators, have to say about it? The principles that underlie our politics, the values of our founding, are too vital to our identity and to our survival to allow them to be compromised by the requirements of politics.

Because politics can make us silent when we should speak, and silence can equal complicity.

I have children and grandchildren to answer to, and so, Mr. President, I will not be complicit or silent.

I decided that I would be better able to represent the people of Arizona and to better serve my country and my conscience by freeing myself of the political consideration that consumed far too much bandwidth and would cause me to compromise far too many principles. To that end, I am announcing today my service in the Senate will conclude at the end of my term in early January 2019. It is clear at this moment that a traditional conservative who believes in limited government and free markets, who is devoted to free trade, who is pro immigration has a narrower and narrower path to nomination in the Republican party — the party that has so long defined itself by its belief in those things. It is also clear to me for the moment that we have given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfied anger and resentment.

To be clear, the anger and resentment that the people feel at the royal mess that we’ve created are justified. But anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy.

There is an undeniable potency to a populist appeal by mischaracterizing or misunderstanding our problems and giving in to the impulse to scapegoat and belittle. The impulse to scapegoat and belittle threatens to turn us into a fearful backward-looking people.

In the case of the Republican Party, those things also threaten to turn us into a fearful backward-looking minority party.

We were not made great as a country by indulging in, or even exalting, our worst impulses — turning against ourselves, glorifying in the things that divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake.

And we did not become the beacon of freedom in the darkest corners of the world by flouting our institutions and failing to understand just how hard won and vulnerable they are. This spell will eventually break. That is my belief. We will return to ourselves once more. And I say the sooner, the better. Because we have a healthy government, we must also have healthy and functioning parties. We must respect each other again in an atmosphere of shared facts and shared values, calmity and good faith.

We must argue our positions fervently and never be afraid to compromise. We must assume the best of our fellow man and always look for the good. Until that day comes, we must be unafraid to stand up and speak out as if our country depends on it. Because it does.

I plan to spend the remaining 14 months of my senate term doing just that.

Mr. President, the graveyard is full of indispensable men and women. None of us here is indispensable, nor were even the great figures of history who toiled at these very desks in this very chamber to shape the country that we have inherited.

What is indispensable are the values they consecrated in Philadelphia and in this place — values which have endured and will endure for so long as men and women wish to remain free. What is indispensable is what we do here in defense of those values. A political career does not mean much if we are complicit in undermining these values.

I thank my colleagues for indulging me here today. I will close by borrowing the words of President Lincoln, who knew more about healthy enmity and preserving our founding values than any other American who has ever lived.

His words from his first inaugural were a prayer in his time and are now no less in ours:

‘We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break the bonds of our affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely as they will be by the better angels of our nature.’

Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.”

Source link