Unlike our president,
the king
was elegant
and eloquent,
addressing Congress
in nothing less
than a
masterclass.
Our special
relationship
he suggested,
was born
from dispute
brutally
contested,
yet met
to create
a partnership
based on
shared
values.
Charles
charmed
and disarmed
with praise,
while reminding
listeners
of guiding
principals
beyond each
phase
of history.
“Not by the will
of one,
but by
the deliberation
of many,
representing
the living
mosaic
of The United States.
In both
of our
countries,
it is the very
fact
of our vibrant,
diverse,
and free
societies
that give us
our collective
strength,
including
to support
victims
of some of
the ills
that,
so tragically,
exist
in both
our societies
today.”
He,
so beautifully,
recounted
our shared
history
and those
specifically
American.
Noting
our geography
that plays
significantly
in our story,
he recalled
the moments
of solemnity
and glory
that have
come
to define us
(at least
until
this Congress).
He spoke of
his Christianity,
the opposite
of vanity,
clearly
directed
at those elected
and seated
in the chamber.
“…the essence
of our two
nations
is a generosity
of spirit
and duty
to foster compassion,
to promote peace,
to deepen
mutual understanding
and to value
all people,
of all faiths,
and of none.”
Take that,
Mike Johnson!
He even included
an environmental
pitch
which he connected
to our
“glorious heritage”.
“…our generation
must decide
how to address
the collapse
of critical
natural
systems
which
threatens
far more
that the harmony
and essential
diversity
of nature.”
He mentioned
diversity
and unity
and the spirit
of generosity
throughout
his speech.
Charles gave
his masterclass
to teach
us
not only
of the greatness
of US,
but to bring
us back
to
E PLURIBUS
UNUM.
Meanwhile,
The Voting
Rights Act
became
historical
fact
that the Supreme
Court
wants to remain
in the past.
At last
the Republican
map quest
passed
the test
to reconfigure
congressional
districting
restricting
minority
voting
power.
If being
color blind
was what
the Court
had in mind,
we’ll likely
find
that what
is meant
by “intent”
in their
majority
argument
is disingenuous
as the dissent
points out
to us.
The Republican
request
to suggest
new
electoral
maps
will perhaps
change
the midterm
elections.
One
wonders
about
the real
intent
that was
meant,
in fact,
in chipping
away
at
The Voting
Rights
Act.
Similar
to
Roe V Wade,
they chipped
away
each decade
while
the most
vulnerable
are left
weakened
still.
This week
saw a King
speak
the right
thing
while the
Right Wing
Court
chose
to distort
the meaning
of everything
we understood
was for
a greater
good.
lou sight 