Why I've Voted for Chuck Schumer Before And Will Again

 

 

As my readers know I'm a resident of New York State. The first election I could cast a ballot in was in 1998, the first time Chuck Schumer was running for the Senate to vacate the seat held by long time Republican Al D'Amato who was retiring.

I voted for him that year and every time he's been up for reelection ever since I've always cast my vote for him. I acknowledge Schumer is phlegmatic rather than charismatic but that's never been a disqualifier for me. Schumer has always met the benchmark I have for an elected official: he's a good public servant because he fulfills the only three masters any elected official should: the Democratic Party, the voters of the state of New York and the American people. I ask no more of my leaders then that nor should any voter.

During the 21^st century Schumer has moved up the rankings of leadership within the Senate, finally becoming minority leader in 2016 – not a great time for any Democrat to be in charge of anything. In my opinion in what has been a very turbulent time for all three of the constituencies an elected official should Schumer has served all three with as much distinction and grace as humanly possible – and with far fewer rewards then at any time in American history. He became a prominent name in the establishment at the exact time both parties were becoming as virulently anti-establishment as possible and for that reason he has become the target of horrific personal attacks not just from the Republicans and conservatives – something any Democrat who came to Washington in the era of Fox News has to be used too – but by voices within his own party. To the point that even though he has done everything that any elected leader can reasonably be expected to do there are many who think that, if the Democrats regain the majority this November, his reelection to an office he held as recently as two years ago is far from assured.

I've had many reasons to reflect on why this is the case and I believe that much of this reasoning is because, during his tenure as minority leader or majority leader, he has not been to Senate Democrats what his counterpart to Mitch McConnell has been for Republicans: an obstructor, a destroyer of every norm the Senate was known for in the two centuries before McConnell was elected. One might find it paradoxical that a man who the left in particular has famously considered the biggest Congressional boogeyman long before the 2016 election would want someone like that as one of their leaders but it makes perfect sense when one considers that at its core the far left has had as little use for institutions as McConnell and the overwhelming majority of Congressional Republicans in the 21^st century have. They never had much use for institutions when they were working properly; now that they've become ossified so thoroughly that have no use at all.

This would go against everything Schumer is, both as a Senator and as a Democrat. Unlike most progressives he remembers a time before McConnell. When he entered the Senate Trent Lott and then Bill Frist served as leadership for Republicans and Tom Daschle and Harry Reid as leadership for Democrats. None of these men were perfect but in my lifetime McConnell by far has been the biggest outlier as a Senate leader of either party. Considering that John Thune took over leadership when Trump won reelection its clear he's not the same kind of leader I've been used to as a Republican in a long time. It remains to be seen if he will become the kind of obstructionist McConnell was if and when the Democrats regain the majority and the Presidency but there have been signs – small but still present – that he does represent a different kind of leadership then I've been used to from Senate Republicans.

After the 2024 election Schumer was where he was in 2016: Senate Minority Leader. The major difference was that the Democrat voter seemed to be engaged in the kind of election denialism that puts anything Republicans did to shame. Despite Trump winning with the biggest margin of his three candidacies and the GOP gaining control of both Houses of Congress, a poll in January said that nearly two-thirds of Democrats did not want Congressional Democrats to go along with the White House. In other words regardless of the verdict of the voters and the fact that the Democrats really had no power to do anything, the Democratic voters wanted men like Schumer to act like McConnell did when he said: "Our job is to make Barack Obama a one-term President." Never mind McConnell had failed at that or that Trump could not for reelection.

So Chuck Schumer chose to do the one thing absolutely guaranteed to piss off the left. He ignored them and chose to act like a grownup. This has infuriated many Senate Democrats such as Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland both of whom have been listed as wanting Schumer's job if the Democrats win the majority.

They can afford to this because their state's Congressional delegations are almost entire made of Democrats and are far more blue in elections then New York is. For a man whose state has at least four swing districts in the last two elections, it's not a position that Schumer is comfortable taking. The fact that his state had until last year Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elise Stefanik among its Congressional delegation, it’s an approach that is reasonable – something you can never accuse either Murphy or Van Hollen of being.

Schumer spent the first half of 2025 under fire from the Democrats for refusing to shut the government down. He then gave into his base and let them shut it down until after the 2025 elections led to victory for Democrats in off-year elections. Then he let members of his delegation vote to reopen the government when it was clear his party had gotten all the political juice they could out of him. The left was infuriated when he reopened the government, most clearly because they didn't want to acknowledge that they'd been outmaneuvered by the establishment.

Schumer has spent much of 2026 so far patiently waiting for the President to do his work for him. This basically involving sticking a sock in his mouth and saying nothing publicly during the Iran War. I have no doubt behind the scenes he has been supporting the vote for the War Powers Act and waiting for the President to do what he does best and go after those people he found insufficiently loyal during the Republican primaries for Senate.

The President, as always, lived up to his expectations and as a result Bill Cassidy and John Cornyn are lame ducks who owe the President nothing and will be in the Senate for another six months. In the last few weeks we've seen how the Senate has increasingly been rebelling against Trump's policies, first by passing the War Powers Act in both houses of Congress, then by making it very clear that they had no intention of voting for reconciliation if either his supposed 'revenge' fund was part of the budget. Both times this was seen as Congressional Republicans standing up to the President but there's no doubt that Schumer's hidden hand was involved as he made sure his caucus would be willing to support them. This was a loss for the President that will almost certainly help the Democrats in their battle for control of the Senate in six months.

Its not clear how big a role Schumer has played in recruiting candidates to run this year and how much is the DNC but having spent so much time working with Sherrod Brown it's hard to imagine that didn't play a factor in Brown choosing to run for his seat in Ohio one years after losing it or helping such possible red state Democrats as Mary Peltola running for Alaska. With the added bonus of Roy Cooper running in North Carolina, the odds were looking up for the Democrats going as 2026 began.

He has been helped, I should add, by the fact that the left's efforts to try and recruit progressive candidates for red states has basically come up short. (There is one exception which I'll be dealing with.) Jasmine Crockett was trounced by James Talarico in Texas and combined with Ken Paxton defeating Cornyn in the primary the odds in winning this seat have increased dramatically. This past Tuesday a kind of shadow proxy battle took place in Iowa where Zach Wahls, a progressive candidate who made it clear he was not going to vote for Chuck Schumer if elected to the Senate ran again Josh Turek who Schumer endorsed. Turek trounced Wahls in the primary by nearly 25 percent and as a result Iowa has now moved to Leans Republican. That either state would be in play would have been unthinkable even a few months ago.

This brings me to what was considered just a few weeks ago as the major impetus for the death knell of Chuck Schumer's career in the Senate: the race to replace Susan Collins in Maine.

During that race Schumer had endorsed Janet Mills, the former governor of Maine who was immensely popular. Almost from the start in the polls she trailed the problematic Graham Platner whose campaign started with his staff all resigning within weeks even before the revelation of his unawareness of a Nazi tattoo on his chest.

Schumer, who had been in the Senate as long as Collins has been there knows just how difficult it is for the Democrats to beat her in Maine. He knew just six years earlier the Democrats had nominated Sara Gideon, a very progressive candidate who had led in every poll all the way up to election day but who Collins had beaten by nearly 9 percent. He knows the history of how many Democrats have managed to win seats in the Senate because of flawed Republican candidates. And he had to know that even if Maine Democrats were willing to overlook these flaws in the primary the Republicans and Collins almost certainly wouldn't. Considering that they'd been making remarks about Platner's flaws for public office as early as November of 2025, he knew the knives were going to come out the moment Platner won the primary and never stop until election day.

For whatever reason, perhaps because of the huge lead in the polls Platner had over Mills, he backed down and Mills withdrew from the race a month ago. This was seen as a mortal blow to Schumer's leadership.

A week before the primary it’s a very different story. Just a few days ago the New York Times ran an article about how multiple ex-girlfriends of Platner made very clear what a toxic personality he was. Platner's campaign has denied it and the left is rallying behind him. The problem is these stories aren't going away. Earlier today The Atlantic have a Graham Platner problem, infuriating the Democratic party. While many progressives such as Ro Khanna are reiterated their support, others such as Robert Zimmerman have said "Democrats who defend him sound like Republicans defending Donald Trump after the Access Hollywood state." Cheyenne Hunt, who'd organized against Eric Swalwell over allegations of sexual assault, rescinded her endorsement of Platner Thursday.  Brian Romick, president of Democratic Majority for Israel, made it very clear "people need to answer for this."

Most tellingly many Democrats are researching the mechanism to replace Platner should he withdraw from the ticket. A senior Democratic operative said: "The calculus here is that this is a must win seat and the safer-bet candidate is the best bet when the Senate is on the line. I don't say this often but I think in this case some people owe Chuck Schumer an apology.

Schumer has been silent on the subject but multiple Democrats are very concerned about losing Maine then they were before. It basically breaks down along party lines: progressives have doubled down while more mainstream Democrats are getting angrier. As well they should. Just last week Platner was beating Collins 51 percent to 42 percent. A poll on Thursday showed the lead had dropped to 48 percent to 43 percent. Simultaneously last month prediction markets gave Platner a 70 percent chance of beating Collins. It's now down to 57 percent – and that's before the primary.

It's impossible to think that Janet Mills could have generate this kind of controversy had she run against Collins. While she withdrew from the race her name is still on the ballot – and its clear that if the voters either stay home or don't give Platner as much of a margin there will be room for a move.

In either case as much as Platner and his supporters want to pretend otherwise its impossible to argue that had they listened to Schumer and backed Mills their chances of taking the Senate back would be much easier. And if they do take the Senate back – which sites like Race to The White House have this week tilted that in the Democrats favor for the first time – it will be because voters prefer candidates like Josh Turek and Sherrod Brown more than the populist rhetoric of Graham Platner.

And even if Platner manages to beat the odds and win – which in a post- Trump America no one can rule out  - he will be more isolated in whatever Democrat senators are elected. He was always an outlier among the Democrats that have been running for Senate this cycle, certainly among those who have the best chance of making them the majority party. Left wing candidates have always had far more difficulty winning statewide offices then moderates have: this is something Schumer knows but that the progressives who loathe him have ignored – and the party has suffered immensely as a result.

Schumer will be on the ballot again in 2028. He'll be 77 then and he might very well want to retire at that point, perhaps deciding to jump rather than be pushed. However if he does stand for reelection I will gladly vote for him yet again and support him if he is primaried. He is a good public servant, the kind of senator the Democratic party, the state of New York and the country need now more than ever. That may not be enough for many of today's Americans or today's Democrats. That's always been enough for me. Schumer, as the left loves to crow, is on the right side of history and that's because he's lived through a lot of it.

Homicide Rewatch: Strangers & Other Partners

 

Written by David Simon, James Yoshimura and Tom Fontana

Directed by Kenneth Fink

 

In the 1990s the finales of broadcast dramas were increasingly coming to end on cliffhangers which would put one or more characters in mortal jeopardy only to return to the status quo in the fall. Homicide had done as much at the end of Season 4 with Frank Pembleton but as we've seen the status quo didn't return for him at the start of the season and he's been struggling with the losses ever since.

During May of 1997 the biggest successes in network drama were taking this to increasingly ludicrous extremes. Perhaps the biggest came with The X-Files which ended with Dana Scully claiming to the FBI that Mulder had killed himself  - despite the fact that a feature film was about to be greenlit at David Duchovny was going to be one of the leads. As we shall see when we begin Season 6 cable would begin to change how these finales came out across the board but network TV would remain late to the party for a few more years. It was not until such shows as 24 and Lost debuted in the 2000s that broadcast television would embrace the season finale when  they teased game changers and would follow through when the season began.

Homicide operated in a grey area during its entire run. In large part this was because as a series that was always on the bubble major changes were born out of necessity rather then any sustained plan. When it had been granted a two season renewal in the spring of 1996 it had been allowed breathing room in a way it never had during its run. This has been seen perhaps the most clearly during Season 5 and its still unclear if the cast changes that were to follow in the summer of 1997 were by its own design or outside factors. But nevertheless the way that it chooses to reveal what is by far the biggest existential change to the show as we know it is keeping with how Homicide has always operated. It allows the entire season finale and several major story arcs that span not only this season but the show's history to wrap up, ending all of the major drama of the season. And only then does it choose to make us spend the entire season wondering the effect of a bureaucratic change in department policies is going to have on our cast.  This isn't  "Who Shot J.R?"

The electricity in this episode starts moments after Giardello brings Gharty into his office and tells them that Felton was working undercover with IID. Internal Affairs was never going to make Gharty popular with the squad but the moment Russert hears his name she instantly places him. Hoffman's righteous fury the moment she says "I guess you decided not to take that pension" as well as her laying out Gharty's very real dereliction of duty completely vindicates the decision to bring her character back. When Howard and Russert realize the full scope of the fact that a man they considered guilty of cowardice has been responsible for the death of their friend, there's no way they can trust them. And when Falsone hears that Gharty is essentially trying to lay the leak on him he's even angrier and nearly takes a swing at him on their first meeting and when Gharty is foolish enough to tell him to go hell, Pembleton has to physically restrain him. Its only because of Giardello's doing everything he can to make this about Felton that he stops the unit from flying apart at the seams but Bayliss makes it clear he has no desire to work with Gharty and Pembleton looks at him as if he smells bad.

It doesn't help that Howard immediately decides to go over Frank's head and start doing her own thing. Pembleton makes it clear he understands the reasons why Howard and Russert want to get involved but he also makes it clear that he wants authority over this case. Frank can be a bastard but he's not wrong – and Howard's decision to erase Felton's name from the board and give herself and Russert priority is the most blatant abuse of power she's done since she became sergeant. Al is absolutely right when he calls her into his office.

In The Unofficial Companion Kalat writes about the perceived double standard by pulling two women off the case and sending them to handle Beau's funeral. However this is another example of Homicide being authentic. Giardello refused to let Bayliss get involved when his cousin was being investigated for murder and he knew he was wrong when he let Meldrick meddle in the investigation of Crosetti's suicide. Howard is in the wrong here and it is because she's taking it so personally that she doesn't see it as the episode progresses. Russert, who was a shift commander, can see it and even as she deflects that she was shift commander for long, she acknowledges that she sees it when Al points it out. And when you consider that in death Beth Felton has no more use for her husband then she did in life, it's fitting – if sad – that the two people who cared about him the most have to prepare for his death.

Howard proves it when she demands to be put on this case and basically tells Giardello that there's a double standard and he doesn't know what he's talking about. Howard and Giardello have a superb relationship throughout the series and her attitude towards her boss is very clearly that of someone demanding special treatment. It's not a good look even if you know where she's coming from.

The scene with Russert and Howard at Felton's last known address is beautiful. The two women were never friends and they never worked together that well and that they're together in this setting is incredibly awkward for both of them. Leo plays it with awkwardness and clumsiness as if she doesn't know the right thing to say or do in front of the mistress of her partner; Hoffman goes through the entire scene as if she is clearly in mourning, having to look at the last place of the man she loved and see his blood on the wall. Its only when Russert mentions that the suit is pointless because it will be a closed casket that Howard says the right thing.

To his credit Frank immediately takes charge of the investigation and settles the squabbling between Falsone and Gharty early. He starts giving assignments to his fellow detectives – and really doesn't like it that Gharty ends up with him.

As when we first met him Gharty is chatty and talkative and Pembleton has no more use for it then Russert did. He makes it clear he has no problem with IID. His issue is with the fact that based on his history he completely doubts Gharty would back him up if he needs it.  Pembleton chews Gharty out and talks about his fellow detectives having his back and being willing to fight for him. (As always the case with Pembleton he says his most respectful remarks for his colleagues when they're not around.)

We are unprepared for what follows as Gharty tells us a monologue of a brutality complaint he did four months ago that he had to go following a cop's response. This leads him to chase down a felon right into a Baltimore crack house – a dope fiend's convention where he makes it clear how scared he was. He tells Pembleton he took a beating so bad he had to spend eight hours getting stitched up and a broken rib. He knows the beating was bad but he acknowledges the fear was worse. Gharty says he needed to prove himself. Pembleton is willing to trust him here but as we'll see in the following season he'll never truly respect him. And as we'll see Gharty will give many reasons for this impression to be correct.

Its clear in this episode that Fontana and Simon are doing the work that will lead to Falsone and Gharty being regulars the following season. Both Seda and Gerety are more than up to the task. Seda has the more difficult job as we just met him and we don't have much experience with detectives from other units. It helps that he's initially partnered with the more open-minded Bayliss who is always good at smoothing over rough spots. Falsone genuinely seems curious about how Homicide works and treats him with respect and admiration. Bayliss's casual remark: "A lot more people care about their cars then dead relatives" is both cynical and admiring of what Falsone does.

The scene between Megan and Frank is wonderful as Megan, using the same tact she did when she was shift commander, gently talks to Frank about his marriage. Throughout the episode Pembleton treats Russert with a respect and kindness he doesn't treat Howard or real anyone else as he knows all too well where she's coming from – and confides a secret he hasn't even told Bayliss: Mary is currently six months pregnant. It is this conversation that leads Frank to, in the midst of a red ball, do something he would never have done even a few months ago: call his wife.

And when the interrogation begins and Mary shows up in the squad room Frank does something he wouldn't have done before: let his marriage come ahead of his job. It's a beautiful scene between Brabson and Braugher as we see the considerate, loving husband. When Frank tells Mary that he doesn't have a single good thing in his life without his wife and daughter, its sincere in a way we're not used to from him. When the man who spent half this season just trying to be a detective again tells Mary that he will give it all up if she'll just come home, it’s a side of Frank the show's never let us see in five seasons, as is the joy as he realizes why she's here. And I love how the man who's never been at a loss for words lets his wife half the last one.

Fittingly the investigation into Felton's murder ends up being brought down by the two men who have no connection to Homicide: Falsone and Gharty. It turns out that the man Gharty used to get Felton into the squad was none other than Eddie Dugan, Falsone's informant. Dugan was playing both ends against the middle. The confrontation between Falsone, Gharty and Dugan in the box  is a powerhouse and all the more remarkable because it involves two men who, as of yet, we have never seen interrogate anyone.

Falsone and Dugan start with a friendly conversation as if they were old friends, Falsone butters him up – and then without a word Gharty walks into the box. The look of shock on Dugan's face is incredible, particularly as he starts to squirm realizing every story he's told has no value. And when he makes one of the dumbest lies imaginable, saying the pager on his belt isn't his Gharty walks out dials the number they've found and immediately traps him.

Of course because this is Homicide the show gives us nothing. Dugan gives up Cantwell and when they raid his shop – with Frank giving the warrant to Howard and Russert – no one's there. Cantwell has fled the jurisdiction and Beau's murder will remain in red forever. They console themselves with the fact that Dugan will go to prison but there's no closure for the death of one of their own. There's a memorial service where Al has to speak for Felton because his family hasn't shown up.

If the episode has a failing its one that is only apparent in retrospect. Kellerman and Cox's relationship ends up falling apart by the end of it, in part because its clear that the relationship has only brought out the worst in both of them.

This truly seems like a cheat. Its understandable why this is the case for Kellerman; the episode shows that the aftermath of the Mahoney shooting is causing him to drown his sorrows in alcohol and its now affecting his work relationship. The writers are super in showing this as the catalyst for the following season where Lewis will essentially end his two year partnership with Mike.

What's harder to understand is why Juliana rejects it. The second half of the season has shown that she's been making more of an effort during Mike's struggles and was open to him even as recently as the previous episode. It seems like the writers, yet again, have failed a character who isn't a detective. We already know Cox's story of drinking too much and falling in love with the wrong men from her introduction but the writers have tried so hard to put her front and center with the detectives in a way they haven't with characters like Brodie when it comes to her professional life, you'd think they could try harder with her personal life. This was not the case – and it may have been one of the factors that led to Forbes deciding to leave the show the following season. 

So by the end of Season Five we've wrapped up every loose end that has been part of the show and all the detectives from Season 4 are having coffee and talking about what's next, while bitching they couldn't arrest Felton. And its after all of that that Al comes down with the real cliffhanger.

As his parting gift before he ends up leaving the series Deputy Commissioner Harris has announced a change in policy known as rotation. Every three months some detectives will be moved from one unit to another. Meaning when the series returns the following fall 'none of us may be here'.

This bureaucratic policy (which had a basis in reality) hits the unit harder then any death ever could. And as we'll see the ramifications will be felt almost immediately when the show returns.

 

NOTES FROM THE BOARD

 

This is the final episode for Melissa Leo and Max Perlich during the series run and the final appearance of Isabella Hoffman in any form.

The mayor of Baltimore Kurt Schmoke makes his third appearance as himself in the final scene as does the then governor of Maryland Paris Glendening. Glendening served as governor between 1995-2003 and Schmoke would serve as mayor from 1987-1999.

The policy in question was a real one, one that Simon had reported on in Baltimore Magazine. Thomas Frazier became commissioner of police in 1994 and instituted a four-year limit on assignments to specialized units, Frazier believed that by rotating officers through departments it would lead to greater sharing of knowledge and skills. But he reckoned without the fact that detectives would have little time to develop specialized skills before moving to a different department. The quality of drug investigations would plummet when inexperienced detectives took over while many top Homicide detectives chose to retire rather than leave the elite squad. Frazier would eventually leave when Martin O'Malley was elected mayor and the policy was reversed in 2000 (which is no doubt why Simon doesn't use as a story line in The Wire.)

 

"Detective Munch: John is fittingly serious during the investigation. The closest he comes to snark is when he reads the toxicology report and "Believe it or not, Beau Felton left this earth clean and sober, no drugs, no alcohol."

 

MAHONEY PTSD: Kellerman comes in to the squad room late and Lewis tells him he's been wearing 'whiskey as last night's cologne' for the last ten days. When Lewis tries to ease Mike's conscience, Kellerman says they're even. Lewis saved him on the boat and he saved his ass from Mahoney. They're saved from brawling when they go out on a call. At the murder scene Kellerman is interviewing  a witness and while he's doing so she wonders off.  He also fails to take her name or vital information.  Meldrick, who's the primary on this case, is justifiably enraged at Mike.  After ascertaining he's 6 foot 1 he says: "I didn't know they piled crap that high."

Get The DVD: One of the very best mixes of music on Homicide can be found in the opening sequence as Soul Coughing's 'Super Bon Bon' is used to show the entire process of how Cantwell's crew steals a car on the street and ships it overseas. In the Waterfront where Juliana is  playing pool while heavily intoxicated we can  hear "Trepidation' and 'Only Onions' by Civil Tones.

Homicide Rewatch: Partners & Other Strangers

 

Written by Anya Epstein, James Yoshimura & Daryl Lamont Wharton

Directed by Leslie Libman and Larry Williams

 

In what has already been an incredibly dark season for Homicide the writers choose to end Season 5 with the darkest storyline yet: Pembleton being called to the scene of a suicide and learning that the dead man is Beau Felton, who was suspended along with Bolander way back at the start of Season 4 but whose absence has essentially been ignored by the squad.

Partners & Other Strangers begins a two-parter that is the most transitional episode in series history to this point. Felton's death will effective trigger events where the show more or less bids adieu to the 'old school' format in the first two to three seasons. That it should do so through Felton's death is a bitter irony.

When Crosetti committed suicide back in Season 3 it was a shock to the squad as much as the audience. But while Crosetti was respected and admired among his colleagues the same was never true of Felton. This is made clear when every character has flashbacks of their memories of Beau and with the sole exception of Howard, none of them are fond ones. Even Howard, who this affects the most, acknowledges she hasn't so much has said a word to him since he resigned. There's clearly guilt involved with his death – and the more the squad learns about Felton's activities it becomes clear they didn't know him as well as they thought – but the truth is they were always inclined to think the worst of him. His absence has not been mourned the same way Lewis has felt Crosetti's death or the way that Bolander's absence has clearly affected Munch. Felton wasn't a distinguished cop or even a very good one. No one has mourned his absence because they were never much fond of his presence.

So when Frank comes thinking it’s a shotgun suicide, he thinks its nothing and takes care of the officer whose struggling and when he sees who killed himself Frank is unnerved even taking his hat off for the loss of his fellow detective.

After basically sidelining Howard to desk duty for nearly two years Melissa Leo gets to shine for the first time in a long time. We see her going through the same denial Meldrick did when Crosetti died: in her case she can't accept its him. Meldrick takes it even harder  - this on top of what nearly happened to Mike is clearly hitting him like a ton of bricks. When Lewis begins chanting about ways to kill himself and then goes to Mike saying: "You're with me, aren't you?" it’s the biggest sign of Meldrick's nasty streak in a long time.

Kellerman, who has no idea of who Felton was, asks the question that no one wants to: why had no one spoken with him in so long? When Frank tries to absolve himself saying that the man left the department of his own accord, he makes it clear he doesn't care. Howard walks in just in time to hear him and makes it very clear that if he did it takes the burden of all of them. Then a new face walks in and says he can explain why Felton killed himself.

This is our introduction to Paul Falsone currently working for auto theft. Falsone would almost immediately become one of the most polarizing characters in the show's history, something I didn't know at time and don't understand now. In his tenure on Homicide there would be reasons to find his character problematic but in his introduction he comes across as a good investigator. He knows that Felton is working for a major operator named Frank Cantwell.  The squad's had an operation into Cantwell for months with the feds until it became clear that there was someone in the department working with him. At the time of his death Falsone makes it clear that Felton was working with Cantwell. Howard takes this extremely personally and Falsone doesn't endear himself by saying that just because Felton worked Homicide doesn't mean he walked on water. He doesn't know until she tells him the two were partners.

Howard refuses to accept that Beau could be dirty. She admits he was deeply flawed but she also knows being police meant everything to Beau and that he wouldn't sell out the badge.

Frank spends the first half of the episode acting far worse then he did when Crosetti committed suicide. He refuses to take his fellow detectives concerns seriously and when Al makes it clear that he's trying to figure out why it happened Frank says its irrelevant. He doesn't care why Beau might have killed himself. When Bayliss shows up in the squad he acknowledges how messed up the suicide was and he's clearly angry that Tim wasn't there.

It's only because of the diligent work of Juliana Cox when she's doing the final autopsy report that she realizes that Beau might not have killed himself. She and Dr. Dyer spend the next forty eight hours essentially putting Felton's skull back together. She figures out that he was shot at close range and then his head was blown off to disguise it.

Pembleton and Howard go to Felton's room and Frank is awkward for the first time, We know Frank always respected Kay and he knows that while he never liked Beau, he and Kay were partners and he understand that bond better than he wants to admit. Howard is still not able to deal and she's upset that 'the bastards killed him in his own bathroom'. Its telling that he uses Beau's term: "They murdered him. Beau believed there was a distinction between murder and killing."  She admits she believed that Felton was capable of it because she always knew that Beau was capable of the worst possible behavior when they were partners.  She makes it clear she doesn't want anyone to know she cried.

After that Pembleton and Howard agree to meet up with Falsone. As is his wont it takes all of ten seconds for Frank to start pissing on the territory of other cops. For once however, he meets someone who gives as good as he gets, who makes it clear that he has an informant but he's going to talk to him on his own. Howard has to stop this measuring contest and makes it clear that an ex-cop was murdered in cold blood. That carries enough weight to have Falsone bring him in and meet.

Before the investigation even begins its put on hold and then we meet the other detective and this face is familiar: Stu Gharty, who's now been promoted to detective and is working for IID (Baltimore's Internal Affairs). We will realize the full consequences of Gharty's involvement in the next episode but we're busy with the biggest revelation: at the time of his death Beau Felton was still a cop, working undercover for IID. Someone was tipping Cantwell around last April. Felton was coming up on the end of his suspension and made it clear he didn't want to go back to Homicide. Gharty decided to use Felton and find a way to figure out who was tipping Cantwell off about customs.

When Al learns about this – and even more upsettingly that Bonfather knew about this – he is furious: he believes it is because of Gharty's work that Felton was killed. He has less use for Gharty who has another problem: if they bring in Cantwell's crew which is the next step, they will never find out who the leak was and Felton will have died for nothing. Bonfather splits the baby and makes it clear Homicide and IID will work together to solve Felton's murder. Al is already furious the decision was made without him – and he's going to be even angrier in the finale.

Because this is a season finale Homicide spends much of the two parts resolving storylines that have lasted much of Season 5. The biggest one in 'Partners & Other Strangers' is the on again, off again rift between Pembleton and Bayliss that has been going on basically since Frank returned to the squad. Bayliss is off on another one of his errands when Frank gets the call that leads him to learn of Felton's death. He's already pissed at Tim for doing this and he lets him have it with both barrels in the aftermath of Felton's shooting. He makes it clear how truly angry he is at how Bayliss has been gone from the squad all this time and how indifferent he seems to have been to the job. When Bayliss again pushes him aside for another errand for the first time Pembleton tails Tim – and sees that he's been taking care of his Uncle George.

In keeping with the grand tradition of Homicide the writers resolve the story by revealing the secret but not providing closure for anybody. Frank knows what's going on and Tim can't explain if this has resolved anything for him. But it's enough to finally heal the gap between them. Tim makes clear he went there he hated him and he wanted revenge to take away from him what he took away from me. And now he can't take away anything he hasn't already lost. Bayliss wanted to talk to him and try to understand why he did what he did. He understand that he has to forgive him and his father before anything can change. And when Frank asks Tim never answers.

The other major storyline from last week is told. Gaffney tells Giardello that the letter he wrote to the Mayor has been carried out and Deputy Commissioner Harris's career is now under investigation from the U.S. Attorney. While its never followed up on after this season Harris is never heard from again, so the assumption is he's been forced out of office, perhaps only in retirement. Gaffney makes thinly veiled warnings about Al not writing any more but its clear he's unnerved – he knows his involvement in the interference with Burundi Robinson and he doesn't want to end up in jail. Gaffney survives, of course – he's a cockroach after all and will be back to his nagging self soon.

Before Pembleton enters the squad room Munch is reading the news of the memorial for Luther Mahoney. Even as Howard jokes that they all wanted to make sure he was dead when Munch tells them that 300 people showed up to view a man many viewed as a leader Lewis and Kellerman are appalled.

The eulogy that Kellerman reads where the reverend says: "there were many sides to Luther Marcellus Mahoney. While we reject and renounce his criminal activities, we must at the same time recognize his countless good works."

Of all the things that all the writers ever wrote this in many ways is the most prescient as it illustrates the most clearly how so much of today's African-Americans are willing to push aside the often horrible things so many of the leaders have done in the past and do the day in service of a greater good. One almost wonders if before he died Luther's youth center had collaborated with Robinson's movement considering that both men's public face excused a huge amount of corruption, wrongdoing and murder.  The viewer knows all too well the horrible things Mahoney has done and that so much of Baltimore seems willing to complete set it aside makes one wonder if Mahoney might very well have ended up in Congress had he not been killed – or perhaps become a version of Clay Davis.

One wonders how much of learning this will lead to Kellerman's downfall. Not long after reading this eulogy he starts going to the bar and getting drunk, something he will do on a regular basis until the season ends and then will resume doing during Season 6. He's been willing to carry this because he thought he did the right thing and he can live with Stivers judgment. But the fact that so many in Baltimore will still look on Mahoney as a hero despite that – well that's a lot for a man who just wanted to be a good cop to bear.

It's clear how much this is beginning to weigh on Mike. He and Cox are on a date, something he's just admitted to Lewis is a relationship. However its clear very quickly that Kellerman isn't interesting in listening or sharing or even having sex with Juliana. He wants to brood and get drunk. It's telling that immediately after this we see a flashback from 'Nothing Personal' when Felton is getting drunk; it’s the clearest prophecy yet of Mike's downfall.

But the biggest revelation comes in the final minutes when we see the final familiar face. Megan Russert has returned from Paris with brown hair and dressed all in black. When she reenters the squad to see Howard and Munch she makes it clear she planned to grieve for Beau in Paris until she learned he was murdered. She's come back to help with the investigation. Howard isn't thrilled with this – she and Russert never had the easiest relationship – and then we see that in over a year Al never got around to erasing her name from the board.

The final scene has Bayliss talking about Felton and reminding Pembleton he didn't like him. Frank says he doesn't have to work this case. When Al tells them that the squad is back investigating Felton's murder Frank and Tim go back in united. Their partnership has endured. Others won't be as lucky.

 

 

 

 

NOTES FROM THE BOARD

It was the 90s: In describing what turns out to be Felton's body Juliana Cox jokes about what was then the brand new TV ratings system between TV-PG and TV-MA. Believe it or not in 1997 this system was relatively new to television and most network TV was crossing the line between TV-PG and TV-14. No one dared to think of an era where the best shows on TV would exclusively be rating TV-MA – though in a few months' time Tom Fontana would help usher it in.

Daniel Baldwin only appears in flashbacks in this episode. In chronological order:

'Nothing Personal' plays while Howard is reeling from the news of Felton's suicide.

'Dead End' plays when Howard's at the morgue.

While Lewis is playing pool we see an excerpt from 'See No Evil'

When Giardello is discussing the shooting we see Felton being shot in 'The City That Bleeds'

Bayliss remembers their horrible conversation in 'All Through the House'.

Before Howard learns that Beau was murdered we see their last interaction in 'From Cradle to Grave'.

Pembleton remembers their volatile discussion in Last of the Watermen.

Kellerman starts to get blitzed as Felton did in Nothing Personal.

Russert's return to the unit is bracketed with her memory of Beau in 'Fits Like a Glove'

Mahoney PTSD: In addition to everything else Lewis calls Stivers to the Waterfront because she's been avoiding him. Lewis makes it clear that Mahoney is dead and what good will it do to have Kellerman up on charges, Stivers and him off the force and Mike going to jail for murder. He seems willing to make peace with it. He asks Stivers if she can carry this. "I don't have a choice," she says. Not long after that he has his flashback about Felton.

 

"Detective Munch" Interestingly – and hysterically – the best description of Munch comes from Dr. Alyssa Dyer in what is the character's first major interaction with Cox since she took over the morgue. As the two of them work on stapling together Felton's skull the two discuss what Felton looked like when he was alive and then Dyer describes what it was like to date a cop. "Gloomy, cynical, completely devoted to their own misery." Beat. "Alyssa please tell me you didn't go out with Munch?" In one of the best inside jokes ever Dyer tells Cox she has sworn off dating cops. Instead, she's dating a stand up comic. Harlee McBride must have loved delivering this line and Richard Belzer must have loved hearing it.

The other jab comes from the other woman in John's life. When Russert passes him she slaps him on the shoulder. "What was that for?" Munch demands. "You couldn't close Bongi and Sabatino while I was gone?" (Her two open cases are still on the board.  "I knew you were coming back; I wanted you to feel at home  when you got back," Munch says.

FUTURE INMATE: Scott Winters, as the credits identify him, plays Eddie Dugan the spotter for Cantwell with a distinct southern accent. Just as his brother Dean made his debut in Homicide Scott made an early appearance here though you'd remember him better for Clark the man Matt Damon famously says, "How do you like them apples?" in Good Will Hunting. He'd take the middle name William when he took on the role of Cyril O'Reilly, Ryan's younger and brain damaged brother in OZ a role, like Dean, he would play to the series ended.

Scott has been very prominent in television ever since, ironically often as a cop. He played Matt Jablonski on the short lived series 10-8: Officers on Duty, Stan Hatcher, a cop who becomes a thorn in Sipowicz's side in Season 11 of NYPD Blue and Detective McNamara in Season 1 of Dexter where he shared the screen with Lauren Velez, David Zayas and Erik King, all of whom had been on OZ while he was there. His most prominent roles have included Agent Samuels on Day 6 of 24, Rafaele Riario Sansoni on Borgia (where he co-starred with John Doman, another OZ alum) Detective Joe Dumas over multiple seasons of Law & Order: SVU, Nick Fischer on Berlin Station and Westley Clark on six episodes of NCIS in 2018-2019. He played Todd Hastings on the first two seasons of City on a Hill (written by Tom Fontana), Eric Dawicki on the miniseries The Girl From Plainville and Detective Marty McGee on Memory of A Killer. And in case you were wondering, yes, that is him playing the younger brother of Dean Winters as Mayhem in an ad for All-State.

On the Soundtrack: In the scenes in the Waterfront when Kellerman is getting drunk with Cox you can hear 'Never Change' by Love Riot.

Decision 2026 - Tracking The Justice Democrats, Part 1: Halfway Through the Midterms Where The Floyd Pattersons of Fighting For America Are

 

 

The last few years I've been watching Pariah: The Rise & Fall of Sonny Liston. Among its many virtues it told me many things about sports figures I knew very little about.

One such figure was Floyd Paterson. Paterson became the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world after a series of fights with Ingemar Johnson. Paterson was a quiet African-American who was popular among those in the civil rights movement for being quiet and non-threatening at a time when the movement needed 'Negros to be less militant' (The documentary's words)

During this same period Sonny Liston was rising fast in the boxing world. Easily one of the most dominant brawlers of all time (Mike Tyson is quoted as much) Paterson spent a lot of time refusing to fight him. The public reason was that it would be bad for the sport to fight a boxer who had criminal ties. The real reason was that Paterson's manager knew that if he were to fight Liston, Liston would destroy him.

Which is exactly what happened. When they finally fought Liston knocked out Patterson in what is still one of the quickest boxing matches in history: it barely lasted a minute into the first round. In the rematch Paterson only lasted four seconds longer.

Now it is possible that the members of the Justice Democrat caucus when they claim to fight for democracy, fight against capitalism, fight against racism, etc. would know doubt frame themselves as Muhammed Ali who is one of the few sports figures that could pass their litmus tests of being a 'role model'. But having watched them for a decade its now crystal clear that what they are is the Floyd Paterson's of the Democratic Party, particularly when it comes to running for office in the first place.

In Pariah contemporaries and historians make it very clear that Paterson's manager did everything to make sure that Paterson never fought anyone who had a chance of beating him. That's been how the Justice Democrats have been trying to fun for office since they got demolished in 2018. They know that they can't win in red districts in red states or even in swing districts. They also know that they can't win for Senate or Governor; they haven't tried that since 2020.

So in the 2026 campaign their 'biggest fight for progressivism in years' they spent much of the leadup to the fall campaign by endorsing 14 newcomers and one former representative. It's important to note that while in the last few months many things have affected the Congressional landscape (and I'll be dealing with that in regard to the Justice Democrats down the road) it had no effect on their success record. They were only running in places that they'd already had success: California, Illinois, Texas, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania – in other words big states. They are making a few attempts in the same deep blue districts in swing states but they haven't gone to well.

This is, for example, one of the reasons I find it very difficult to take the AOC's or Ilhan Omar seriously when they claim to be 'fighting for the people in a rigged system'. First they're not fighting for all the people because much of the country has rejected them. Second they're using the system to try and gain the power they have.

After the primaries of June 2 in California and New Jersey we're now more or less halfway through the primary seasons for the Justice Democrats. So I figured its worth seeing how the fight for them is going. The answer is: not well

 

TEXAS MARCH 3^RD

 

Greg Casar is an incumbent member of the Justice Democrats and leads the progressional caucus. After the districts were gerrymandered in Texas he chose to run in the 37^th district rather then his old district which was now Republican. Casar will make it clear that this is them the rigging game which is true. What's also true is that his brand of progressivism doesn't have a chance in a ruby red district and he's doing to a district that will. Two things can be true.

As I mentioned before after Jasmine Crockett tried and failed to run for the Democratic nomination for Senate Frederick Haynes III won the nomination for her district the 30^th. Haynes will be 66 by the time he takes office so its hard to argue this part of a generational move for progressivism.

TWO HOLDS

 

NORTH CAROLINA MARCH 3^RD

4^TH District

 Nida Allam tried to run against Valerie Foushee  on an anti-ICE platform, was endorsed by Bernie Sandrs, gun control activists and the working families party. She lost by a small margin though she didn't concede until Wednesday.

This wasn't the first time Allam challenged Foushee, She'd done so in 2022 and lost by nearly ten points to her. That time she didn't have the Justice Democrats on her side; this time she had the entire left-wing establishment – and it still wasn't enough for her to win.

ONE LOSS

 

ILLINOIS MARCH 17^TH

Delia Ramirez an incumbent managed to hold her seat in the third district.  Two other challengers Junaid Ahmed and Kat Abughazaleh tried to win in the 8^th and 9^th district respectively.

Abughazaleh was the first Gen Z woman and a Palestinian American. Her campaign managed to raise $378,000 on campaign contributions. She received a lot of coverage as a progressive stars and was castigated for using profanity in public statements. She also didn't live in the 9^th district, having only registered to vote in the 7^th district before the announcement. She received a lot of publicity because of her campaign and she finished second to Daniel Biss, the Mayor of Evanston. She received less than 26 percent of the vote as did  Ahmed.

ONE HOLD, TWO LOSSES

 

Pennsylvania May 19^th

A lot has been said about Chris Rabb and Chris Rabb has said a lot of things when he ran for the 3^rd district. I won't dignify him by bothering to repeat him. I'll be honest he makes me yearn for the days of Marjorie Taylor Greene and that's the main thing he has in common.

He's running unopposed in the general. No Republican opposition. No opposition at all.

These are the exact kind of fights the Justice Democrats love. They don't have to justify anything to the electorate. And it demonstrates to me how for all the arguments about a 'rigged game' people like Rabb and other Justice Democrats benefit it from it as much as the Freedom Caucus does.

There are quite a few swing districts in play in Pennsylvania that are held by Republicans. The DNC wouldn't dare let a candidate like Rabb  or Summer Lee, the other Justice Democrat in the state anywhere near them and they sure as hell won't have them campaign there in the fall.

So yes this is a gain for the Justice Democrats but its also the only kind of gain they can manage.

ONE GAIN, ONE HOLD

 

New Jersey June 2^nd

Adam Hamawy is running to succeed Bonnie Watson Coleman in the 12^th district. Hamawy has served in the New Jersey national guard and served in the Iraq War. One of his patients was Tammy Duckworth who credited him with saving her life. He's served in disaster zones such as the aftermath of September 11^th. In May of 2024 he joined a volunteer mission organized in part by the WHO which led him to be trapped inside Gaza at the end of the mission. He's also volunteered following the siege of Sarajevo, the 2010 Haitian earthquake and the Syrian civil war.

The biggest difference between him and the typical Justice Democrat is that he has the support of a PAC, American Priorities a pro-Palestinian political action committee. This PAC spent nearly 1.5 million dollars leading to his eventual winning the nomination which he did last night, albeit with just under 28 percent of the vote in the New Jersey 12^th.

Two things occur to me. First even though Hamawy was endorsed by a PAC – a fundamental violation of the Justice Democrats core principles – no one among the Justice Democrats seemed that upset about it. And second even with the money invested into the race Hamawy still got roughly the same percent of the vote in so many contested primaries. 8 years ago Peter Jacob challenged Coleman without a PAC and could only get 19 percent of the vote. Here Coleman had retired, Hamawy had the full weight of the Justice Democrats behind me and a political action committee – and he still only got 27 percent of the vote. It's hard to argue that the people are truly onboard with so much of what the Justice Democrats want.  

ONE GAIN (PENDING)

 

California June 2^nd

Three new candidates were running for in California along with Ro Khanna who won his primary: Mai Vang in the 7^th, Saikat Chakrabarti in the 11^th (Nancy Pelosi's district) and Angela Gonzalez-Torrez who was challenging Jimmy Gomez in the 34^th district.

The clearest loser in this Chakrabarti and not just because he finished a distant third with less than 15 percent of the vote. Chakrabarti is the co-founder of the Democrats and served as AOC's campaign manager and then her chief of staff. He was part of Bernie Sanders presidential campaign which was the impetus for the Justice Democrats foundation. He is one of the major forces behind policy such as the Green New Deal. In rhetoric he's been as inflammatory calling the Blue Dog Democrats 'the new Southern Democrats'.

But when he ran AOC not only refused to endorse him but wouldn't even mention him in interviews, despite the Justice Democrats backing his campaign. He actually started his campaign one month after Trump's inauguration even before Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had not yet decided she was going to seek reelection, announced her retirement. His rejection is the loudest and clearest sign of not only the lack of appeal the Justice Democrats have but how their own leaders will turn on their own.

Considering according to California politics the top two finishers in each primary advance it remains unclear how the others will play out. In the 34^th Angela Gonzalez-Torres was challenging Jimmy Gomez and while she will likely advance Gonzales-Torres is currently trailing by 20 points. For Mai Vang, challenging incumbent Doris Matsui in the 7^th district, she's currently fighting it out for second with GOP challenger Zachariah Wooden.

What is noteworthy is that for all three challengers none of them are doing particularly well even in heavily democratic districts. Chakrabarti finished with less than 15 percent of the vote, Vang has barely 25 percent and Gonzales-Torrez has just under 26 percent.

ONE HOLD, ONE LOSS, TWO PENDING

 

So halfway through the primary season the Justice Democrats have managed to get two candidates to win their nomination and one definite win. They've also lost four of their primaries, three in fairly convincing fashion. Two of them are pending though considering that in both cases they will have to compete against a heavily funded incumbent; the odds are not immensely in their favor. (They'll also hold four seats they have but this article is primarily about the new faces.)

This would seem to confirm my overall opinion of the Justice Democrats as not being a political movement in any reasonable definition of the term. Indeed my definition of them as the Floyd Paterson's of the Democratic Party is being generous at this point. Paterson may not have fought boxers who were true heavyweights but he was nevertheless able to win most of his fights. For people like Chakrabarti and the overwhelming majority of the defeated candidates they can't even land a punch where the judges should be willing to grant them more leeway.

One win and four defeats is not a great record for any major political banner. It's great by the Justice Democrats standard I grant you but considering that they lost 72 races in their first attempt (I will drive this point harder then Liston did to Paterson) they could only go up from there – and they have struggled just to keep an even keel.

And it needs to be said this group of contenders were the easy bouts on the schedule. It's only going to get harder from here. I'll be back to give the next official report on the fight in three weeks when New York's primaries are over as the Justice Democrat battle comes to the home turf of their own heavyweights.

 

 

 

Coalition for The Sane: How I Decided, In My Own Small Way, To Get In The Arena

 

I've spent a lot of this on this site and others – probably far more then is good for me -  haranguing the loudest and angriest voices for their nihilistic diatribes disguised as political commentary. To be fair in almost all of them – at least 90 percent I'd argue – much of it is meant as constructive criticism. I'm well aware that the watchword among the left ever since at least the 1960s has been that doing so has always put you in the same camp as the enemy. (In fact I've been making that argument in that criticism more than once but that's not what this article is about.)

Even at my most vitriolic – and if you're part of the coalition you know how obnoxious I can be when I get passionate – I've always been sincere.  As I said, I'm in agreement with them about their causes and I want them to succeed. I understand their frustration at how things are and the desire to do something. So I always ask what their plan is. The best case scenario is I get no response from the authors; worst case – well I think everybody reading me knows what the worst case is because they've experienced it themselves.

It's for that reason in recent years I've expressed an increasing amount of frustration with so many of the most prominent left wing voices elsewhere, whether they write for prominent magazines, are members of the Hollywood or academic circle and yes certain members of my own party. If you've read my articles about the upcoming midterms or many of my articles on New York politics you know where I stand on who I think the Democrats should listen to going forward – and possibly even some Republicans. (As I said, they're not going anywhere.) I've made clear in quite a few articles the difference between the activists and marchers and those who do the grass roots work at a political level and I've made it very clear who I know is more effective.

But there comes a time when one has to walk the walk as well as talk the talk. And while I felt these articles are providing a contribution, however small, to where I thought America should go in a post-Trump world I actually want to see if there was something I, as an American, could do beyond the usual voting and occasionally donating to the DNC and some candidates.  So earlier this year I decided to really step out of my comfort zone in the biggest way possible.

If you've read my columns on the midterms or if you know anything about Democratic politics you may be aware of how the Senate race in Alaska might be competitive this year. In January Mary Peltola who in 2022 became the first Democrat to represent Alaska in half a century in Congress announced that she was going to run against Republican Dan Sullivan for the Senate.  Considering that she had been a member of Blue Dog Democrats and that if the Democrats wanted to be competitive they needed candidates like her to be running in red states, the political establishment knew this was a big get.

I'd been a fan of Peltola's since reading a New York Times Magazine piece on her Jared Golden and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez in the spring of 2024.  In the fall elections Golden and Perez kept their seats but Peltola narrowly lost, a blow for the Democrats when it came to holding Congress but a cause for rejoicing among progressives like David Hogg, who found her endorsement by the NRA a sign that she was a DINO. He bid her good riddance when she lost.

Peltola spent much of 2025 decided whether she would run for the Senate and this past January began her campaign. As I've written she's the kind of Senator, Democrat or Republican we'll need in the post-Trump world and while I wrote about her I spent much of the next few months wondering, could I do something? Not move to Alaska for 2026 but something besides giving money.

The thought stayed with me throughout the spring. Finally in April when Peltola's campaign sent me a fundraiser I did something I haven't done for a very long time. I clicked on a link to see if there was a way I could do something to help. Not sign a petition. Not give money. Help.

I ended up going through a series of forms and eventually led me to some options. Since door to door campaigning or anything that was at the PURE grass roots level was not something I was willing to commit to, I finally found something I could do from the relative comfort of my own home: phone bank and try to get undecided voters to vote for Peltola in November.

So I signed up and waited for the call. The first call came last month. It asked me to engage in a webinar involving voter safety. This I figured was something you had to deal with in Alaska considering how much of the state requires voting by mail. But there was a catch: it was at 5:30 PM Alaska Standard Time.

Now I'm not naïve enough to not have realized the time zone difference but I wasn't sure whether it meant Alaska was four hours ahead of me or four hours behind me. A google search gave conflicting information. I assumed it was at 1:30 pm. And then I learned it was actually 9:30 PM.  In either case I didn't have anything big planned so I agreed.

9:30 Wednesday came. I was looking for an email. It didn't come. I spent the next hour waiting for it to come. Finally I checked my email. It had come – at 6 PM. Sigh.

Undaunted I actually sent an email to the Peltola campaign explaining my situation and asking if they could send a tape of the webinar. Then I looked at the site again and they sent me to Alaska Democrats.  This was more promising. I immediately did some more signs ups for several volunteer phone banks including one for this past Saturday. I should mention by now I'd cracked the time zone. There were two options. Thursdays at 1 AM to 3AM EST and Saturdays 6pm to 8pm. I wanted to help the cause but not to stay up until the wee hours. I was willing to sacrifice some Saturdays.

The campaign, I should mention was very understanding – and efficient. I expected to hear back from them at the earliest in a few days. They got back to me within 24 hours and were very understanding. Then last Wednesday at 7:30 PM a campaign worker called me to verify if I would be available on Saturday. I said so definitively.

So last Saturday I attended my first virtual campaign event. The exact details of what was discussed I will lay out in a different article down the road. (This will serve as an introduction  of a different series of articles.) Suffice to say I learned quite a bit about Peltola, campaign issues in Alaska and what to say and what not to say in a phone call.

Then I was directed to a virtual phone bank and a list of Alaska Democratic voters who had not voted in the last election. I made somewhere between 45 and 50 calls my first day. Let me say upfront I now have a healthier respect for telemarketers then I've had in my entire life.

I actually talked to six human beings the first time. Two told me to go to hell, with one of them saying they'd moved to Canada after the 2024 election. One said no outright. Two said they were interested but were busy and asked if someone else could call back later. And one agreed that he would be willing to vote for Peltola. As you'd expect most of them either went to voicemail or I didn't reach anybody at all.

Am I discouraged? Not in the least. Do I have an overinflated opinion of myself? Not really. But at the end of the session I felt a sense of accomplishment that I don't know if I can describe well to anybody: the feeling of having contributed, of being part of the process. There might be some of you reading this that know what I mean; I'm actually hoping there are more of you then I want to think.

After being horribly cast aside by the voters in Tuesday's primary John Cornyn quoted Theodore Roosevelt's famous 'In The Arena' speech.  While I've never been thrilled with Cornyn (that doesn't mean I'm happy he lost) I've always been a fan of TR and I've always admired the things he said.  This speech made in 1909 has always been about the difference between those who stand on the sidelines and comment and those who get on the field of politics and fight for what they stand for. Cornyn was willing to do that and for that reason I will have a certain respect for him that I just won't for so many of the activists and Hollywood celebrities whose politics I theoretically agree with more but who spent their lives on the sidelines looking down rather than getting down in the dirt and actually fighting for what they believe in.

If Stephen Colbert loses his job in Late Night because he was too anti-Trump, it's not as big a loss as if John Cornyn lost his Senate seat. The former never had any real skin in the game besides mistaking his audience for America. The latter represented his state in the Senate for 24 years and while you might disagree with his politics, he had an effect on American policy far more than Colbert ever did. Colbert's disappearance from late night changes nothing in American politics. Cornyn's defeat changes a lot, and that's besides giving the Democrats a chance to win in Texas.

Similarly if you go to  a No Kings march in a few weeks' time you may feel like you are accomplishing something in the fight against Trump and for democracy. But it doesn't change the fact that Trump was President before you protested and he was President afterwards. It may give you immediate satisfaction but it hasn't changed anything.

Now I don't know that my phone calls have changed anything. I will never know  for sure even if Peltola wins in November. But I don't need to know for sure if any of the people I call actually vote for her. The point is I got in the arena. I did the work. I fought the good fight. She may win or lose, even we do everything right: I have no control over that and I won't pretend it doesn't bother me a little. But I'll be able to sleep a little easier in my bed.

Yes I will be hundreds of miles away from the field of battle the same way that Colbert and his colleagues were when they made jokes against Trump and called it a win. But unlike them – unlike nearly every single one of the activists and academics and Hollywood celebrities and social media hanger-on's – I will be giving my time and my energy trying to help in a very small way make America a better place.  I'm not going to virtue signal and call it a day. I'm going to fight bit by bit, in the small, incremental ways that democracy works and progress really happens. In my own small way I will be in the arena and I can work with that.

I recommend that to all those who have spent their lives writing diatribes or posting squares or signing petitions and thinking they've contributed to 'the cause' when all they've done is promote themselves.  This is what I'm willing to do for the cause. You're willing to do that then we can talk about the bigger things.