A Tale of Two Women

This week two women, whose lives were quite different, each made headlines; one for what she has done and the other for what she still might accomplish. The two women were obviously former Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, and Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

While the hearings for Judge Jackson were being held, Secretary Albright passed away from cancer. Albright was born in a country that no longer exists: Czechoslovakia. Her father was a diplomat and moved his family to London to wait out the attacks of Hitler during the Second World War. They returned after the war, only to have to move again because of the advance of Soviet troops, and then came to the United States when she was a teenager. So, she was an atypical post-war “displaced person”,(a term used for people who were forced from their country and/or who no longer had a country to return to) because her father was a scholar and known internationally. She entered Wellesley College, a top-line women’s college, known then as one of the seven sisters, a name for the collection of premier colleges for women, that was an elite female counterpoint to the male Ivy League schools.

Eventually, after raising a family and obtaining a Ph.D., she began work in foreign policy. She was first named to a prominent post when she was tapped by President Bill Clinton to be the Ambassador to The United Nations. Albright next became the first female Secretary of State during his second term in office. Her interventions were instrumental in the wars in Kosovo and the Balkans; her actions helped bring in both the United Nations and the United States to help resolve these conflicts. She was not a towering physical presence, but her words were heard, whether she was speaking to presidents, generals, or dictators. She famously almost gave General Colin Powell an aneurysm (his words) when she was pressuring him to use American forces to intervene in the conflict in the Balkans and asked: “Colin,” I asked, “what are you saving this superb military for if we can’t use it?”

(Quote from Read My Pins, author Madeleine Albright, page 66–personal copy.)

Wisely, she used the pins she wore on her suits to open conversations where the discussions might be difficult. However, after the United States discovered a Russian spy listening to a “bug” placed in a room in the State Department, she used a huge bug pin when she next met with President Putin. Putin reportedly tried to “read” her pins. Although she hated snakes, she used a snake pin when she met with Saddam Hussein, since, as she later recounted, he reminded me of a snake.

Standing only five feet two inches tall, she used every one of those 62 inches to her advantage. In his biography of Albright, (Madame Secretary) author Thomas Blood reported they did not almost choose her as the Secretary of State. President Clinton checked with his friend Hafiz Assad of Syria, who assured him that the rulers in the Middle East would not take instruction from a woman. Subsequently, Albright assured him that if she could deal with Senator Jesse Helms, known to be often grumpy and recalcitrant, she could deal with any ruler in the Mid-East.

So, when she became the first female Secretary of State, she broke many glass ceilings. But, to her credit, she performed her duties as any other State predecessor would have done. She carried out her roles as she saw them, giving the best advice, considering the varied circumstances she faced. Not only did she disagree with General Powell, but she also disagreed with the President about the genocide in Rwanda. Eventually, some of her ideas prevailed. She had seen genocide in Europe as a child and was insistent that these acts were ones that the U.S. should oppose. Late in life, she discovered her grandparents had been Jewish, but that fact had been hidden as her family tried to survive by practicing Catholicism, so the issues of genocide became even more important.

After retiring from the appointed office, she continued to be active in consulting. She wrote the book mentioned above about her pins, but, more importantly, also wrote a book about fascism. Harper Collins, the publisher, described that book Fascism: ‘A personal and urgent examination of Fascism in the twentieth century and how its legacy shapes today’s world, written by one of America’s most admired public servants, the first woman to serve as U.S. secretary of State.’

Although it was written during the tenure of the disgraced former president, she said she did not consider him a fascist, but she said in an interview with Vox: “Fascism is always, in the end, about stirring people up and giving them someone to hate.” Sound familiar?

I have read this book, and believe that, because of certain current world circumstances, so should everyone else. Shortly before her demise, she wrote an op-ed in the New York Times about the issues in Ukraine. Her admonitions included this conclusion: “Ukraine is entitled to its sovereignty, no matter who its neighbors happen to be. In the modern era, great countries accept that, and so must Mr. Putin. That is the message undergirding recent Western diplomacy. It defines the difference between a world governed by the rule of law and one answerable to no rules at all.”

The world shall miss her wisdom, as shall I.

This week, we experienced the circus that certain members of the Senate created in the time allotted for the vetting of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Judge Jackson, an African American Judge, who has been confirmed by the Senate three times already for positions in lower courts, is now President Bidens’ nominee for the Supreme Court vacancy that will occur when Justice Breyer steps down at the end of this Court term. She gave a personal statement in her opening remarks, mentioning her parents, husband, and daughters, and spoke about her career and respect for the Rule of Law. Jackson mentioned her mentors and Justice Breyer, for whom she had clerked, stating she could never fill his shoes. Additionally, she noted the career of the first African American female Judge-Constance Baker Motley-with whom she shares a birthday and noted that they both cherished the ideal of equal justice under the law and the need for that ideal to be a reality. There is little there, I thought when I heard these remarks for anyone to argue against. Was I ever wrong about that!

Some Senators on the Judicial Committee fought culture wars instead of asking reasonable questions. They rudely peppered judge Jackson with questions about leniency against viewers of child porn, actions against the interests of the U.S. when, as a public defender, she defended some prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. They also questioned her about books found in the private school her children attended since she was on the board and claimed the books called babies racist and the school taught critical race theory. The worst questioners were Senators Hawley, Cruz, and Graham, followed by Senator Blackburn, who asked the judge to define the word woman. (In my opinion, she asked some of the stupidest questions, while the men were boorish, disrespectful, and rude, interrupting the judge so she could not answer their questions.) Not only did they ask these absurd questions of a scholarly Judge who has issued over 500 opinions in her almost decade long career, (and had only ten reversed) they seemed to think the only cases she ruled on were those dealing with porn–of course, that makes for more headlines! She famously noted when denying White House Counsel Donald McGahns’ appeal against testifying before the House that ‘Presidents are not kings’.

Senators Cruz and Hawley consider themselves presidential material, so they wanted to burnish their conservative creds before a national audience. I would wager that they lost some female voters by their behavior. Senator Graham pretended to be so angry that a less experienced judge from his home state was not chosen, that he had to attack Judge Jackson. Senator Sass considered himself a voice of reason but still could not find a way to say he could support her nomination. So far, no Republican has said they will vote for her, although some suspect Senator Romney may do so. I expect Senator Collins will do her famous maybe dance, then vote no, but wouldn’t mind being proven wrong.

I wonder, would any of these Republican Senators approve of anyone speaking to their mother or their sisters in the manner they addressed Judge Jackson? Even some Republicans chastised Hawley for the inappropriateness of his remarks repeatedly about the judges’ sentencing of those charged with sex crimes, and his multiple descriptions of the victims of this pornography. Judge Jackson, to her credit, did not break under this assault; she did not shout back as Judge Kavanaugh did when he did not like the questions about his drinking or sexual attacks. Don’t you remember Kavanaugh refused to answer when Senator Kamala Harris asked him if he could think of any laws that gave the government the power to make rulings that governed the male body?

So, Judge Jackson sat there in the Senate Conference room, hour after hour, being questioned most times by obviously lesser souls, keeping her composure, smiling now and then. It was only when she was embraced by the oratory of Senator Cory Booker, who spoke of his joy, the joy that she brought to him by just being there, and what this representation meant to him and other African Americans, that tears trickled down her cheeks. She had mentioned in an answer to an early question, what she might tell her daughters and others as they started on their career path, the words she received as a college student from a passing stranger-‘persevere’. Booker acknowledged that the roads she traveled were made more difficult because of her race; other times because she was a female, but he repeated what her presence meant as the first female African American on the Supreme Court to so many; it was a big deal! As I have mentioned previously, she should be celebrated, not berated.

In the end, most expectations are that the Democrats have enough votes to confirm, even Senator Manchin is on board with this vote, so it will be held before the Easter recess if all goes according to plan. However, these arguments about CRT, sexual predators, and other cultural issues, such as gender identity, signal that the mid-terms will be about these spurious concerns, straight from the QAnon playbook. The successes in Virginia have brought out those eager to fight school boards and ban books, gays, and teaching about slavery. They appear to want a rewrite of history.

Professor Melissa Murray, a prominent African American scholar who was also on Bidens’ shortlist for the Court, noted in an op-ed in the Washington Post today that the Culture Wars have already started. One can look at the rulings in Texas against parents whose children who seek treatment of gender issues, the rulings in Florida against talking about gays in elementary school, and the abortion rights concerns in many states, many of which are clearly unconstitutional. She considers contraception, gay marriage, and interracial marriages, once thought to be settled law as topics for the future overturning of precedents if some states get their way. To quote her: “All this underscores that abortion was never the conservatives’ endgame. It is merely a way station on the path to rolling back a wide range of rights — the rights that scaffold the most intimate aspects of our lives and protect the liberty and equality of marginalized groups.”

Judge Jackson has echoed other justices in affirming her support for precedents; current justices who said that in their hearings, however, seem to find no problems with a potential overturning of Roe. Time will tell.

Guess that is enough for today–no COVID check now, but it will be back next week as will the discussion of the invasion of Ukraine or Putin’s war.

“Til next week–hope for peace or at least a ceasefire.