LATE NIGHT RAMBLE

In 1954, I watched the McCarthy/Army hearings with my father on the new wonder, our TV with a thirteen inch screen that broadcast in black-and-white. I was mesmerized, as was, it seemed, the nation. The outcome changed the direction our country took in the years that followed. I watched the Nixon impeachment hearings on a color TV in the commune I was a part of and was impressed with the evidence and witness testimony that led to Nixon's resignation and changed the course of the nation for some years.

The Clinton impeachment seemed like a farce in comparison, but still fascinating both politically and theatrically even though it changed little. In the current impeachment "trial" in The Senate over the past three days the Democrats have been making their case at times with the gravity and eloquence of the McCarthy hearings and the Nixon Watergate hearings, as well as at times inspiring oratory. The argument has been made methodically with reason, logic, and detailed and thorough evidence.

But, unfortunately, I have little faith anything will change, partly because TV doesn't command the attention or audience it once did, nor do reasoned arguments based on factual evidence. I had a hard time myself staying tuned into the entire three days of laying out the case. The repetitiveness, though perhaps necessary to make the main points of the argument unarguable, was not "sexy" or "dramatic" in the ways the media has conditioned their audience to expect.

Maybe it wouldn't have been as nuanced or reasonable, but if everyone on the Dem side who spoke had played a card from the Repubs and used the words "traitor" and "unpatriotic" about the president repeatedly, maybe that would have resonated for the undecided or tired-of-politicians-and-the-whole-impeachment-process folks. Unless the president's defenders commit a crime of violence in their presentation starting tomorrow, I don't see the Dems winning the vote on witnesses and evidence. Hope I'm wrong.