With CHARLIE HARPER

The two friends were back on Anne’s patio, sitting six feet apart from each other, bundled up and wearing masks except when they were sipping from mugs of hot coffee that was a necessity because in America where they sat, it is very cold in February.

Helen looked at her friend through the steam rising from her hot drink.

“As a kid, I learned that congressmen and women are supposed to represent the sections of states that elected them and sent them to Washington. Senators, we were told, were supposed to represent not only the entire state that chose them but also to keep an eye on the overall national interest.

“What in the world happened to that?”

Anne paused to reflect before answering. She knew her earnest friend expected a thoughtful answer, but it was tough concentrating in the cold. “Damnable virus,” she thought to herself. “But we have to keep taking it seriously.” She looked over at Helen.

“Yes, that’s what we learned about Congress in primary school. And in the House of Representatives, they still act that way. They speak with what they believe is the voice of the voters who chose them. So everyone from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in Queens, New York City to Devin Nunes in Orange County in Southern California speaks their mind - pretty sure that their mind represents the views of a majority of their voters.

“If the House is raucous and fractious, it’s because the country is that way now.”

Helen was nodding. Anne continued.

“I think the problem is the Senate. These men and women face the voters only every six years. They’re supposed to be part of a sober, deliberative body that sees and responds to the national interest.

“Senators are supposed to lead, not to follow.

“But the senators are acting like congressmen now. Many of them are just as partisan as their House counterparts. Look at Ted Cruz (Texas) and Josh Hawley (Missouri). These guys are waving their arms in the air and shouting about stolen elections and illegal immigrants like a street corner agitator. And some of the Democrats are just as bad, though they are better mannered these days.”

Helen shifted in her seat and after exchanging a glance, the two old friends stood up at the same time. “I’m getting stiff in the cold,” Helen said. “Let’s take a walk to get the blood circulating again. And let’s warm up our coffee.”

Now the two women were walking along quiet streets in their leafy neighbourhood. A dog barked. The happy sounds of kids laughing and playing was comforting. Helen looked at her friend.

“What is going on with this impeachment trial? It’s all so confusing. The President is out of office, but it does seem like he stirred up that riot at the Capitol.”

“The Republicans in the Senate are stuck,” Anne replied quickly. “They know Trump tried to overturn a valid, fair election. It’s obvious that he incited that riot, and I think it will turn out that not only did the White House help to plan all that disorder but that Trump’s flunkies in the Pentagon deliberately delayed approval to deploy the National Guard to the Capitol in order to punish Congress and Mike Pence for defying the President’s wish to remain in office.”

“Well,” Helen said, “if that’s the case, why in the world wouldn’t the Senate convict Trump and then make sure he could never run for office again?”

Anne paused. Her friend had slowed her pace, her face drawn with uncertainty and confusion. Anne finally spoke.

“I think the answer is primary elections. Too many GOP senators worry about Trump’s influence with Republican voters. They fear – because Trump has threatened this – that if they defy him, he’ll stir up primary election challenges when they’re up for re-election. That’s not only expensive, but it can lead to upset defeats. Remember the Tea Party? That was only a decade ago. Several established senators were beaten in primary elections when a small number of zealots can and often do determine the result.”

“So these senators are putting their narrow self-interest in reelection above the interests of the country,” Helen said. “Is that what you are saying?”

“It sure looks that way to me,” Anne replied. “But after we saw such a clumsy initial defence from Trump’s lawyers in this impeachment trial, maybe their incompetence will give enough Republican senators enough cover that they will find the courage to do the right thing. But I would not bet on it.”

The friends walked on for a while in silence. There was nothing more to say.

What’s Rubio really up to?

As the US Senate continues Trump’s impeachment trial this morning, let’s consider Marco Rubio. This man is the senior senator from the crucial, pivotal state of Florida, facing uncertain re-election prospects next year. Only five years ago, he was the Barack Obama of the Republican Party.

He was a rising star. The son of immigrants from Cuba with a compelling personal and family narrative, Rubio seemed bright, articulate and reasonable. He could be the face of Republican resurgence in the rapidly growing and increasingly influential Hispanic and Latino communities in the US.

There was talk that he might win the hotly-contested Republican presidential nomination. Mainstream party loyalists, fearful of the telegenic demagogue from New York City, proudly boasted of their support for Rubio.

But something happened along the way to Rubio’s coronation. Donald Trump happened.

Remember some of the nicknames and insults Trump tweeted at Rubio?

“DISGRACE!”

Rubio “treated America’s ICE officers ‘like absolute trash in order to pass Obama’s amnesty.”

“Lightweight!”

“Not as smart as Cruz, and may be an even bigger liar.”

“Looks like a little boy on stage.”

“Not presidential material!”

“Couldn’t even respond properly to President Obama’s State of the Union Speech without pouring sweat & chugging water!”

And the ultimate putdown: “LITTLE MARIO.”

Rubio never recovered, though after Trump dismissed him from the primary field Rubio was able to renege on a previous promise and run successfully for re-election.

Over the next four years, Rubio metamorphised into a true Trumper. Now, like his Florida colleagues Senator Rick Scott and Governor Ron DeSantis, he has been all too eager to show what a fierce Trump loyalist he can be.

Before Trump’s current Senate impeachment trial, Rubio declared the trial was “stupid,” apparently daring fellow senators Hawley, Cruz and Arkansas’ Tom Cotton to top his disparaging comments. He tweeted the following: “Waste of time! Impeachment isn’t about accountability. It’s about demands for vengeance from the radical left. And a new “show” for the Political Entertainment Industry.”

Rubio is acting this way in an attempt to deflect the ultimate 2022 primary election challenger – Ivanka Trump herself.

But Rubio hasn’t learned the lesson of Jeff Sessions and so many others: Trying to patch up things with Trump is like riding the back of a tiger.

Sooner or later, the tiger will throw you off and eat you.

The nation’s best

George Shultz died last week at the age of 100. Many 20th Century American diplomats will recall Shultz as the best Secretary of State under whom they served. The US has not seen his equal since he left office.

Born in New York City and the beneficiary of a prep school and Princeton education, Shultz served in World War II with the Marines and got a PhD from MIT. He taught economics at MIT, the University of Chicago and Stanford. He was also only the second person to serve in four different cabinet positions – the first three under Richard Nixon.

As Labour Secretary, Shultz confronted racism in some trade unions. As the first director of the US Office of Management and Budget and later as Treasury Secretary, Shultz dealt with issues arising from the American dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency.

At State, he guided Reagan through the process of helping dismantle the old Soviet Union, which collapsed under the weight of its unwieldy defence spending and general internal inefficiency, corruption and rot just after Shultz left office.

No less a witness than then-Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev later said that “without Reagan, the Cold War would not have ended. But without Shultz, Reagan would not have ended the Cold War.”