TGIF 7/31/20

I bet you're ready for the weekend, aren't you?  And ready to make your good week/bad week lists?

Some people, and by that I mean Trump advisor Stephen Miller, the guy who apparently learned how to carry an umbrella from his boss, is upset that President Obama gave some pretty fiery and yes, pretty political remarks, in his eulogy of Rep. John Lewis yesterday.

Now, I'm just guessing here, but I think the Lewis family would have told him not to do something like that, if they didn't want it to happen, what do you think? And do you think maybe attacking Obama is a way to deflect people's attention away from the pariah that is his boss, the only living president who did not participate in the civil rights icon's funeral?  Maybe it's just me who thinks that, I don't know.

Speaking of the pariah, he and his Attorney General, Snitty Snitty Bill Barr, have been touting the possibility that foreign governments are going to print up millions of ballots and submit them, thereby poisoning the presidential election. The ballots, you see, presumably would be votes for Joe Biden - a man with actual foreign policy experience - as if that would be more helpful than having a fickle, childish hotelier-turned-TV-celebrity in the Oval Office. I tell you, I shake my head at some of this. But not Snitty Snitty - he has "common sense" that makes him think this is going to happen.

I'm trying to picture that level of interference, not only because there will be thousands of different ballots in use in November, gathering votes for everything from dog catcher to president, that would have to be perfectly replicated, and be assigned to actual registered voters who have signatures on file, in the correct jurisdiction... So, is it common sense, or an attempt to sow seeds of doubt in our election processes?

Miller, and Obama, and Trump, and Barr -- you can figure out whether they're on the good week list or the bad week list.  The folks below? Yeah, they're all on the good week list.

• The California artist who painted flowers, using a syringe, for 1800 people who work at a Brooklyn hospital.
•  The Wisconsin bus driver who gave a brand new bicycle to a ten-year-old who kept her company when her bus broke down.
• The 12-year-old who read his hero's favorite poem during yesterday's funeral service for John Lewis. 

And I'll leave you today with some of the words of John Lewis, which were published yesterday, the day of his funeral, as he requested. 

Ordinary people with extraordinary vision can redeem the soul of America by getting in what I call good trouble, necessary trouble. Voting and participating in the democratic process are key. The vote is the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society. You must use it because it is not guaranteed. You can lose it.

You must also study and learn the lessons of history because humanity has been involved in this soul-wrenching, existential struggle for a very long time. People on every continent have stood in your shoes, through decades and centuries before you. The truth does not change, and that is why the answers worked out long ago can help you find solutions to the challenges of our time. Continue to build union between movements stretching across the globe because we must put away our willingness to profit from the exploitation of others. 

Though I may not be here with you, I urge you to answer the highest calling of your heart and stand up for what you truly believe. In my life I have done all I can to demonstrate that the way of peace, the way of love and nonviolence is the more excellent way. Now it is your turn to let freedom ring.

When historians pick up their pens to write the story of the 21st century, let them say that it was your generation who laid down the heavy burdens of hate at last and that peace finally triumphed over violence, aggression and war. So I say to you, walk with the wind, brothers and sisters, and let the spirit of peace and the power of everlasting love be your guide. 

There is no doubt about which list to put Lewis on, is there? Nope - he'll be on the good list for the ages.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday (v218)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Let's dive into wonder-land, shall we?

First off, I have to admit to a certain bit of confusion on the whole back-to-school thing.  I mean, on the one hand we've got the president and the Secretary of Private Education telling us that we need to have kids in school, five days a week. And, we also have the president telling us that if we can't have the kids in school five days a week, we should give "the money" to the parents. Which they can spend on the "public private charter religious or home school of their choice." So, I wonder: does the president thing that there's a 'home school' out there that kids go to, take a bus to, like a public private charter religious school?  Or, is having kids in school five days a week not really important after all?

How, I wonder, is putting up a new FBI headquarters, across the street from the president's emoluments hotel, a component of the HEALS Act, the latest stimulus package from the White House and Senate Republicans? I know that many of the senators are against that $1.75B provision, and that the president insisted it get added to the bill, but really? How does that help with testing, or PPE, or contact tracing, or people making their rent, or getting schools open, or anything else?  And don't start with me -- I know the HEROES Act, passed months ago by the House, has more than enough porky stuff too, but this is just one more example of the president attempting to feather his own nest, or at least make his nest attractive for feathering.  I'm getting tired of it - really tired. 

I'm not even going to mention the president's latest obsession or said obsession's obsessions. I'll let you wonder about that yourself.

Joe Biden's talking points for Sen. Kamala Harris have made big news, but for totally the wrong reason. Everyone's all gaga wondering if it means that he's going to pick her as his veep - but what they should be paying attention to are the comments made by Biden ally  Sen. Chris Dodd, who is grumbling about the "lack of remorse" Harris has shown for taking on Papa Joe over his positions on busing back in an early debate. The only thing to wonder here is, when will we no longer have to deal with men like Dodd?

One thing I'm not wondering about tonight? The announcement that President Barack Obama will deliver the eulogy at the funeral of John Lewis; that was my guess and I'm sure it will be a moving, honorable and fitting tribute. I'm also not wondering at all whether Presidents Bush and Clinton will attend - of course they will. And I'm glad the current president will not be there. I wonder not at all about that, too.

And, from the good news pages, we learn that folks have been able to train dogs to sniff out the coronavirus.  A study in Germany found that, with only a week of training, eight dogs were able to smell the coronavirus in saliva samples with a 94% success rate. That's pretty cool, and very exciting given the issues that people are experiencing getting test results back. This could be a game-changer, assuming that additional testing goes well. And while I don't wonder that dogs can do this - we know they're able to sniff out other diseases, including cancer - I do wonder when someone will have success doing something like this with cats.  You know - a new kind of cat scan...

What are you wondering about tonight?

Poll Watch: Corporate Political Speech

Earlier this month, Robert Unanue, the head of Goya Foods, attended a Trump Rose Garden ceremony launching the Hispanic Prosperity Initiative.

I suspect more people know his name now than ever before, given what he said and the reaction to it. I've added emphasis on the sound bite that got him into hot water. 

Today, it gives me great honor — and, by the way, we’re all truly blessed at the same time to have a leader like President Trump who is a builder.  And that’s what my grandfather did: He came to this country to build, to grow, to prosper.  And so we have an incredible builder, and we pray — we pray for our leadership, our President, and we pray for our country that we will continue to prosper and to grow.

The reactions were as expected: multiple calls for boycotting from the left, with regular folks and political folks and celebrities all on board. Unanue and others called that 'cancel culture.'

Similarly, regular folks and political folks and celebrities on the right were equally on board with support for the company, Hatch Act be damned.

And prior calls for boycotts from the right be damned as well - I mean, that was then, and athletes, and this is now, and Trump.

I tossed a six-question survey up on Facebook looking for opinions on the influence of corporate political speech, if any, on people's buying choices: were they boycotters, joiners, or not swayed by this stuff? How long would they stay away from a company? And what contributes to their decision-making process?

I loosely defined 'corporate political speech', as comments and statements from executives, brand spokespeople, or from the company itself; advertising which supported or opposed a candidate, a political party, policy positions, and so on. Rather than pinning it down firmly, I followed the SCOTUS theory: some of this stuff, you simply know it when you see it.

There weren't a ton of responses, which didn't surprise me; I have a lot of vocal friends and we have some strongly opinionated conversations in person and online, but actually taking a survey? That's a 'meh' much of the time, and that's OK. Here's what I found out from the folks who did.

I asked whether people had stopped doing business with a company, started doing business with a company, or decided to never do business with a company because of corporate political speech.

• 63% of respondents said they have stopped being a customer,
• 26% said that they have become a customer, and
• 68% have chosen never to do business with a company because of political speech.

I also asked if there were any circumstances under which a person would go back to being a customer of a company they had boycotted. While 21% of respondents would not boycott in the first place, 

• 31.5% would not go back under any circumstances;
• another 31.5% would, but only if they were unable to find a comparable product elsewhere; and
• 16% would go back if the company issued an apology. 

I wanted to know what issues people found important in making the decision to begin patronizing, continue patronizing, or not patronize a company, and asked that respondents rank some hot-button issues in order of importance to them.

While LGBTQ issues are the most important based on overall ranking, the single most important thing playing into the decision-making process is the consumer's or the company's support of a politician or a political party.

The final question - a 'choose all that apply' - asked which factors might influence a respondent's decision to support - or boycott - a company that others are boycotting.

• 58% said news media articles or posts;
• 42% said their own political position/party affiliation;
• 42% said discussions, including on social media, with friends/family; 
• 21% said something else would be involved; and
• only 5% said social media posts.

I was pleased with the distinction between news articles and generic social media posts; I'm glad my friends are still paying attention to news, instead of just what will get clicks on social media. And, I'm also pleased that discussions, and sharing ideas, matter.

How would you answer the questions? And how do these results compare to what folks in your circle would say?

Sunday School Extra Credit 7/26/20

Our Sunday School post was devoted to the president's 4th Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows. 

Today, we'll hear from a couple of the president's other men: Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, National Economic Council director Larry Kudlow, and from Texas Senator Ted Cruz. 

Mnuchin is first, speaking with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.

On the Republicans taking so long to get a new stimulus plan put together, the Dems having passed one in May, and the Rs missing their own deadlines to announce a bill, potentially causing harm to millions of Americans:

We want to move forward quickly. The bill will be introduced Monday and we're prepared to act quickly. This is all about kids and jobs. This is our focus and we want to make sure something gets passed quickly so that we deal with the unemployment and all the other issues -- Paycheck Protection Plan, tax credits to rehire people and money for schools.

On whether there's really a plan to be announced on Monday:

...we do have an entire plan, it's a trillion dollars. And let me just remind everybody that of the $3 trillion we've already passed, we have about a trillion to a trillion and a half still left to put into the economy. So these are very, very large amount of money, working with Congress to support this. And what Mark Meadows was saying is that within the trillion-dollar package, there are certain things that have time frames that are bigger priority, so we could look at doing an entire deal, we could also look at doing parts... we can move very quickly with the Democrats on these issues. We've moved quickly before and I see no reason why we can't move quickly again. And if there are issues that take longer, we'll -- we'll deal with those as well.

 On how much of a reduction there'll be to the expired $600/week unemployment bump:

...as it relates to unemployment insurance, we knew there was going to be large unemployment. We had a technical issue with the states and how they were going to be able to do this. So, we picked a number that on the average looked OK, but what we've seen is now that we want to have the technical correction -- and we want to have something which pays people about 70 percent wage replacement, which I think is a very fair level. So it's not a fixed number, it's something that pays you a percentage of your wages that are lost.

On even Republicans, including Sens. Grassley, Thune and Cornyn, being against the payroll tax cut the president wanted:

There are other Republicans that supported it, and let me just say -- again, we know we need bipartisan support. We have tax credits that we put in here to incentivize people to get back to work and small businesses to hire people. We have the direct payments. And as you know, the direct payments are much quicker way of effectively giving everybody a tax cut and it's much quicker than the payroll tax cut. 

On having the extra unemployment be roughly 70% of salary, or around $200 on average, and whether that will cost jobs, especially if there's significant GDP contraction in Q2, as expected:

And I think as we've said, we expect the third quarter, the consensus is 17 percent GDP, so we do think you're going to see a very big rebound. I might just also comment on June retail sales. We're 1 percent higher than June of last year. So all that money we pumped into the economy, it worked. People went out and spent. And on -- as it relates to the unemployment insurance, again, I think workers and Americans understand the concept that you shouldn't be paid more to stay home than to work. That the fair thing is to replace wages and it just wouldn't be fair to use taxpayer dollars to pay more people to sit home than they would get working and get a job.

Optimism abounds with Mnuchin, and even more so with Kudlow, the happy puppy of the administration. He talked with Jake Tapper for CNN's State of the Union. 

On Census Bureau data showing that employment is down:

Most people look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics that print out the weekly claims and the monthly jobs numbers. All right, that's what -- I haven't seen those Census numbers. And I don't know that I would put a lot of stock in it, but whatever. The fact remains, as I was saying before, in some places, job increase -- job declines or job increases have been affected. I don't deny it. But it's being made up by people calling back employees, so that, actually, the joblessness rate is going to fall. I'm not going to suggest -- I don't know the July number. We will all learn it in about a week or so. But I do think the odds favor a big increase in job creation and a big reduction in unemployment. I just want to make the point, though, all these other signals, Jake, most economists, Wall Street, elsewhere, are suggesting we are in a self-sustaining recovery. Now, you can argue about the speed of it. I get that. And you can -- and I don't deny that some of these hot spot states are going to moderate that recovery. But, on the whole, the picture is very positive. And I still think the V-shaped recovery is in place. And I still think, Jake, there is going to be 20 percent growth rate in the third and fourth quarters.

On the proposed reduction in the unemployment bump:

It won't stop the assistance. It's going to -- it's going to cap the assistance at a level that is consistent with people going back to work. That's what we have said from day one. First of all, state unemployment benefits stay in place. Second of all, we will try to cap the benefits at about 70 percent of wages. You know, a University of Chicago study showed virtually 70 percent, 68 percent of people actually have higher benefits than wages. We have had a flood of inquiries and phone calls and complaints that small stores and businesses, restaurants can't hire people back. They went too far. Maybe last March, it was necessary for that. But, really, the consequences of people not returning to work -- Secretary Mnuchin said it right. We want to pay folks to go back to work. And, incidentally, we are going to have, on top of the cap of wages, 70 percent, which is quite generous by any standard, on top of that, we will have a reemployment bonus and a retention tax credit bonus for going back to work. So, that's going to more than offset any of this. I mean, the trick here is going back to work. We don't want people out.

And, a random string of what else will be in the Republican package:

Don't forget, in the package, we're talking about a $1,200 assistance check. I just want to add, Jake, I just want to add -- we were talking about employment benefits and so forth. Don't forget, there's a $1,200 check coming. That is going to be part of the new package. I would have preferred a payroll tax cut, on top of that check. But, be that as it may, politically, it doesn't work. But the check is there. The reemployment bonus is there. The retention bonus is there. There will be breaks for small tax credits for small businesses and restaurants. That's all going to be there.

And finally, Senator Cruz, talking stimulus with Margaret Brennan on CBS' Face the Nation.

 
On whether he is on board with the new Republican stimulus bill: 

I am not. We have right now two simultaneous national crises. We have a global pandemic. It is serious. It has taken the lives of over six hundred thousand people. We need to do significantly more to fight the disease. At the same time, we have an absolute economic catastrophe. We have over forty-four million Americans have lost their job, and we have got to get America back to work... (Speaker Pelosi's) objectives are shoveling cash at the problem and shutting America down. And, in particular, you look at the three-trillion-dollar bill she is trying to push. It's just shoveling money to her friends and not actually solving the problem. Our objective should be Americans want to get back to work. They want to be able to provide for their family.

On whether he is willing to consider a lower bump in unemployment insurance:

I- look, I- what we ought to focus on, instead of just shoveling trillions out the door, we ought to be passing a recovery bill. Now, what's a recovery bill? A recovery bill would be lifting the taxes and the regulations that are hammering small businesses so that people can go back to work. A recovery bill-would suspend the payroll tax, which would give a- a- a pay raise to everyone in America who is working. That actually gets people back to work. But what- I am on board with restarting the economy. What- what Democrats want to do- we're a hundred days out from the presidential election. The only objective Democrats have is to defeat Donald Trump, and they've cynically decided the best way to defeat Donald Trump is shut down every business in America, shut down every school in America. You know Nancy Pelosi talks about working men and women. What she's proposing is keeping working men and women from working. And, you know, ironically, what she does have in her bill? She has a big tax cut for millionaires and billionaires in blue states.

Sadly, Brennan didn't have time to probe that last part.  

So, there you have it -- three more Republicans painting us a nice picture of what's to come, in the next stimulus as well as in the jobs number and overall economic growth. Let's hope all of that adds up to a nice stimulus in your Extra Credit points, right? And, do you agree with the rosy picture, or no?

Drop a comment, let me know what you think.

Stay safe.  See you around the virtual campus. 

Sunday School 7/26/20

Who's trying to make headway in the classrooms today?

Well, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, for one; he sat in ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom for his first interview as CoS. He's the only interview for Sunday School; I'll have more in our Extra Credit post tomorrow.

Meadows said that, in the face of the rising death toll from the coronavirus (five straight days of at least 1000 deaths each, and at least 145,000 deaths overall), and the president's "sinking poll numbers," the strategy to turning this around is to

...focus, obviously, on trying to make sure there's therapeutics, vaccines and a number of mitigation strategies, hopefully for those that are suffering from the coronavirus.

And he said, money and time are no object; the president has made that clear. And, given "some of the breakthrough technology" on therapeutics, he's hopeful there'll be some new therapies announced soon. And, he said,

But this is a virus that came from China, something that's unexpected. Obviously, when you're in a political world, there are those things that you can control. There are those things that you can't. 

Now, I don't think - at all - it's acceptable for him to be pretending at this point, six months past the virus arriving in the US, with 145,000 people dead and projections of what, 200,000 deaths by fall, that anything here is "unexpected." That ship, Mr. Meadows, has long since sailed.  And what's also likely too late?

And, as we look at this, it's trying to make sure that we have got our entire team there to provide the relief that so many Americans are looking for and the hope that so many Americans are looking for.

And I'm hopeful that, in the next couple of days, that we will have some very good news on the therapeutic and vaccine fronts, as we try to address this China virus.

You want a way to 'address' the China virus?  Address it as the President Trump Virus - that's what we're dealing with now.

He also said that masks and shutting down the economy aren't the solution to the virus, but "Hopefully it is American ingenuity that will allow for therapies and vaccines to ultimately conquer this." He also spouted the Trump line on testing: we're testing more than any other country; they're only testing sick people, we're testing everyone; we're finding more cases because we're doing more testing; and so on. Nothing new there, at all.

On unemployment, he was clear that the $600 COVID unemployment bump will not be extended, saying that the benefits paid people not to work, which we've heard anecdotally but I haven't seen any real numbers on that.  Regardless - the Republicans "have been very clear" that won't be extended.

We are going to be prepared on Monday to provide unemployment insurance extension that would be 70% of whatever the wages you were prior to being unemployed, that it would reimburse you for up to 70% of those wages. Hopefully as a way to get people back on their feet. We’re prepared --

George interjected, saying that "administrators have said that that's going to be almost impossible to administer and people are going to face real gaps before they get any money.  Meadows said have no fear, they've already been talking about that, and

we believe that in a combination of working with (Treasury) Secretary Mnuchin and (Labor) Secretary Scalia, we'll be able to find a way to actually provide a threshold that will meet that guideline. 

He talked about "antiquated" state benefit systems and so the feds are going to have to work on this, and that Mnuchin is "willing to step in and help with that." And, he said, the economy's not where they want it, but "it's improving very quickly." They've been busy on a bill, he said, with the Republicans, adding

 But, honestly, I see us being able to provide unemployment insurance, maybe a retention credit, to keep people from being displaced or brought back into the workplace, helping with our schools. If we can do that along with liability protection, perhaps we put that forward, get that passed as we can negotiate on the rest of the bill in the weeks to come.

Moving to the upcoming election, George asked "Why does the president keep questioning the election? And why won't he say clearly, as every president has done before, that he’ll accept the results?"

That question turned into a discussion about mail-in ballots, and whether or not there has been wide-spread fraud with that method of voting. Meadows said basically that's because we haven't had "widespread mail-in ballots" and that the Dems "see this as their panacea of being able to put a ballot in every mailbox and hope for the best." Absentee ballots are OK, and the president supports it (even though he doesn't know where he lives and his permanent address may not be valid for legal - and voting- purposes.) 

What we do know is a number of times as we have mail-in ballots, if there is -- is not a chain of custody that goes from the voter to the ballot box, mischief can happen. And we’ve seen that throughout our history. We also see very clearly that if you're going to cast a ballot, you want to make sure it goes in the ballot box and it’s your vote that counts, not your vote for someone else that gets decided by another person.

Moving on to possible foreign interference in our election, from China, Russia and Iran, our intelligence community warned, George wondered if Trump talked about that with his favorite dictator, Vladimir Putin, and what Trump was doing to help prevent the interference.

No answer on the Putin question, but Meadows said Trump's doing a lot, a lot more than the previous administration; "hundreds of millions of dollars" have been invested and there were "two different legislative actions that this president has signed off on to make sure that election integrity is - is important." DHS is on it, DOJ is on it, the intel community is on it, he said.

Now, there's a big difference between foreign interference and foreign influence. They continue to try to influence, as everyone does across the globe. But in terms of actually affecting the vote totals and interacting, I think we're in a good place. We've been willing to work with secretaries of states of every -- of all 50 states as we look at that and the territories to make sure that their systems have the needed resources for the integrity to be there and so that we can count on that.

Well, goody for them, that they've "been willing to work with" all 50 states.  I mean, in any other administration, not immediately doing that would be a dereliction of duty, but this is the 'be nice to me or you're screwed' administration, so I guess we should give them a participation medal or something.

George switched to "continuing unrest" in the Oregon and Washington, where the feds have been sent in to protect federal property, and now the new deployments of feds to cities such as Albuquerque. He noted that New Mexico's gov. Michelle Lujan Griffin, had threatened to sue, and has invited the feds "to work together first" instead of just coming in. Will Meadows take her up on that? 

He said "we certainly want to work with" the governors of New Mexico and the other states where the feds are being deployed. And he took pains to describe the difference between the riot stuff and the crime stuff.  In Portland, he said, the agents are there to protect the courthouse that "has not only been vandalized, but they're trying to burn it down... I mean, we can't have this in American cities." In the other places, they're "trying to "come in and help with gang violence..."

This new thing - Operation LeGend, named after four-year-old LeGend Taliferro, who was killed in Kansas City back in June. The op

-- is really designed to make sure that those moms and dads who have -- who have lost loved ones, who have lost kids and grandkids, and perhaps kids that have lost their parents because of gang violence in these cities, that we come in a very covert way to investigate and work alongside local law enforcement.

Again, we have the 'willing' concept -

Attorney General Barr has been willing to do that, is doing that now and certainly working with the governor in that fashion is what we would love to do.

So, are they willing to admit that a lot of this is really the president trying to shore up his base, and his all-important ratings? Or would they have us believe that this is all coming from the willing goodness of the president's heart?

Stay safe, stay skeptical, stay apart from others, and stay behind your mask.

See you around the virtual campus, and for tomorrow's Extra Credit.

In Case You Missed it (v46)

It was very busy here last week - let's dive in.

The first post of the week was from my Middle-aged White Lady Perspective, questioning whether a person can have more than one sense of outrage without offending people. In the post, I talked about the death of a young police officer, how people reacted in the moment, and how a friend of mine reacted to it now. 

I honestly share the outrage, expressed by my friend, a policeman's mom, over Corona's senseless death, and of the deaths of all the other officers killed in the line of duty. I hope that her son stays safe, on duty and off, and that other police officers do as well.

I also talked about my continued outrage at how blacks and other people of color are treated, including by police officers, and ended with this. 

I just as honestly wish it was socially acceptable to be equally outraged by both circumstances - because honestly, I often feel like it's not.

And that, to me, is also outrageous, and makes things worse, not better.

That was followed by three posts - that's right, three - covering the president's exclusive interview with Chris Wallace. Of all of the Sunday hosts, he's the only one I could see doing an interview like this - the rest of them, not so much.  Here are snippets from each of them.

• In our Sunday School entry, he talked about changing the names of military bases. 

So, there's a whole thing here. We won two World Wars, two World Wars, beautiful World Wars that were vicious and horrible, and we won them out of Fort Bragg, we won them out of all of these forts and now they want to throw those names away. And no, I'm against that, and you know what, most other people are. And I even - I don't believe in polls because I see the fakest polls I've ever seen, but that poll is a 64 percent thing, which actually surprised me. We won World Wars out of these military bases. No, I'm not going to go changing them, I'm not going to go changing them.

• In the Extra Credit piece, he talked about children learning to hate our country in school. 

I just look at - I look at school. I watch, I read, I look at the stuff. Now they want to change 1492, Columbus discovered America. You know, we grew up, you grew up, we all did, that's what we learned. Now they want to make it the 1619 project. Where did that come from? What does it represent? I don't even know - (Wallace said it was about slavery.) That's what they're saying, but they don't even know. They just want to make a change. Cancel culture - I hate the term, actually, but I use it. 

• And, in what I called the Sunday School Final Chapter, he spoke of the possibility of losing in November.

And you know why I won't lose, because the country, in the end, they're not going to have a man who has - who's shot. He's shot. He's mentally shot. Let him come out of his basement, go around, I'll make four or five speeches a day, I'll be interviewed by you, I'll be interviewed by the worst killers that hate my - my guts. They hate my guts. There's nothing they can ask me that I won't give them a proper answer to. Some people will like it. Some people won't like it... But, look, let - Let Biden sit through an interview like this. He'll be underground crying for mommy. He'll say mommy, mommy, please take me home. 

Yeah, that's the president of the United States right there - literally (not just Joe Biden literally) the jerk at the end of every bar in every dive in every city in every county in every state in the country. #MAGAMA

Wednesday's Wondering included a look at how newspapers are being challenged by their staffs over their opinion pages, with the Wall Street Journal being the latest to face this. And, there was some news from SecState Mike Pompeo, of whom I am definitely not a fan. Among other things, he gave us his very 'right' opinion on the murder of George Floyd, and how that has led to an attack on the very foundation of America.

In recent weeks, justified outrage at the actions of a rogue Minneapolis policeman has given way to outrageous efforts to erase American history by tearing down statues of our nation’s founders.

There was a really outrageous comment from him on our rights, and our founding fathers, and it gave me chills. Which is not really the feeling I expect to have when thinking of our chief diplomat, really.

I followed that up with a post about Mitch McConnell also getting all up in arms about people trampling on our freedoms and our rights. Coming on the heels of the Pompeo comments, I could resist paying attention to Mitch. Among other things, he offered this.

As I said a few weeks back, this goes deeper than just constitutional law. America has always prized the spirit of the First Amendment. We citizens must want to protect an open, civil discourse; a true marketplace of ideas. But lately, the political left has embraced something totally different.

You'll have to read the post to find the particular McConnell comments that prompted me to drag out the Irony Board and remind folks of what the Senate Majority Leader *really* thinks about speech, and who gets to exercise their rights.

My TGIF was a bit of a hot mess, with no common thread, really - although there were a couple of sports references, and some stuff about math.  And I did learn

You can get an MBA for only $12.99 through the Find Something New initiative co-chaired by Ivanka Trump as part of her workforce portfolio.

Yeah, seems like maybe someone is trying to game the first daughter with their training and continuing ed stuff, don't you think?

Salman Rushdie was mentioned in the Irony Board post on Thursday, but not for what he said in a June Washington Post op-ed. Here's a snippet of that message, which is timelier and more urgent, I think. And it was the focus of Saturday's Sidebar.

President Trump is, temperamentally, a tinpot despot of this type. But he finds himself in charge of a country that has historically thought of itself — by no means always correctly — as being on the side of liberty. So far, with the collusion of the Republican Party, he has ruled more or less unchecked. Now an election looms, and he is unpopular, and flails about looking for a winning strategy. And if that means trampling over American freedoms, then so be it.

So, there it is - the full veritable pastiche for last week.

I'll see you later with Sunday School.

Sidebar: The Irony Board: Free Speech

In Thursday's Irony Board post, we heard from Mitch McConnell that even the esteemed author Salman Rushdie is uncomfortable with the silencing of speech in America. According to McConnell, 

Rushdie recently signed an open letter with other intellectuals, many liberals, sounding the alarm on this cultural poison. 

It might surprise McConnell to learn that Rushdie is uncomfortable about several other things, too. In an op-ed last month in the Washington Post, he spoke of seeing "several dictators rise and fall" and, and defined for us the 'dictatorial cast of mind."

Extreme narcissism, detachment from reality, a fondness for sycophants and a distrust of truth-tellers, an obsession with how one is publicly portrayed, a hatred of journalists and the temperament of an out-of-control bulldozer: These are some of the characteristics.

Hmm... sound familiar? There's a reason for that.

President Trump is, temperamentally, a tinpot despot of this type. But he finds himself in charge of a country that has historically thought of itself — by no means always correctly — as being on the side of liberty. So far, with the collusion of the Republican Party, he has ruled more or less unchecked. Now an election looms, and he is unpopular, and flails about looking for a winning strategy. And if that means trampling over American freedoms, then so be it.

A tinpot despot? Ruling with the collusion of his party? Trampling on our freedoms? Who knew?

Rushdie also spoke of that infamous Bible photo op,  pointing out that the man "... whose inflammatory language full of racist dog whistles has played a significant role in unleashing white-supremacist bigotry upon us all," stood in the Rose Garden expressing a desire to protect peaceful protesters, while "just down the street, his security forces, some of them on horseback, are attacking a peaceful protest with tear gas and rubber bullets." I'm sure the protesters felt safe, wrapped in the protective arms of tinpot despotism that day, wouldn't you agree?

And, Rushdie noted,

We are so inured to the behavior of this man, so used to his lies, his inexhaustible self-regard, his stupidity, that maybe we are tempted to think of this as just another day in Trumpistan. But this time, something different is happening. The uprising that began with the killing of George Floyd is not fizzling but growing. The man in the White House is scared, and even, for a time, takes refuge in the basement and turns out the lights... 

If left to his own worst instincts, unchecked by his party, what comes next?

If he is allowed to use the actions of a tiny minority of criminals and white extremist infiltrators to invalidate the honorable protest of the vast majority against the murder of Floyd, the violence of the police toward the black community and the entrenched power of American racism, he will be on his way to despotism. He has threatened to use the Army against American citizens, a threat one might have expected from a leader of the former Soviet Union, but not of the United States. 

Rushdie, the intellectual, the freedom-loving American citizen, closed his op-ed with a warning.

In my most recent novel, “Quichotte,” I characterized the present moment as the “Age of Anything-Can-Happen.” Today I say, beware, America. Don’t believe that it can’t happen here.

Do you hear him now, Senator McConnell?  Are you listening, America?

TGIF 7/24/20

A bunch of random stuff to mull over as the 'work week', however that's defined for you, comes to a close.

The NFL Team Formerly Known as the Washington Redskins will be known, this year anyway, as the Washington Football Team.

Why, you ask? Well, there apparently are some trademark and licensing stuff, plus logos and stuff, plus who knows, maybe generating more interest waiting for the new name to be revealed?

And, speaking of waiting, in case you can't, here's a bone you can gnaw on, if you like, that suggests the new name has been chosen, and perhaps why there might be some legal stuff to deal with.

Let's see, what else do we have?

• Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

• Regular math, not Andrew Yang MATH: did you know that the average maximum weekly unemployment benefit for the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico is less than $500? Or that only nine states pay extra unemployment for someone who has dependents?  Or that only thirteen states pay at least a "living wage" ($600/week, the equivalent of $15/hour for 4o hours) in unemployment (with or without dependents) Or that Kentucky's maximum is higher than New York's? The figures don't include the extra (and effectively expired) COVID-19 pandemic benefit of $600 per week. 

• You can get an MBA for only $12.99 through the Find Something New initiative co-chaired by Ivanka Trump as part of her workforce portfolio.

• The entire assembled teams of the New York Yankees and the Washington Nationals took a knee before the National Anthem last night - and the world didn't stop spinning, except for lots of people on social media. And, staying with baseball for one more item, the Toronto Blue Jays will play most of their home games in Buffalo, where they have a Triple-A affiliate. The reason? Concerns about the coronavirus, of course, which prevented them from being able to travel to and from their home stadium. (Not for nothing, there's a ban on travel across the US/Canada border which is preventing people from working, being present for the birth of their children and so on).

• The president may or may not have asked his Ambassador to the UK to ask the Brits to see about holding a British Open at Trump's Turnberry course in Scotland. Both Trump and the ambassador say it didn't happen. Golf Magazine justifies the ask by saying that according to their rankings, Turnberry is #17 on their Top 100 Courses in the World list. If that's true, they can do it when Trump's out of office.

• The FDIC has relaxed regulations related to banks hiring people with minor criminal records, "expanding the pool of potential candidates and leveling the playing field for aspiring bank workers." Going forward, folks with offenses like small dollar theft (less than a grand) or possession of fake identification, can be hired without a waiver; around 100 or so waivers were requested annually.

And, I'll leave you with the funniest thing I saw all week. 

TGIF, everyone.

The Irony Board: Free Speech, McConnell Style

In this week's Wondering on Wednesday, we looked at a couple of news organizations - the Wall Street Journal and the NY Times - which have taken some heat recently for how they manage their Op-Ed pages, and how speech is being constrained. There were also some comments from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on our rights.

Shortly after completing that post, I stumbled on this opinion by Senator Mitch McConnell in the NY Post. Let's take a look at the piece, titled 'The lawless left's attack on America's bedrock beliefs.'

Since the spring, our nation has engaged in important conversations about racial justice in policing. Most people understand that continuing our nation’s tremendous progress toward justice does not mean battling against US principles or history. Progress means fulfilling our values, not attacking them.

And yet a group of radicals has latched onto this moment to say we should repudiate our country itself. Mobs have dragged statues of Washington, Jefferson and Grant through the dirt. And in parallel, inside many elite institutions, self-styled intellectuals say we should similarly discard the basic principles they fought for.

I followed the link above, which took me to another NY Post article; would you be surprised that it contains no mention of radicals, leftists, country, America, US, repudiate, values, founders, or principles? I was.

McConnell goes on to say

One of the key pillars of our nation is the rule of law. In a civilized society, the same laws need to apply to everyone. The times our nation has fallen short on this score, particularly for all the years when black Americans were completely denied the equal protections of law, it has been to our great shame.

This has been central to the cause of civil rights. There’s a reason the Fourteenth Amendment insists on “the equal protection of the laws.” And yet in recent months, local leaders have violated this basic tenet. As riots rocked major cities, we saw politicians decline to act. They seemed to fear far-left critique more than looting and chaos. And we saw the uneven application of other rules, like when mayors cheered on mass demonstrations but continued to prohibit religious gatherings.

Again, another link to another NY Post article, with no evidence that any politicians were 'fear(ing) far-left critique' in any way, shape or form. And, of course, mass demonstrations  - even armed ones - were fine when the goal was the 'right' one. You know, good speech.

That is the rule of law in jeopardy. Of course, that last example is also a First Amendment issue. And the freedom of expression itself is another principle that’s come under threat.

As I said a few weeks back, this goes deeper than just constitutional law. America has always prized the spirit of the First Amendment. We citizens must want to protect an open, civil discourse; a true marketplace of ideas. But lately, the political left has embraced something totally different.

Today’s far left is not interested in winning debates with better arguments. It prefers to shut down debate altogether. It doesn’t try to win the contest, it just harangues the referees to stop the game.

Oh, the irony.  Folks, this is Mitch McConnell talking!

The same Mitch McConnell who refused to allow anyone the opportunity to "win a debate with better arguments." The same Mitch McConnell who "prefers to shut down debate altogether." The same Mitch McConnell who "doesn't try to win the contest." He did that, of course, when he refused to allow consideration of Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination.

He denied every person who voted for Barack Obama the opportunity to have their voices heard, in favor of allowing other people in the future an opportunity to have their voices heard. He denied people their representation.

Not only that, but McConnell also refused everyone who didn't vote for Barack Obama the right to have their voices heard, to have their elected officials go on record, to have them do their jobs.

And yes, this is the same Mitch McConnell, who proclaimed,

One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, 'Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.'

Yep - one of the proudest moments of the Senate Majority Leader was denying people their rights. But now, he's concerned about our rights?

Here's more.

If leftists don’t like an op-ed, they want it unpublished. If they don’t like a tweet, they want to track down the author and get him fired. If they don’t like a tenured professor, they throw around Orwellian accusations that his or her ideas make them feel unsafe.

This hostile culture is getting results. According to one brand-new survey, it is only far-left Americans who do not feel compelled to self-censor their views because of a hostile climate. Everyone but the far left feels the threat. And 50 percent of self-identified strong liberals say that simply contributing to the GOP presidential candidate ought to be a fireable offense for a business leader.

One "brand-new survey" without referencing the organization who led or commissioned the survey, no definitions (what is a "far-left American" and what is the "far-right American" equivalent?), nothing on how or when the survey was conducted - for all we know, the survey is completely fake.

McConnell continued, writing

We recently saw The New York Times apologize for publishing a straightforward policy argument from a US senator. Since, an editorial staffer resigned from the paper because even center-left opinions were not liberal enough and led to her constant harassment. You see, the safe spaces only ever go in one direction.

On elite campuses, such as Princeton, we see faculty turning against their tenured colleagues, and even administrators weighing in, to chastise people with unpopular views.

Citation? References? Facts? Who knows? I guess I should give him credit for actually naming one of the Ivies.  Pompeo only generically referred to "our institutes of higher education" in his comments. 

We see online platforms such as Facebook threatening to ban political advertising altogether, chilling our democracy.

Even at a time when there is significant appetite in Congress to take a second look at the legal protections afforded to these supposedly neutral platforms, they still contemplate giving an angry minority of agitators a veto over Americans’ speech.

Proof that people who hate political ads on Facebook are "an angry minority" and not a disgusted majority? Survey data? Bueller? Anyone?

McConnell, again.

The author Salman Rushdie, who was himself threatened with death for controversial speech, once said this: “Two things form the bedrock of any open society: freedom of expression and the rule of law. If you don’t have those things, you don’t have a free country.”

Rushdie recently signed an open letter with other intellectuals, many liberals, sounding the alarm on this cultural poison.

“Editors are fired,” they wrote, “books are withdrawn...journalists are barred from writing on certain topics...professors are investigated... steadily narrow[ing] the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal.”

You can guess what happened next. The grievance-industrial complex came after the letter ­itself. The authors were accused of advancing bigotry. And the cycle of nonsense started all over again.

The United States of America needs free speech. We need free expression. And all of us, from all perspectives, need the courage to speak up and defend it.

Mitch McConnell

I'll remind you of another thing about Mitch McConnell, so aggrieved by the suppression of free speech that he sees in the country right now.  In February, he admitted that there were 395 House bills sitting in the Senate that would not get passed, or even considered. I'm not sure how many there are now. Isn't that yet another stifling of speech being perpetrated upon our duly elected Representatives?  Or doesn't that count?

And I'll throw in another one - McConnell has repeatedly said that the Senate won't take up legislation unless he knows the president will sign it. So much for the co-equal branches of government, right? So much for "open, civil discourse."

What, or who, is he afraid of? His re-election chances? His wife's boss? The American people? Free speech itself?

Wondering on Wednesday (v217)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Seems the Wall Street Journal is the latest paper to face backlash from employees for printing objectionable opinion column; this comes on the heels of the New York Times facing a similar experience for publishing an opinion essay written by Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton; the piece has been updated with comments from the paper about the editing process and the potential for the piece having been rejected.

Over at the WJS, according to this article from The Hill, employees at the paper wrote the publisher  that Opinion's "lack of fact-checking and transparency, and its apparent disregard for evidence, undermine our readers' trust and our ability to gain credibility with sources." One of the Op-Eds that was cited as an example? That would be one written by the vice president- go figure.

So, what's the wondering? Simply this: What would happen if employees at Fox and Friends, or Hannity's show, or Rachel Maddow's, or even at the White House, decided to do the same thing, and call out some of the fact-challenged silliness that gets pushed to us on a daily basis? Would those employees still be employed, and respected? I wonder.

Speaking of opinions, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had one published in the Washington Post last week.  Here's the third paragraph.

Never before have America's founding principles been under such relentless assault. For decades, our institutions of higher education have sought to debunk or disown them. Last summer, the NY Times launched the 1619 Project, which contends that the essence of America is entwined with slavery and racism. In recent weeks, justified outrage at the actions of a rogue Minneapolis policeman has given way to outrageous efforts to erase American history by tearing down statues of our nation’s founders.

I wonder if the Washington Post doesn't require facts in support of opinions from important people? For example, where are the facts supporting that the murderer of George Floyd was a 'rogue' policeman? Where are the facts about institutions of higher learning? And are we really to accept at face value that there has never been this kind of assault on our founding principles?

And I also wonder about this statement made by Pompeo in his speech the other day.

The founders changed the course of history when they established a nation built on the premise that government exists not to diminish or cancel the individual’s rights at the whims of those in power, but to secure them.

Coming from a member of the administration that is fully supporting the cancellation of rights of certain Americans, that statement is, well, problematic, I think. As are these which came later.

And so we are forced to grapple with the tough choices about which rights to promote and how to think about this. 

Americans have not only unalienable rights, but also positive rights, rights granted by governments, courts, multilateral bodies. Many are worth defending in light of our founding; others aren’t. 

Who gets to determine which rights are not worthy of defending? Who decides that certain people are not allowed to participate in our founding principles, of our being created equal, of our having the same unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?  I have to wonder about that...

Opinions, and disagreements about them, are part and parcel of who we are as Americans.  The rights that Pompeo seems so concerned about both allow and encourage us to disagree, to debate, to challenge, and to protest. We are allowed to be angry, as Americans, and to fight to make our country better.

Rather than considering that a "relentless assault" on our founding principles, I wonder why we can't just call it patriotism?

America: Love it, and fight for it. To do anything less is to fail our founders, and to abdicate our rights.  I don't wonder about that in the least.

Sunday School 7/19/20: The Final Chapter

Yes, it does take three volumes to cover a Donald Trump/Chris Wallace interview.  Parts one and two are in the books; here's the last of it.

After Wallace pointed out that in the latest Fox News poll, Joe Biden beats Trump even on the competency question, there was some back and forth on that test that Trump aced, shocking all of the doctors, no one had ever done so well on it, and, oh by the way, Trump said there was no way Wallace could pass it. And then,

If Joe Biden got in, first of all, he won't call the shots. The people - the radical left people that surround him will call. Religion will be gone, OK? Life, you could forget about that, the whole question of life. Supreme Court - (Wallace confirmed he was talking about abortion) Absolutely. A hundred percent. That whole question, which is a very - you know, it's always been a 50-50 thing... it's actually trending a little bit more towards one side now. 

On religion:

Well, look at what they're doing to the churches. They won't let the churches even open if they want to stand in a field six feet apart. We've had churches that wanted to stand in fields six feet apart. There has never been an administration that's done so much as I have. From tax cuts, to regulation cuts, to rebuilding the military, to getting choice for the vets. Nobody's done the things I've done. Nobody. In three and a half years, no other president's been able to do what I've done.

On the pace of reopening and whether the economy will be an issue in November:

I don't think so. I think the economy is expanding and growing beautifully. Now, the Democrats want to keep it closed as long as possible because they think that's good for election. But I think the economy is doing very well. Now we're coming back and we're coming back at a level that nobody would have thought possible. And we are -- and, by the way, take a look at another -- I mean, a gauge, whether you like it or not, the stock market. The stock market, Nasdaq hit its all-time high two weeks ago and has beaten it 14 different times, OK. The stock market, Dow, et cetera, is a thousand points away from its all-time high, meaning very close. We're going to have a stock market perhaps on November 3rd that's the highest in history.

On having no plan to replace Obamacare:

Well, we haven't had -- excuse me, you heard me yesterday, we're signing a health care plan within two weeks. A full and complete health care plan that the Supreme Court decision on DACA gave me the right to do. So we're going to solve -- we're going to sign an immigration plan, a health care plan, and various other plans. And nobody will have done what I'm doing in the next four weeks. The Supreme Court gave the president of the United States powers that nobody thought the president had by approving -- by doing what they did, their decision on DACA. And DACA's going to be taken care of also. But we're getting rid of it because we're going to replace it with something much better. But what we got rid of already, which was most of Obamacare, the individual mandate. And that I've already won on. And we won also on the Supreme Court. But the decision by the Supreme Court on DACA allows me to do things on immigration, on health care, on other things that we've never done before. And you're going to find it to be a very exciting two weeks.

On how it would be if he lost in November:

And you know why I won't lose, because the country, in the end, they're not going to have a man who has - who's shot. He's shot. He's mentally shot. Let him come out of his basement, go around, I'll make four or five speeches a day, I'll be interviewed by you, I'll be interviewed by the worst killers that hate my - my guts. They hate my guts. There's nothing they can ask me that I won't give them a proper answer to. Some people will like it. Some people won't like it... But, look, let - Let Biden sit through an interview like this. He'll be underground crying for mommy. He'll say mommy, mommy, please take me home. 

He can't do an interview. He's incompetent. There's a number you don't mention. It's called the enthusiasm number. The enthusiasm for Trump is through the roof, even higher - even higher than last time. The enthusiasm for Biden is non- existent. Everyone knows he's shot. (Wallace notes enthusiasm against Trump is high) Well, that's OK. That's his only shot. And that's his only shot. I agree. And those people know I'm doing a good job. But it's something in my personality that they don't like because, look, nobody's done what I've done. Biden wants to come in and ruin our country, triple your taxes. He wants to do things - he wants to add regulations that I've all cut. And we still have regulation, a lot of regulation, but I've cut it down to a level that nobody's - nobody ever thought possible.

He will destroy this country. But it won't be him. It will be the radical left. The same type ideology that took over Venezuela, one of the richest countries in the world. They now have no water, they have no food, and they have no medicine.  That's going to happen here if he wins.

On how he will regard his years as president, whether it ends in 2021 or 2025: 

I think I was very unfairly treated. From before I even won, I was under investigation by a bunch of thieves, crooks. It was an illegal investigation. Russia, Russia, Russia. (Wallace asks about the good parts) No, no. I want to go this. I have done more than any president in history in the first three and a half years, and I've done it suffering through investigations where people have been -- General Flynn, where people have been so unfairly treated. The Russia hoax, it was all a hoax. The Mueller scam, it was all a scam. It was all false. I made a bad decision on - one bad decision. Jeff Sessions. And now I feel good because he lost overwhelmingly in the great state of Alabama. Here's the bottom line, I've been very unfairly treated. And I don't say that as paranoid. I've been very - everybody says it. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. But there's tremendous evidence right now as to how unfairly treated I was.

President Obama and Biden spied on my campaign. It's never happened in history. If it were the other way around, the people would be in jail for 50 years right now. That would be Comey, that would be Brennan, that would be all of this - the two lovers, Strzok and Page, they would be in jail now for many, many years. They would be in jail. It would have started two years ago and they'd be there for 50 years. The fact is, they illegally spied on my campaign. Let's see what happens. Despite that, I did more than any president in history in the first three and a half years. 

I hope you got all of that, from this part and the first two. Remember, there WILL be a quiz on all of this. I don't normally do that, but this is hardly a normal interview.

Stay safe, and I'll see you around the virtual campus.

Sunday School Extra Credit 7/19/20

For today's Extra Credit, we're picking up the action from the Fox News Sunday exclusive Chris Wallace interview with the president. The first part of the interview is in yesterday's Sunday School entry.

After spending quite a bit of time on coronavirus-related issues, and some time on the Confederate flag and Confederate heroes, and defunding schools, they moved deeper into education.

For example, on where the president saw that our children were being taught to hate our country:

I just look at - I look at school. I watch, I read, I look at the stuff. Now they want to change 1492, Columbus discovered America. You know, we grew up, you grew up, we all did, that's what we learned. Now they want to make it the 1619 projet. Where did that come from? What does it represent? I don't even know - (Wallace said it was about slavery.) That's what they're saying, but they don't even know. They just want to make a change. Cancel culture - I hate the term, actually, but I use it. 

Wallace interjected again, asking if they are being taught to hate America.

Yes, I think so. Look at the professors. Look at what's going on in the colleges. If a conservative goes on a college - and look, we have as many as them. Excuse me, I think to the best of my knowledge, we're sitting at the White House and the Oval Office is right behind me. We have as many as them. (Who's 'them' Wallace asked) The liberal radical left, and I'm not talking all - I think liberal, I could tell you I like a lot of liberal people. I like a lot of liberal governors and senators, but Chris, we have the radical left destructive ideology and that's being taught in our schools. And don't act like you're surprised to hear this - there are books written about it, and we can't let that go on. We can't let them change the true meaning of what we're all about and that's what they're trying to do and I don't want it to happen. Not on my watch. It's not going to happen on my watch.

On the latest Fox News poll, which shows the president losing to Joe Biden (-8), and losing on handling the coronavirus (-17), race relations (-21) and even on the economy (-1):

First of all, I'm not losing because those are fake polls. They were fake in 2016 and now they're even more fake. The polls were much worse in 2016.

Huh? They're more faker now, but they were way more worser in 2016?

They interviewed 22% Republicans. Well, how do you do 22% Republican? You see what's going on. I have other polls that put me... We have polls where I'm leading. I have a poll where we're leading in every swing state. And I don't believe that your - I - first of all, the Fox polls, whoever does your Fox polls, they're among the worst. They got it all wrong in 2016. They've been wrong on every poll I've ever seen. (Wallace interjects, I- I must tell you) No, I'm telling just telling you. And-  and let me - let me ask you this. So, on the economy. So I've always led the economy by a lot. (Wallace said he was surprised by the numbers). Biden can't put two sentences together. They wheel him out. He goes up. He repeats - they ask him questions. He reads a teleprompter. And then he goes back into the basement. You tell me the American people want to have that, in an age where we're in trouble with other nations that are looking to do numbers on us.

On whether Trump thinks Biden is senile:

I don't want to say that. I say that he's not competent to be president. To be president, you have to be sharp and tough and so many other things. That - he doesn't even come out of his basement. They think, oh, this is a great campaign. So he goes in. I'll then make a speech. It'll be a great speech. And some young guys start writing. Vice President Biden said this, this, this. He didn't say it. Joe doesn't know he's alive, OK? He doesn't know he's alive. Do the American people want that, number one.

And, (having nothing to do with Joe Biden), there's number two.

Number two, I build the greatest economy ever built anywhere in the world, not only in this country, anywhere in the world, until we got hit with the China virus. We got hit with a virus. Shouldn't have happened. And we had to close up. We saved millions of lives. Now we've opened it up. Got to go back to school. We're open. We've got to do things. We had the best jobs numbers we've ever had last month. We should have good ones coming up in two weeks. Look, I built the greatest economy in history. I'm now doing it again. You see the numbers. The numbers are through the roof. 

And then there's the meanies on the other side.

The Democrats are purposely keeping their schools closed, keeping their states closed. I called Michigan. I want to have a big rally in Michigan. Do you know we're not allowed to have a rally in Michigan? Do you know we're not allowed to have a rally in Minnesota? Do you know we're not allowed to have a rally in Nevada? We're not allowed to have rallies in these Democrat-run states. (Wallace said some would say it's a health risk). Some people would say, fine. (And, Wallace pointed out there were issues after Tulsa).  But I - but I guarantee you, if everything was gone 100%, they still wouldn't allow it. They're not allowing me to do it. So they're not - they're not allowing me to have rallies... And I'll do it a different way. 

And yes, you typically do things in a different way, don't you, Sir?

I'll have a bonus round for all of you distance learners later. Stay safe in the meantime, and yes, there will be a quiz this week.

Stay safe.