In Case You Missed It (59)

Grab your cuppa whatever, settle down in a comfy chair somewhere, and enjoy this recap of last week's posts.

Sunday School brought us an interview with Lara Trump, the $15,000/month campaign worker, wife of Eric Trump and daughter-in-law of the president. She spoke with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union, at least until he abruptly thanked her off the air.  Before that happened, she offered this explanation for the president's behavior vis a vis the domestic terrorism plot against one of his favorite targets, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Well, look, this is - he wasn't doing anything, I don't think, to provoke people to threaten this woman at all. He was having fun at a Trump rally... There are issues at hand here that are bigger than just keeping everybody locked down. So, I think people are frustrated. And look, the president was at a rally. It's a fun, light atmosphere. Of course he wasn't encouraging people to threaten this woman. That's ridiculous.

It is ridiculous, she's right about that.  She was equally ridiculous talking about Joe Biden's stutter, which is when Tapper shut her down.

Your Extra Credit task? Taking in interviews with Tom Perez, the chair of the DNC, and Reince Priebus, who was Trump's first (of four) chiefs of staff. The two talked with Margaret Brennan on CBS' Face the Nation.

Perez is hopeless, IMO - and barely quotable, which this close to an election is an offense the party should really deal with - you know, sit him at a desk opposite whatever three famous Dems will be willing to do it, and summarily dismiss him a la the Celebrity Apprentice. Or tweet his fake resignation letter, or something. 

Priebus is still relatively unlikeable, but at least he does a halfway decent interview, defends his candidate at every turn, and attacks the other guy. Here he is talking about what's left of the time on the calendar before Election Day.

I mean, you know, clearly, I think one of the things that you're going to see over the next couple of weeks is that the President's going to be pivoting, talking about the economy. I think this upcoming debate is going to be really important that the President is that, you know, likable, fun, have a good time. 

I don't think Trump had much fun at the debate, given the rules, do you? 

Midweek, I was Wondering on Wednesday about all kinds of stuff, including alleged foreign election interference, but more about the actual domestic election interference being done by the Republicans, or at least by their minions. I gave an earlier example, of the Trump-loving conservative activists were charged for making threatening robocalls, which to me is worse than Iranians making threatening robo-mails. Why? Um, because they're Americans...

I was also talking about the new Ukraine-China stuff that's being dripped out by Rudy Colludy, and the Republicans who are actively complicit in this, or passively so.

And I wonder if I'm the only one wondering if they think releasing this will make more people vote for the ethically-challenged, debt-challenged, Russia-challenged, China-challenged, taxpayer-soaking, lying, bullying, corrupt president, or if they think this will make fewer people vote for the other guy, giving the ethically-challenged, debt-challenged, Russia-challenged, China-challenged, taxpayer-soaking, lying, bullying, corrupt president a better shot at re-election?

I have my ideas on that, how about you? 

Thursday, I did a PPOD  post - that's Pet Peeve of the Day - on the damn Democrats and how horrible they are, once again, at managing PR. This time, the target of my wrath at my former party was the posters-in-chairs boycott of the Senate Judiciary Committee vote to advance the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the full Senate.

I could do a 'Dems are dumb' PPOD at least monthly, I'm sure, without having to stretch my research muscles enough to even wake up my Fitbit. I could have done a dozen just on the impeachment, for Pete's sake.  This time, my own Sen. Chuck Schumer was the focus of my wrath, for a variety of reasons, including these.

I hate to point out that this silliness, during an election where perhaps the highest priority is gaining the majority in the Senate, is not likely to be the kind of thing that's going to push an undecided voter to choose blue. Worse, it might be just the thing to embolden the red guys in the several very close Senate races that the Dems need to win to get the majority. Why feed the beast?

And, with a 17% approval rating for Congress as a whole - the lowest it's been in a year - why don't you at least show up?

And finally, I closed the week with a stranger-than-usual TGIF entry. I had planned on talking seriously about the debate but first I found myself channeling Trump in his post-presidential book, and channeling Melania, as if she was the one who had control of the president's demeanor during the debate. Those two parts were fun to write, for sure.

In summarizing the debate (and I did offer a possible explanation in the post for my take on things), I offered this.

If I were to sum up the night as simplistically as possible, it would be like this: in Donald Trump's world, we'll be kept all warm and fuzzy by surrounding ourselves with piles of really outstanding 401(k) statements and oil company stock certificates and drugs and vaccines while we sit in bars sharing food off the plates of strangers, and if we need them, we have cages for people who don't want to do that, really nice cages Obama built, while in Biden's world, we'll be kept all warm and fuzzy by masks and by surrounding ourselves with allies that trust us, and 'we' includes everyone no matter where they live, even if they were brought here as babies and toddlers from another country by their parents. 

There you have it - the full and veritable pastiche from last week.  See you later for Sunday School.