Sunday School 11/21/21

For this week's Sunday School, we'll start with Dana Bash and her State of the Union chat with Gov. Chris Sununu (R-NH), and then check in with Margaret Brennan for her conversations with Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Ted Cruz (R-Cancun) on Face the Nation.

Sununu agrees that "everyone likes" the kind of things that are in the Build Back Better bill (BBB) passed by the House - clean energy, climate incentives, universal pre-K, and so on. That's good, but the "immense amount of money" is an issue. He thinks 

fiscal responsibility has left the window out of Washington, DC, and I think that's a frustration for all Americans. 

Inflation "is the worst tax you can put on low- and middle-income families, he added; the answer is finding the middle - and that takes more than cutting the size of the spending.

You do it by looking at what happens at a local level. How do you make sure these programs can get implemented? Remember, the Senate supports a policy. They support funding. And then they go on to the next thing. It's governors and the citizens in local communities that have to implement these programs and that feel the real cost of them. 

He also mentioned, without any detail and without follow up from Bash, that in February, the feds are putting in regulations that will bring "further barriers to getting a CDL license, just getting someone a trucking license." According to the NYS DMV website, the new federal "barriers" include ensuring that new drivers are, you know, trained to be drivers. Oh, the horror.

Sununu turned down a Senate run, saying "as a governor, you can actually play defense and protect the interests of your citizens" from what happens in Washington. And that includes his belief that "politics in its entirety on both sides of the aisle in Washington is screwed up. I mean, it really is," mostly due to them focusing on the wrong priorities.

I agree with a lot of what he said about Washington; how about you?

For her part, Sen. Gillibrand said Sen. Joe Manchin "has come a long way" on paid family leave, and he's "come forward with a lot of really smart questions" in the past few weeks. They both want it to be "an earned benefit" and she's "optimistic" they can come up with something that's bipartisan. The problem is, other Rs who are interested in paid leave aren't interested in what Manchin's looking for. 

Specifically on Manchin's desire to strengthen the "social safety net," Gillibrand says that's what paid family leave will do. 

We know if it's parental leave, parents, mothers are 40% more likely to get back to work if they have paid leave, which goes to Sen. Manchin's concerned that he wants to strengthen our social safety nets. He wants to strengthen Social Security. That's what paid leave does. It gets people back to work. 

They talked about the increase in the SALT deduction cap, which the House bumped up from $10K to $80K, which she hopes will make it through the Senate. Brennan failed to ask Gillibrand what she was doing back home to get NY to reduce taxes, instead of putting this massive benefit to the wealthy in the BBB. While she says the increase will help the middle class, it would give about 40% of the overall benefit to folks making between $366K and $866K, according to the Tax Policy Center. 

Gillibrand also said she thinks Dems are getting the message out now that voters should stick with them in the midterms. And, they'll be doing that even more once the darn thing is signed, when they'll be in their districts talking about how the bill helps families and how that helps the economy.

Brennan wondered if Senator Cruz he agreed with fellow potential 2024 candidates Nikki Haley and Tom Cotton that we should fully boycott the Beijing Olympics. He thinks the Olympics should have been moved to another location, but not with a full boycott.

You know, Jimmy Carter tried that in the 1970s. All it did was punish a generation of athletes. We've got young men and young women, Americans, who spent their whole lives practicing for this moment. I don't want to punish those young athletes.

He agrees with the administration (without agreeing with Brennan that he agrees), on a "so-called diplomatic boycott," in which we "try to minimize the attention" by not sending any high-ranking government officials. But wait - there's more.

Number one, that we actually show the courage the Women's Tennis Association is showing to call out the murder, the genocide, the torture, the lies, the complicity in COVID-19 of the Chinese communist government to speak the truth. And then number two, I really hope our young men and women, that they go over there and kick their commie asses. We need to win in the Olympics.

He'd also like to see corporations "show a tiny bit of courage" and not do any Olympic-related advertising; he thinks that would make sense.

And finally, is Cruz running for president? He said he has "no idea what's going to happen in 2024" and that the Former Guy has a decision to make - is he running, or is he not. Aside from that, 

I can tell you that- that when I ran in 2016, we came incredibly close. I came in second. There's a long history of runner-ups becoming the next nominee, and it was the most fun I've ever had in my life. But there's a lot of time between now and 2024.

See you around campus.

Guess What: You Live in a Bubble, Too

Like many, I've seen lots of articles and news stories and videos and memes and celebratory posts and agonized posts about the verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. 

Many of them suggest that people like me are idiots. We're a bunch of poor, hated, misguided libtard snowflakes blah ditty blah blah blah because we have an opinion that disagrees with the opinion of the people who are "right" about the trial. 

 

According to the folks I'm referring to, I live in a leftist bubble, and I'm incapable of forming an opinion; all my thoughts are being spoon-fed from the mainstream media. This message is for them.

You may not agree, but you live in a bubble, too. 

The news media that you follow, the pundits and talking heads you pay attention to, the memes you read, the posts you share, say that Kyle Rittenhouse didn't do anything wrong, and that anyone who's outside your bubble simply hasn't been paying attention. 

They say that he was only defending himself, and that he had every right to be there, and that him wandering around with a gun fortunately long enough to keep him from being charged with a gun crime was fine, and no one should have thought twice about that. They say he used his gun with skill and responsibility.

They say that no one should have been concerned about this baby-faced teenager, in his blue gloves for "helping people" and his gun slung over his shoulder, running around during a riot that started as a protest because people were angry because a black man, once again, was shot by police, who were found to have done so righteously, once again.

They say that the fact that he was "appreciated" by the police, for helping, or for whatever it is they thought he was doing, means that whatever it was he was doing is OK. They say that a good guy with a gun is as good as the police, because the police can't be everywhere at the same time. They suggest that you can be Kyle Rittenhouse, if you want, and that there shouldn't be consequences if that's the choice you make.

They say that he brought the gun to the riot not for self-protection, but to protect businesses, and that his carrying the gun signaled no intent to use it, and that he only killed two people and wounded a third because they 'came at him,' a kid - a child - carrying a rifle in a riot. 

They tell you that it's perfectly OK for a judge to say that the men Rittenhouse shot could not be called victims, because that was prejudicial. They tell you that it's OK to be prejudicial to the victims, but it's not OK to be prejudicial to the defendant, the only person on trial for what happened, the man-child of the hour. 

They tell you that his two dead victims had criminal records, and they therefore deserved what they got. The third, the one who lived, also had trouble with law enforcement, and he deserved what he got, too. Those criminal charges have nothing to do with Kyle Rittenhouse, and nothing to do with the riot, but that doesn't matter, because they were bad men and, honestly, who cares about them anyway?

They tell you that anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong, biased, drunk on the lies fed to them by the mainstream media. They tell you that anyone who disagrees hasn't been paying attention to the trial, because if they had, how could they reach a different decision? 

They tell you we need more Kyle Rittenhouses. Elected officials suggest that Rittenhouse should be in Congress; one very famous resident of your bubble suggested that we need Rittenhouse in the Oval Office; another said we should have a national holiday called Kyle Rittenhouse Day, celebrating his freedom and what he did. 

They tell you that Kyle Rittenhouse was a hero and that everything he did that night in Kenosha was fine. That he did what needed to be done and that if he hadn't had acted, bad things could have happened. 

You know what? They'd tell you the same thing if Kyle Rittenhouse had killed your son, your daughter, your grandchild, your niece or nephew, your neighbor. They would turn on you, your family, your community, in a heartbeat, if it served their purpose.

I don't hear you talking about that, and I don't hear you talking about this stuff, either: 

What about Kyle Rittenhouse? He's not going to prison. He can run for Congress, or be a nurse, a career he might pursue, or be a cop, something he thought he wanted to be when he was growing up. The world is his oyster, as they say. 

He will be in his own personal hell, though, suffering for who knows how long, as he says he does now, from PTSD. At some point, I hope he realizes that it is his decisions, his actions, that caused his personal hell. And I hope that he gets whatever help he needs, when he needs it.

He won't have the luxury of having a private hell, though, because he's been adopted by the right-wing bubble, by the Former Guy's lawyers, the stolen-election crowd, by the lunatics, by the pundits, and they will use him, as they've been doing all along, for as long as it serves their purpose. 

He'll have his memories, the picture of him in his Free as F*** t-shirt, and the posters and the videos and the articles and tapes and the reporting and all the rest of it, to remind him forever of how he was their hero. And I hope he realizes how he was used by a bunch of people who, honestly, don't have half the cojones he has - people who wouldn't even think about making the kind of commitment Rittenhouse made when he went to Kenosha.

I hope all the people who are cheering him today remember him in the future. And I hope people realize that we all lost something with this case. 

Dear Democrats: Can We Talk?

You might not remember me, but I was one of you for decades, up until 2019. If you're interested, here's why I left you. And even if you don't care about me anymore, I still care about you - and I have to say this:

You will officially, completely screw things up 

if you don't get your heads out of the clouds, 

out of the sand, out of the weeds, and out of your caucus,

 and start paying attention. 

Here are some things I think you need to understand, from a person who always votes - but not always for you.

1. Joe Biden won the election, and you hold the majorities in DC, but you've never had a mandate. Biden got more votes not because of his policies, but because so many people who voted for him did so because they despised Donald Trump. I'd guess maybe as much as 30% of his votes came from us - yep, I'm one of them. 

Whether you remember this or not, we remember that Joe Biden was the nominee because the other candidates could not beat Trump. We were sick of Trump, and voted accordingly. But we also remember that the progressives were not hitting it out of the park in the primaries, because most people are not as progressive as you wanted us to be. 

Successfully denying Trump a second term while holding less than 51% of both the House and the Senate do not a legislative mandate make. Any thinking to the contrary is both foolish and foolhardy.

2. You act like a presidential term lasts only from Inauguration Day to Veterans Day. As a result, you prioritize everything equally, which means you prioritize nothing. 

To you, everything is an existential threat. Child Care. Universal pre-k. Climate. Broadband. Voting rights. Billionaires. Health insurance. Student loan debt. Drug prices. Corporate profits. Defunding the Police. Free college. You name it, it's an existential threat - except maybe immigration. You seem to have forgotten about that. 

But are these really threats to our very existence as a country? Are these really threats to the continuation of humanity? Arguably, the only one that meets that level is climate change; the others do not. That doesn't mean they aren't all important - but thinking you must solve all of them at once, coupled with your inability to prioritize them, is ridiculous. 

3.You throw everything you can think of into every bill. We are sick of that, frankly, whether it's you or the other guys doing it. Not to mention, it jeopardizes your chances of getting anything passed. 

Look, I get it. The tent is big, and everyone's got lofty goals and good intentions - but that's a foolish way to legislate.  Need an example? How's this one: what do a code of ethics for Supreme Court justices, requiring candidates for House, Senate, and the Presidency to release ten years of income tax returns, and public financing of campaigns have to do with my right to cast a ballot? Absolutely nothing.

We are not stupid. We know, and you do too, that those provisions were drafted because you wanted to stick it to Trump for not releasing his taxes, because you're mad about how blatantly chummy and political some of the Supremes are, and because you've long wanted to get the other guy's money out of the mix. 

We also know those things will make it nearly impossible to get a voting rights bill passed and signed.

4. You think all elections are a reflection of national politics, and you try and make them so. 

• Look at this ad the Virginia Dems ran against Glenn Youngkin. Why even mention Trump at all?  

• Or, this mailer placed by the New York State Dems against my mayor in Syracuse. No one's ever accused him of any affinity or affiliation with the Proud Boys - no one, until the Dems did. What the actual hell were they thinking?

Where do the state parties get those ideas? Are they getting them from the national parties, or from the various campaign committees? Even if they pull this stuff out of thin air, it's got to stop. 

5. You don't treat voters - particularly your own voters - with respect.

There've long been complaints that you only care about voters when you need them, not when they need you - particularly Black voters. And, you treat us as if we can't possibly understand how important your work is, and that our frustration with your inaction is unfounded. 

You're wrong on both counts. We never asked you for perfection, and we don't have the luxury of waiting for you to craft something perfect. We all need something, and we don't have the luxury of watching you accomplish nothing. You will lose us. You're already losing us. 

6. This cannot be overstated: you are horrible messengers.

• You are comfortable talking about what you're against, but not what you're for.
• You're miserable at marketing. Did you really think Defund the Police could hold a candle to Make America Great Again? Do you think it's helpful to hobnob with the rich while wearing a dress emblazoned with "tax the rich" - when the dress is worth more than a year's salary for someone earning $15/hour?
• You're either uncapable of fighting - or unwilling to fight - the lies told by the other side. Critical Race Theory and immigration are perfect examples. Need another? Election fraud, like the allegations in the VA gubernatorial race. 
• You're great at infighting. Progressives, in particular, are adept at attacking moderates and at making it nearly impossible to accomplish anything. The only people who think that's helpful are your GOP counterparts.
• You still haven't found anyone able and willing to get in front of microphones and in the faces of the talking heads and sell me and everyone else that your really understand what matters to us, what you stand for, how that'll help us, and how you're going to accomplish it. I've said it before, but it bears repeating: you need That Democrat, and you needed them way before yesterday.

In closing, I'd like to let you know that I just sent a thank you note to my Republican congressman; it's the second time I've done that in the past couple of months. I let him know that I'll be voting for him in the midterms next year. 

I didn't want to keep that last part from you, because I know I'm not the only one who's going to do that. I'll continue voting for people who understand what matters, regardless of their party affiliation. 

If you want me to vote for you again, I hope you'll take my advice to heart. 

Thanks. 

Wondering on Wednesday 11/3/21

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I'm wondering untraditionally this week. Instead of entertaining or antagonizing you with my own ramblings, I'm sharing the ramblings of the experts, who are looking in their rear-view mirrors at yesterday's elections.

Biden arrives back in Washington to a political nightmare

Returning to the White House in the dark, Biden declined to answer questions about the race, which he'd incorrectly predicted Democrats would win eight hours earlier. The results had been called a half-hour before Biden touched down at Joint Base Andrews. Aboard Air Force One, people familiar with the matter said the mood was grim as a weary team returned to what has become a swirl of recrimination and second-guessing…

But, Biden said, there's not much that could have been done given historical trends and enthusiasm among Republican voters.

"I think it should have passed before Election Day," Biden said of his legislative agenda, "but I'm not sure that I would have been able to change the number of very conservative folks who turned out in red districts who were (former President Donald) Trump voters. But, maybe. Maybe."

Are the Democrats doomed? 

Even if Democrats regain their footing and recover some lost ground, it is hard to be optimistic. Given the GOP's structural advantage in the U.S. Senate, Democrats would need to win by at least four points nationally just to retain their slim majority next year. And if democracy reforms like national non-partisan redistricting remain stalled in the Senate's legislative mausoleum, Republicans are likely to win the House unless Democrats have the best midterm for either party since George W. Bush's Republicans defied history in 2002. It's hard to see how that happens given what transpired Tuesday. 

Democrats: This is no time to panic 

So if I were a Democratic political strategist, I would recommend three things: One, pass the Biden agenda in the best possible form — hopefully with some of the economic capacity elements included to cut down on inflation — and as soon as possible. This would get some kind of accomplishment on the board and end the humiliating media coverage. (If the party flips out, passes nothing, and spends the next year hiding under the bed, defeat is guaranteed.) 

Two, pass voting rights protections to make Republican cheating harder.  

Finally, pray to every god in the book that the party gets lucky. Campaigns are important, and Democrats should do as much as they can. But the results in Virginia and New Jersey demonstrate no candidate can compensate for wretched conditions on the ground.

Reeling Democrats see threat to House and Senate control as Republicans crack their 2020 coalition

Democratic officials and strategists said that to counteract what unfolded in Virginia — strong anti-Democratic and anti-Biden energy driving the conservative base and suburban independents to vote Republican — the party needs to significantly improve its economic pitch, engage with young voters, voters of color and women under 50 far earlier and more aggressively than they have this year and renew efforts to recruit a more diverse slate of candidates. 

Republicans broke through in Virginia, but not for the usual reasons.

Glenn Youngkin, the Republican candidate for governor, won by making broad gains over Democrats in every part of the state and, apparently, across every demographic group. He gained in the cities, the suburbs and rural areas. He gained in the east and west. He made inroads in precincts with both white and nonwhite voters...

The broad shift to the right could indicate widespread revulsion against Democrats, or it could simply be a sign that longstanding trends have finally run their course. Or perhaps it’s because Mr. Youngkin adopted a message that appealed to the kinds of voters who have gradually been fleeing the Republican Party.

An electoral thumping boosts Democrats' urgency to pass Biden's agenda

"We can never run on just anti-Trump," Jayapal said. "We have to run on the things we do." Democratic pollster Cornell Belcher said the election result should "put a sense of urgency and a fire under" the goal of passing Biden's agenda. "If you look at how upset Americans broadly are about what they see as a dysfunction in Washington, and if you're a rational Democrat, you have to understand we've got to do something, we got to start delivering for the people," he said. 

Democrats misjudge anti-Trump vote in suburban setbacks: The Note 

It means that President Joe Biden is back on American soil Wednesday trying to pick up the pieces of a stalled agenda in addition to a freshly battered party. Biden himself has experience in running against -- and defeating -- Trump. But in Virginia, Biden turned out to be about as unpopular as Trump among voters overall. (There were no exit polls in New Jersey)...

Trump is already claiming full credit, but Youngkin won by keeping some distance between himself and the former president; Democrats were more eager than Republicans to talk about Trump in this year's key races...

For months, Democrats have heard from strategists, analysts and even members of Congress worried that their party has drifted from relevance to people's lives. A similar message has now been delivered from many of the same suburbs that gave them majorities and the presidency. 

What do you think? Are the Dems doomed? Do they have a clue about what voters want? Do they even know why people who voted for them last year did so? Does the rest of the country actually care what happened in Virginia? 

Chime in, if you're so inclined. I'll be sharing my thoughts on this tomorrow.

The Election Eve Post, 2021 Edition

It's that time again - the night before the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. That means it's Election Eve, and time for me to do my absolute best to encourage you to vote.

Odd-year elections aren't usually as exciting as even-year ones, are they? Hardly any ads on local television, and we get a whole lot less political junk mail, right? Turnout is even lower than during the even years, when so many eligible voters don't bother to show up. 

And yet, there's still a lot going on. Some people are choosing governors - most notably Virginia, where it appears that Joe Biden is running against the Former Guy. Or maybe it's Critical Race Theory running against white parents - it's hard to tell, for sure. Most of what we know about that race is brought to us by a media horde desperate for relevance, without a care in the world about how their words influence elections. Or, maybe they've all bet on the race, who knows?

What shouldn't be as hard to figure out are the local races. Picking the people who will be making decisions that directly impact you are the races that are important. County supervisor races and mayoral races and town council races and school board races and the rest - even the race for dogcatcher, if there's such a thing anymore - matter. Those folks, who put their lives on hold, and in some cases these days put their lives in danger - deserve your attention, and your vote. You know what's important to you; find the candidate who also knows what's important to you, or who at least comes close. I hope you have the opportunity to vote for someone, rather than having to vote against someone else. 

If you're an early voter, and have already done your civic duty, thank you. If you're not going to be around and chose to vote by absentee ballot, thank you. And if you're planning on voting  the old-fashioned way - showing up at your polling place on Election Day - thank you. 

But if you didn't vote early, or by mail, and you're not a reliable in-person voter, what's your plan? I hope you're not thinking of doing nothing.

Are you so frustrated with the state of things that you just don't care? I sure hope not! Believe me, I'm frustrated too, with all of the efforts being made to poison the process, make it harder for eligible people to vote, to cast doubt on the process of casting our ballots, and all the rest. 

And here in New York, we've got a handful of ballot initiatives, including some related to how we vote and how our districts are drawn. To me, putting them on the ballot during an off-year is completely wrong - why let the smallest number of voters make the decision? Of course, that's probably why they're on the ballot this year.

Yes - I'm frustrated. I get it if you are too. I'd be surprised if you weren't. But the antidote to that frustration is voting, it's not staying home. 

Use your voice. I don't care if you and I don't agree on a single thing - I still want everyone who is eligible to vote to do just that. The thing that's most frustrating to me is that the people who don't show up are often the ones making the decisions for the rest of us. We can't continue to allow that to happen. 

Tomorrow, Election Day, I'll go do my civic duty. I'll make my Dad, the history teacher, proud. I voted with him as a child, and I've never missed an election. He's been gone since 2007, but I know he knows I'm still doing the right thing. 

As I do every year, I offer the following motivation, in case you're still on the fence. 

After some thought, “I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians." (1) Actually, “The idea of an election is much more interesting to me than the election itself…the act of voting is in itself the defining moment.”(2) And why is it that “When the political columnists say ‘every thinking man’ they mean themselves, and when candidates appeal to ‘every intelligent voter’ they mean everyone who is going to vote for them”?(3) 

We know it’s true that “Bad officials are elected by good citizens who didn’t vote”(4), and that “A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won’t cross the street to vote in a national election.”(5) Do we still not realize, after all these years, that “lower voter participation is a silent threat to our democracy… it under-represents young people, the poor, the disabled, those with little education, minorities and you and me”? (6) 

After all, “the vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison men because they are different from other men” (7) and “to make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not just observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” (8) 

And complain we do, after every election, when the wrong guy wins. If only people who actually voted complained, it’d likely be a lot less noisy, don't you think? 

Some folks may not vote because they don’t know how to pick the right person. There are a couple different schools of thought on that. On the one hand, some might think that “politics is the art of the possible” (9) while others may subscribe to the thinking that “politics is not the art of the possible, it consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable. And it is true that, the great thing about democracy is that it gives every voter the chance to do something stupid.” (10) 

Said another way, a “Vote (is) the instrument and symbol of a freeman’s power to make a fool of himself and a wreck of his country.” (11) But that’s OK – “personally, I believe that our American system works as long as you participate in it. You must vote and make your voice heard; otherwise you will be left out.” (12) 

It’s generally true that if you “ask a man which way he’s going to vote and he’ll probably tell you. Ask him, however, why – and vagueness is all.” (13) But voting’s really easy; and “all voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong.” (14) And just about everyone likes to play a game every now and then, right? 

The bottom line is, “voting is simply a way of determining which side is the stronger without putting it to the test of fighting;”(15) “voting is a civic sacrament;”(16) and “the future of this republic is in the hands of the American voter.”(17) If all of that seems like too much pressure, you have an out: “Vote for the man who promises least. He’ll be the least disappointing.” (18) 

Please, vote. It really does matter, this year and every year. Honestly, "there is no such thing as a vote that doesn't matter."(19) Besides, "not voting is not a protest. It is a surrender." (20)  

My final pitch?  "Talk is cheap, voting is free; take it to the polls." (21)

If you need information on where to vote, help on 

your ballot, or any other assistance, visit Vote411.org 

or contact your local Board of Elections. 

Lots of people are out there, ready and willing to help. 

(Thanks to these folks for their words of wisdom: 1 - Charles De Gaulle; 2 – Jeff Melvoin; 3 – Franklin P Adams; 4 and 13 – Andrew Lack; 5 - Bill Vaughan; 6 - Nancy Neuman; 7 - Lyndon B Johnson; 8 - Louis L’Amour; 9 – Otto Von Bismarck; 10 – Art Spander; 11 – Ambrose Bierce; 12 - Mari-Luci Jaramillo; 14 – Henry David Thoreau; 15 – H.L. Mencken; 16—Theodore Hesburgh; 17 – Dwight D. Eisenhower; 18 – Bernard Baruch); 19 - Barack Obama; 20 - Keith Ellison; 21 - Nanette L. Avery