Wondering on Wednesday 6/29/22

Ready... Set... Wonder!

The wondering is wandering today. 

I wonder why so many people think that a House committee investigation is a trial, and that a hearing room at the Capitol is the same as a courtroom? 

And why would anyone who managed the House Judiciary Committee GOP cabal's Twitter feed would think that everything Cassidy Hutchinson said yesterday - the entirety of her testimony - was hearsay? I wonder if it's because Rep. Jim (Who's Going to Play Me in Clooney's Documentary?) Jordan is the goofball behind the keyboard?

Hutchinson seemed very clear, to anyone who actually watched the hearings (other than the aforementioned Twitter user, who said no one was watching) about what things she was personally involved in, and what things were told to her by others. 

So, for example, when she said she texted Kevin McCarthy, one could surmise that those text messages were made available to the January 6th Committee. And I wonder why so many people who obviously didn't watch are so dead-certain about the veracity of her testimony...

Happily, I'm able to report that Andrew Giuliani was not successful in his bid to become the Republican nominee for governor of NY, not that I wondered a whole lot about the possibility of him winning the primary. Truth be told, I spent zero time on that. 

Although, now that I think about it, I do sort of wonder how Andrew, son of Rudy (My Back Hurts, but Otherwise I'm Able to Walk and Stuff Like That) Giuliani would be able to withstand the rigors of being a politician. After all, male pols are frequently given a sturdy handshake and countless bicep grips and backslaps. If he's got a glass back like his daddy, he'd be in big trouble, so it's probably good he didn't win.

Incumbent Gov. Kathy Hochul, who took over after the Sonofa Gov's fall from grace last year, easily won the Democratic primary. Hochul won every county in the state, most of them easily, over runner-up Jumaane Williams and Tom Suozzi, who finished a distant third. 

On the Republican side, Rep. Lee Zeldin cruised to victory over Giuliani, 2014 nominee Rob Astorino, and 'turn-around expert' Harry Wilson. I don't think any of the Rs ran a good race, really - and we never heard much at all from Williams and Suozzi. It almost felt like the Rs ran upstate and the Ds ran downstate. 

So, what's the wondering on our election results? Now that the campaign will start in earnest, how bad are things going to get, advertising-wise? Hochul's raised over $34M so far, with a goal of raising $50M-$70M by Election Day. That's a whole lot of money for a whole lot of ads, to go along with a whole lot of bill-signing still to come, I'm sure. And Zeldin? He claims over $11.5M in 'pre-primary' fundraising, so we'll be seeing a lot of him I'm sure, too. He certainly wasn't shy with his ads during the primary, and I don't think that'll change. 

Early voting turnout was "anemic" in New York City, with fewer than 90,000 people taking advantage of the opportunity, out of some 3,600,000 registered voters. Not sure how that amount of apathy will impact what happens in August, or November, but it does make me wonder if we really needed to have several days of early voting in New York.

In New York, R Kelly was sentenced to 30 years in prison for his decades of sexual trafficking and racketeering; he faces additional charges in Illinois and Minnesota. My only wondering here is if any of his victims will ever feel safe and whole again. 

And finally, I'm going to drop a blanket wondering: what the heck's going on with the Supreme Court and their recent decisions, and did anyone really see all of these coming?

What's on your wondering minds tonight?

The Journal of Unpopular Opinions (Ch. 3)

Shockwaves continue to move across the landscape after the not-unexpected Supreme Court decision that there is no constitutional right to abortion, so the states must decide individually what they'll allow. 

But all is not lost in this battle, and pro-choice politicians - primarily Democrats - have a variety of opportunities to make a difference, and, of course, to make a horrible mess of things.

I look to the Notorious RBG for motivation here, and what she teaches us about Roe: that it was the right decision, wrongly justified. She believed, and stated more than once, that Roe should have been decided as an equality issue, not a privacy issue, as Amy Frieder noted in a Salon article this past May.

She elaborated on this in her dissent in Gonzales v. Carhart:  "[L]egal challenges to undue restrictions on abortion procedures do not seek to vindicate some generalized notion of privacy; rather, they center on a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature." (Emphasis added.)

Because of that, Frieder continued, "Advocates must argue that the government has a legitimate interest in protecting already-existing human lives subjected to oppression that stems from state action based on impermissible sex stereotyping in an unequal society. To put that in plain language, abortion is necessary so long as sex inequality in society persists." 

And, she included in the article,

"When abortion-restrictive regulation is analyzed as state action compelling motherhood, it presents equal protection concerns that Roe's physiological reasoning obscures," according to constitutional law scholar Reva Siegel. Equal protection should preclude state coercion of motherhood. 

The Dems and their pro-choice allies should use the discriminatory and unequal arguments as their primary tactic to challenge state laws, or at least legislate corrections to them.

• Forcing motherhood on a pregnant woman is discriminatory and unequal, because fatherhood is not being forced on the man. 

• Forcing parenthood on a pregnant woman is discriminatory and unequal, because parenthood is not forced on any other women (or men). These laws unfairly favor 'pre-born' children over living children who are parentless in homes, shelters, and state-run institutions.

• Declaring that life begins at fertilization imposes a faith-based decision on all citizens, favors one set of beliefs over all others, and denies pregnant women the right to practice their religion, as guaranteed under the First Amendment. 

• Allowing rape or incest exceptions for the pregnancy being 'outside the woman's control' is discriminatory, as abortions aren't similarly available to women who get pregnant due to a contraceptive failure, equally outside her control. 

• Allowing rape or incest exceptions for any other reasons is purely arbitrary, creates a separate class of pregnancy, and is therefore discriminatory. There can be no exceptions based on how the pregnancy occurred.

• Allowing destruction of embryos created outside the womb, but not allowing destruction of embryos created inside the womb, creates a separate class of 'pre-born children' and is discriminatory. 

• Allowing dependent tax deductions and other financial advantages for living children but not for 'pre-born' children is discriminatory. 

• Companies providing a benefit for women to travel to receive medical care, but not providing that same benefit to all employees, is discriminatory. 

• Period- and location-tracking apps, and similar technologies, are private and cannot be used against any woman seeking a legal abortion. Laws must be put in place, before the abortion law goes into effect, making use of these technologies for this or any similar purpose a crime.

• Any state banning abortion must provide health insurance coverage for all pre-natal, maternity, and post-partum care. Regulations providing the benefits, and confirmation that they're available, must be in place the abortion law goes into effect. 

• Any state banning abortion must provide paid time off from work for all necessary care and treatment, including maternal/child bonding if the woman is keeping the child. If the woman is enrolled in any level of school, special provisions, including tutoring if needed, must be made available. 

• Any state banning abortion must provide housing, nutritional, transportation and/or other assistance to any pregnant woman requesting it; the state must prove the capability to provide this assistance for the anticipated population before the abortion ban can go into effect.

• Using Medicaid or other generally accepted 'access-to-care' metrics, any state that bans abortion must prove there is sufficient access for the projected population to receive appropriate care throughout the pregnancy, and after. If the access is not available, the state must develop, fund, and implement programs to provide it before the abortion ban can go into effect.

Believe me, I realize some of those might be distasteful, particularly the ones challenging widely-supported abortion exceptions and IVF; hence the tag of 'unpopular' opinions. But not fighting discrimination that we agree with is wrong. 

In Case You Missed It (v95)

It seems like last week was extra-long, doesn't it? Or, is it just me? 

I was surprised I managed to get four posts out; if you had asked me how the writing went, I'd have guessed two posts made it out the door - the week was a blur.

Here's a recap of the posts that made the cut. 

Sunday was the day I confronted Father's Day 15. And it's the day I confronted the moodiness that often overwhelms me three months of the year when I feel his absence most dramatically.

I know, now, reflecting on 15 Father's Days without you, that it's not out of my control. It's within my control, within my capabilities, t0 react better to January, the month we lost you; February, the month you were born; and June, the month with a day to celebrate you.

Well, maybe not react better - but to react differently. To focus differently: on what's present, not on what's missing. On the fullness, not the emptiness. To remember, rather than trying to forget. So many ways of saying basically the same thing, right? Darn words...

Darn words, indeed. 

Moving on to your Sunday School lesson, I covered three interviews; here are highlights from Dana Bash's conversation with Sen. Fred Upton (R-MI). One of the ten Republican senators who voted to impeach Donald Trump, Upton is not running for re-election. 

Among the topics they covered was the January 6th Committee hearings; he felt they are making a difference, but he also 

expressed frustration with folks who are talking to the committee now, saying

...where have they been for the last year-and-a-half? Why weren't they saying what they're saying now a year-and-a-half ago, particularly to those of us that actually witnessed what was going on, to back us up a little bit?

The other two interviews? George talked with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in the This Week classroom, and in the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan talked with Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the network's go-to guy for COVID stuff, about the newly authorized vaccine for kids five and under. 

I was going to devote your Extra Credit to Juneteenth, but there was so little discussion on that topic in the classrooms, there wasn't a post. Personally, I think that's sad.

There was Wondering on Wednesday, last week, including this piece about free speech, the NFL, and the horrible Rep. Jim Jordan.

I can only wonder when Jordan last read the First Amendment; based on his questioning of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, I'd say it's been a while. 

"You believe in the First Amendment, don't you?" Jordan asked Goodell. "Yes, Congressman," Goodell replied. "Why do you ban Dave Portnoy from NFL games? He's a journalist. In fact, he's a sports journalist," Jordan asked. "Why is he banned?"

Is Jordan seriously suggesting that Goodell has in some way stripped Portnoy of his constitutional rights? Or is he just being his usual idiotic showboating self? Dumb question, I know. Silly me. 

And there, was a piece on Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who's currently #3 in the House Republican leadership. She's more "conservative" than most NY pols. 

I often wonder if folks like Stefanik wouldn't be happier in a red state like Texas, where everything is way more bigly conservative, and where her opinions would fit right in. After all, the Texas GOP passed two resolutions as their convention last week; one declared President Biden to be the 'acting' president and the beneficiary of a stolen election. 

There was more wondering, too, of course. 

And, almost before I knew it, it was Friday, and it was time for your TGIF entry. I didn't do a standard good week/bad week list; it was more like a future bad week list. Here's a bit of the post.

 If it fits in a uterus, it will surely fit in a married couple's medicine cabinet.

If it fits in a uterus and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, it will surely fit in a same-sex relationship.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, it will surely fit in a same-sex marriage.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, it will surely fit in an inter-racial marriage.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, it will surely fit in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer... 

You see what's happening, right? Remove one right, and removing the next one is easier. The one after that is easier, and the next is even easier... The question is, where does it end? 

At what point will a government so small it fits in a uterus stop trying to fit into smaller and smaller places? And at what cost?

I'll be back later, with Sunday School, or something else - you just never know.

TGIF 6/24/22

If it fits in a uterus, it will surely fit in a married couple's medicine cabinet.

If it fits in a uterus and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, it will surely fit in a same-sex relationship.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, it will surely fit in a same-sex marriage.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, it will surely fit in an inter-racial marriage.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, it will surely fit in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer. 

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, it will surely fit in a period-tracking app.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, it will surely fit in an employer's benefit package. 

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, and in an employer's benefit package, it will surely fit in a smart-phone location-tracking app. 

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, and in an employer's benefit package, and in a smart-phone location tracking app, it will surely fit in a toll-tracking app. 

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, and in an employer's benefit package, and in a smart-phone location tracking app, and in a toll-tracking app, it will surely fit public surveillance data.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, and in an employer's benefit package, and in a smart-phone location tracking app, and in a toll-tracking app, and in public surveillance data, it will surely fit in your electronic medical records.

If it fits in a uterus, and in a married couple's medicine cabinet, and in a same-sex relationship, and in a same-sex marriage, and in an inter-racial marriage, and in a fertilized embryo's deep freezer, and in a period-tracking app, and in an employer's benefit package, and in a smart-phone location tracking app, and in a toll-tracking app, and in public surveillance data, and in your electronic medical records, it will surely fit in other places, the likes of which we haven't yet even thought.

But it won't fit in a gun cabinet.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday 6/22/22

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

Separate from the foolishness of a Congressional Oversight Committee holding hearings on the NFL's Washington Commandos, which in and of itself deserves wondering, I can't help wondering why people continue to think that there's a quote-unquote First Amendment issue when an employer fines, fires, or otherwise disciplines an employee for comments made, or for bad behavior, or other such infractions. 

For the folks in the back, here's what the First Amendment says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Do you see anything there about the NFL? The Washington Commandos, or Redskins, as Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ick) called the team? 

I can only wonder when Jordan last read the First Amendment; based on his questioning of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, I'd say it's been a while. 

"You believe in the First Amendment, don't you?" Jordan asked Goodell. "Yes, Congressman," Goodell replied. "Why do you ban Dave Portnoy from NFL games? He's a journalist. In fact, he's a sports journalist," Jordan asked. "Why is he banned?"

Is Jordan seriously suggesting that Goodell has in some way stripped Portnoy of his constitutional rights? Or is he just being his usual idiotic showboating self? Dumb question, I know. Silly me. 

I also find myself wondering about this part, too, and whether Jordan knew how ironically funny it sounded, given the former president's well-documented proclivities....

Jordan then mentioned that Portnoy, whom multiple women have accused of sexual assault, is an established journalist who interviewed former President Trump, saying, “Seems to me, [if you] can get into the White House, you should be able to get into a football game.”

Moving from the First Amendment to the Second, there appears to be enough bipartisan agreement to pass some gun reforms this time; the initial vote to advance the legislation passed 64-34. Folks are lining up on their respective sides of the aisle, with some Dems suggesting they might not vote for it because it doesn't go far enough, and some Rs saying outright they won't vote for it because it goes too far. 

Here's one who suggests exactly that: the #3 Republican in the House, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-Embarrassing NY as Best I Can). Stefanik, who's got a better-than-fair chance of becoming the House Majority Leader if the Rs win in November, given Trump's public souring on Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, released this statement today.

I will continue to stand up for Second Amendment rights against this legislation that shreds the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans with no effect on deterring criminals who do not follow the law when obtaining firearms. This bill contains unconstitutional gun control provisions and allows the implementation of red flag laws that take away due process rights. It would restrict men and women who are able to serve in our military from purchasing a firearm and would strip the Constitutional rights of gunowners by broadening the scope of punishment for even nonviolent misdemeanors. As this blatant government overreach seeks to make gun owners second-class citizens, I will continue to stand up for the Constitution and push for solutions, including advocating for increased mental health resources across the country.

I feel kind of bad for her, that she feels compelled to say stuff like this, particularly that last part, about her intention to advocate for increased mental health resources. And I wonder if she's even read the bill, or any news reports about it?

According to this article, the bill "provides $15 billion in federal funding to bolster mental health services..." from training programs to pediatric mental health care to community health services to intervention and prevention services t0 school-based mental health services, and more.

I often wonder if folks like Stefanik wouldn't be happier in a red state like Texas, where everything is way more bigly conservative, and where her opinions would fit right in. After all, the Texas GOP passed two resolutions as their convention last week; one declared President Biden to be the 'acting' president and the beneficiary of a stolen election. The second is below. 

Resolution against the Gang of 20 Gun Control bill:

Whereas those under 21 are most likely to be victims of violent crime and thus most likely to need to defend themselves.

Whereas “red flag laws” violate one’s right to due process and are a pre-crime punishment of people not adjudicated guilty.

Whereas waiting periods on gun purchases harm those who need to acquire the means of self-defense in emergencies such as riots.

Whereas all gun control is a violation of the Second Amendment and our God given rights.

We reject the so called “bipartisan gun agreement”, and we rebuke Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). 

One more thing on Stefanik? Taking a page out of her Dear Leader's playbook, she's endorsing sketchy characters for office. For example, she proudly endorsed Carl Paladino for Congress in the new #NY23 district.

Carl is a job creator and conservative outsider who will be a tireless fighter for the people of New York in our fight to put America First to save the country.

I guess it makes sense that she'd endorse a guy who said Hitler is the kind of leader we need today. After all, someone very much in Stefanik's corner seems to meet the "get up there screaming these epithets and these people were just, they were hypnotized" definition Paladino used to describe Hitler... 

But, I wonder if she remembers Paladino going public with plans to threaten NY members of Congress if they didn't support Trump in 2016? Or, later that same year, when he said stuff so bizarre about the Obamas that even the Trump campaign objected? 

And that's where the real wondering comes in: is it possible that Trump's peeps have out-Trumped him? 

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

Sunday School 6/19/22

I've got three interviews for you today, starting with Dana Bash and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Yes, I Voted to Impeach Him) in the State of the Union classroom. 

He said he thinks the January 6th Committee is making a dent with moderates and independents. While the economy and gas prices are the big issues, 

there's been real interest in what's going on... I think that it's had an impact on voters across the country. And we will see how this thing plays out. The committee has been very careful not to divulge any details in advance of their hearings.

He expressed frustration with folks who are talking to the committee now, saying

...where have they been for the last year-and-a-half? Why weren't they saying what they're saying now a year-and-a-half ago, particularly to those of us that actually witnessed what was going on, to back us up a little bit?

Upton said people "still like (president Trump) a lot... he's had a number of decisive wins, where he's endorsed candidates that they have won...he certainly entertains a majority of the Republican base, and will be hard to stop" if he runs in 2024.

And, frankly, as we look at the economy, we look at gas prices, all these different things, folks are not really happy with the Biden administration, which is why he is mired at a level even below where Donald Trump was at this point in his tenure.

Bash asked if there'll be anyone left who's willing to stand up to Trump, since half of the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach him won't be back next year, and "the remainder are facing some pretty tough reelection battles." Upton thinks there are.

And you've got to remember too, though there were only 10 of us that voted to impeach, there were 35 of us that voted for a bipartisan commission to look at this. And we know that there were a lot of folks who were, frankly, scared of their reelection, which is why they voted the other way as well... But we will -- that's why politics is so much fun sometimes. It's -- we will see how things all shake out.

Upton said he's hopeful the Senate can get a deal on guns, although he thought they'd have gotten there by now. And, he added,

Law-abiding folks, they shouldn't have any fears in terms of what's -- what's going on. It's been a rallying point, particularly for the NRA and the gun owners of America. You look at their Web site and they're, like, raising cash like you wouldn't believe in terms of their Second Amendment rights are being taken away.

That's not what's happening here, he said, but that thinking has "been elevated, for sure," mentioning that Texas Republicans Sen. John Cornyn and Rep. Dan Crenshaw were both "accosted" at their state's GOP convention.

George talked with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in the This Week classroom. He mentioned a Wall Street Journal report that 44% of economists expect a recession. Both President Biden and Fed Chair Jerome Powell have made bringing inflation down a top priority, and she said

I don't think a recession is inevitable.

She pointed to still-strong consumer spending, while admitting "higher food and energy prices are certainly affecting consumers" and changing spending patterns. And, she said most folks "continue to have buffer stocks of savings" to help maintain spending levels, so she doesn't see that as a "likely cause of a recession" in the coming months. And, she said, the labor market is 

 arguably the strongest of the post-war period. Not only is the unemployment rate near historic lows but there are two job vacancies for every unemployed worker, so the labor market remains extremely strong; unemployment insurance claims near their lowest levels in history.

She said that having had high inflation "in first half of this year ...locks in high inflation really for the entire year," but she expects the pace of inflation will come down, and she cautioned, "there are so many uncertainties relating to global developments..."

George asked her to explain why in Europe the core inflation rate was under 4% but in the states it's 6%. I didn't think she answered that. She talked about "energy price spillover" being half of inflation, 

food and energy, and there are spillovers because energy is an important input into almost everything in the economy. It is true that we've had core inflation over and above that -- that is too high and the Fed will take steps to bring it down.

She mentioned Biden's "historic releases" from the strategic reserve, which have kept gas prices from being even higher, and said he's ready to work the with the oil industry and Congress to bring down "other costs that are burdening households," notably drug and healthcare costs and housing. 

She also countered some of what the oil industry folks argue, saying

I think that producers were partly caught unaware of the strength of the recovery... and weren't ready to meet the needs of the economy; high prices should induce them to increase supplies over time... The way in which we can ensure reasonable energy expenses for households is to move to renewables, to address climate change, as a medium-term matter. 

A gas tax holiday may be on the table (Biden said he might have a decision by the end of the week on that). And, Yellen said, he's "reviewing tariff policy toward China." 

We all recognize that China engages in a range of unfair trade practices that it's important to address. But the tariffs we inherited, some serve no strategic purpose and raise costs to consumers. And so, reconfiguring some of those tariffs so they make more sense and reduce some unnecessary burdens is something that's under consideration --

She wouldn't give any timeline for that. 

In the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan talked with Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the network's go-to guy for COVID stuff, about the newly authorized vaccine for kids five and under. 

Gottlieb anticipates this rollout will be "more complicated" than previous ones, saying people skilled with giving kids this age need to be involved. He thinks most kids will get them at their pediatrician's office, and that might make it take longer to get doses distributed.

He also said "it's continued to concern" him that that "only about 30% of kids ages 5-11 have been vaccinated" with two doses, which is lower than original estimates. And, he said

there are surveys showing that about 20% of parents plan to vaccinate children under the age of 5. I suspect it may end up being lower than that...a lot of parents may choose to take a wait-and-see attitude and reconsider this in the fall. 

They also talked about Florida, which is "affirmatively against" vaccinating kids in this age-group. Gottlieb thinks that was the wrong move. "They could have taken a neutral stance and just merely said, we're not recommending the vaccine for children." He clarified that they're not blocking access to the vaccine, just "not facilitating access."

See you around campus. 

Father's Day 15

The portulaca are blooming beautifully today, Dad; we plant them every year, since they were one of your favorites. 

There are days I simply cannot fathom that you've been gone fifteen years... Sometimes it feels like just months ago, sometimes longer than that, but saying 'fifteen years' out loud, that's a kicker. 

I can't believe it's been ten years since I last wrote about Father's Day, or that it was the only time I wrote specifically about this day. I think that post says pretty much says everything I needed to say; maybe that's why I've never tried another one. Until today, that is.

I've written about you on your birthday, and of course in January, on 'that' day. I suspect you realize you've been mentioned many times in other posts in these pages - it's hard for me to think about important stuff without at least thinking about you, if not actually including you in the conversation. 

I'm pretty sure if I had been writing veritable pastiche when you were alive, we'd have had published reams of back-and-forth conversations on hot topics, or silly ones, of course. You were a writer too, in addition to being a teacher, and always had an appreciation for the ridiculous.

I must tell you, Dad, that I've finally come to realize, after fifteen years, why I have these darn 'mood months' filled with agonizing, frustrating, cry-at-the-drop-of-a-hat days, and sleepless nights of aerobic tossing and turning, random songs playing on repeat (yes - sometimes In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida), and thoughts from days - no, weeks - no, months - no, years - no, decades ago - marching around my head, trampling on my brain. 

I used to think that June was a mood month because it's "my birthday" month (remember that?!) and because I embody many of the traits of a moonchild - emotional, sensitive, self-critical, imaginative, creative, possessing a retentive memory for even the smallest details of things and conversations both meaningful and inconsequential... I'm sure you recognize each of these individually, and all of them collectively. After all, you put up with me for over 48 years.

I used to think that January and February were mood months simply because it was the depths of winter, and the days were short and dark and cold, while the nights were long and dark and cold.

January. February. June. The mood months. 

I've always felt more helpless than usual then; I flounder more, and am more prone to my moonchildness, feeling it an inevitable outcome of some random astral alignment, and therefore out of my control. 

Dare I say, 'comfortably' out of my control? That would be easier, right?

I know, now, reflecting on 15 Father's Days without you, that it's not out of my control. It's within my control, within my capabilities, t0 react better to January, the month we lost you; February, the month you were born; and June, the month with a day to celebrate you.

Well, maybe not react better - but to react differently. To focus differently: on what's present, not on what's missing. On the fullness, not the emptiness. To remember, rather than trying to forget. So many ways of saying basically the same thing, right? Darn words...

On the third birthday after you passed, I wrote about you, and me, and about the ebb and flow of missing you.

I do miss you -- all the time, some of the time, and every now and then. I explained once that you were like a favorite piece of jewelry, one that I don't wear every day, but when I take it out of the box, it's precious and wonderful and I love wearing it. And then, it goes back into the box after a while, not forgotten, just saved for another occasion. That's you now -- sometimes you pick the occasion, sometimes I do - but you're always here, my favorite, and it comforts me knowing that.

During the mood months, I forget about that analogy; the missing you can be excruciating, as can the not missing you. When I'm not, I feel like I should be. When I am, I feel like I shouldn't be, that you would want me to knock it off. That's one of the characteristics of your random astral alignment, one that you embody as fully as I do mine.

Pisces can judge a person or situation with a guiding force of wisdom. Because of this, they can call you out whenever you're acting in ways that don't serve you... But, when a Pisces identifies these hard truths, they do so with love. 

Always with love, Dad - often a healthy dose of frustration, I know, and I'm sorry about that. But always with love. 

I feel that love now, in this moment, on this day. 

I can see your face and hear your voice telling me I can claw my way out of the sadness, out of the missing you, that it's OK to do that, that you don't want me stuck in the depths of whatever hell I put myself through in January, February, and June. 

That I can smile with the memories, instead of getting trapped in them. That I can assume I'm doing OK, in your eyes, instead of assuming I'm not. That I can take you out of the jewelry box, and put you back, and it's OK to do both.

And like always, when I take a step back and listen to you, I know in my heart you're right. I know you're here. I know you always will be. 

Happy Father's Day, Dad. 

In Case You Missed It (v94)

Here's your recap of last week's posts, in case you missed anything.

I sat in on Bret Baier's Fox News Sunday interview with Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) for Sunday School. Most of the time, the two circled around each other, with Coons wanting to talk about January 6ht and Baier doing everything he could to avoid it. 

Baier was  interested in talking about security for Supreme Court justices, particularly whether protestors outside justices' homes should be arrested, under a title in the federal code. Coons, who co-sponsored a bill to address the issue, didn't say yes or no, but he did say

we need to make sure that all appropriate actions are being taken to ensure the safety of members of our federal judiciary, including Supreme Court justices.

Here's what happened next. 

Baier: Okay, so don't arrest the protesters based on the title, I got it. That's what you're saying. The president this --

Coons: Bret, let's be clear. I didn't say don't arrest protesters. I'm simply saying that all appropriate action should be taken to ensure the safety of the Supreme Court justices. And I'm not going to say this protester or that protester ought to be arrested. I just think that that's a judgment call to be made by law enforcement, not by a senator on a Sunday show.

Boy, I miss Chris Wallace - how about you?

For your Extra Credit I sat in on two of Dana Bash's interviews on CNN. The first was with Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a member of the January 6th Committee. When asked if president Trump should be indicted, 

Raskin pointed out that "respect by politicians for the independence of the law enforcement function" was one of the things that was "crushed" during the Trump years, and he wasn't going to participate in that. He also noted that Merrick Garland is a constituent, and

I don't browbeat my constituents. I think that he knows, his staff knows, the US attorneys know what's at stake here. They know the importance of it. But I think they're rightfully paying close attention to precedent and history, as well as the facts of this case. 

The other interview was with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Ortiz (D-NY). Bash noted AOC's support of State Sen. Alessandra Biaggi against Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, the head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Many folks think that's a bad idea, including President Obama's campaign manager, Jim Messina, who said "if we lost the House, it's because of dumb stuff like this."

AOC's response to that criticism?

when we are able to elect representatives that excite the Democratic base, that excite young people, that excite a multiclass, multiracial coalition, then that puts us in an even better position to win in November. I think, right now, there are a lot of voters at home that have quite a bit of anxiety about the enthusiasm right now in terms of turnout for the Democratic Party. And I think one of the best things that we can do is elect people with a proven record of being able to excite a base and turn it out.

If, as seems likely, the Ds lose the House in November, people might want to remember this interview. 

Baier's interview with Sen. Coons prompted an item in last week's Wondering on Wednesday. The folks at Fox are not only concerned about SCOTUS security, they're also focusing outrage on media coverage of the assassination plot against Justice Kavanaugh, and how different they insist it would have been if one of the liberal justices had been targeted.

That got me wondering how the network covered the 'workup' on Justice Sonia Sotomayor the FBI found when investigating Roy Den Hollander, the man who killed the son of a federal judge in New Jersey a while back in 2020. 

Would you be surprised that I found only one article about that threat, which is the same number of articles as there were about Justice Sotomayor's children's book, and about her mangled pronunciation of the vice president's name? You shouldn't be. 

I reposted a Sidebar from 2017 as a #tbt post. Coming after Rep. Steve Scalise was shot at the baseball practice, the post focused on how words matter - except, of course, when they don't.

This hand-wringing about the words we use and how we use them, would not be occurring to this degree had the gunman not targeted members of Congress. It does not occur, as I noted in my post, when extreme words about abortion lead to murder.

I gave several other examples of where hands were not wrung. It seems we care, deeply, about the words people use, when we care deeply about whatever it is we're talking about. Otherwise? Not so much.

Thursday was the 50th anniversary of the Watergate break-in; I took the opportunity to point out the many similarities between  that scandal and Trump's current scandal. For example,

• Nixon's secretary, Rosemary Woods, destroyed White House documents; Donald Trump has allegedly destroyed White House documents. 

• Nixon had the 'plumbers'; Trump was full of crap with his ideas of a stolen election.

• Nixon was overwhelmingly re-elected after the scandal; Trump continues to maintain that he overwhelmingly won an election he overwhelmingly lost. 

There were several more in the post. 

 I struggled a bit with some of the good week/bad week list-making in the TGIF entry. A story about John Hinckley and redemption was one; here's another.

The EU "gave its blessing" for Ukraine to become a candidate to join it. That's just the first step - becoming a member can take years, as the article pointed out - and there's no guarantee.

...there are 35 "chapters of the acquis" setting out standards to meet in areas from judicial policy and financial services to food safety...talks have been stalled for years with Turkey, a candidate since 1999.

If nothing else, it's a symbolic step for the Ukrainians, still caught in the very ugly war with Russia, but it's hard not wondering how much of a Ukraine will be left to try and meet the onerous requirements. Does that make this news, like the Hinckley story, a candidate for both lists? 

 What list did you end up on last week? Drop a comment or a message if you want. 

I'll be back later.

TGIF 6/17/22

It's Friday again, and time for our good week/bad week lists. As I was gathering notes for today's post, I wasn't sure which list some of these would end up on. 

We learned this week that John Hinckley, the guy who shot President Ronald Reagan, his press secretary James Brady, Secret Service Agent Timothy McCarthy, and DC Police Officer Thomas Delahanty back in 1980 to impress actress Jodie Foster, had been released from all supervision. 

I was unaware that Hinckley had been working on art and music during his decades of confinement, but it seems he's been trying to sell art on eBay, and he cut a record and scheduled a concert tour, once he knew the date he'd be free of all supervision. (I am not encouraging anyone to look at his art or listen to his music; I include the links so you know I'm not making stuff up.)

Sadly, or thankfully, his concerts are being cancelled, mostly because of strong feelings on the part of people who think it's sick to pay money to a guy who tried to kill the president, or who think it's wrong to make money off a guy who tried to kill the president, or for any number of other strongly held opinions on this. Here's a statement from one venue that decided to cancel Hinckley's performance. In part, it says

So, Hinckley had a good week, based on his release after "41 years 2 months and 15 days," but a bad week because some of us are not willing to accept that he deserves a chance at a normal life? Is that how it works out for him? And the rest of us? Do we make the good week list for keeping him from performing? Or does that put us on the bad week list?

Here's another mixed week mention. The EU "gave its blessing" for Ukraine to become a candidate to join it. That's just the first step - becoming a member can take years, as the article pointed out - and there's no guarantee.

...there are 35 "chapters of the acquis" setting out standards to meet in areas from judicial policy and financial services to food safety...talks have been stalled for years with Turkey, a candidate since 1999.

That said, as Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president said,

Ukrainians are ready to die for the European perspective. We want them to live with us the European dream."

If nothing else, it's a symbolic step for the Ukrainians, still caught in the very ugly war with Russia, but it's hard not wondering how much of a Ukraine will be left to try and meet the onerous requirements. Does that make this news, like the Hinckley story, a candidate for both lists? 

Axios is reporting a number of police crime reporting failures, saying that "nearly 40% of law enforcement agencies nationwide...failed to report their 2021 crime data to the FBI. Agencies that failed to send some or all their data included the LAPD and the NYPD, as well as several significantly smaller law enforcement organizations across the country.  

The report, from a partnership between The Marshall Project and Axios Local, noted

The FBI's annual data set is the country's foremost way to understand how crime across the U.S. is changing, measuring things like how many murders or rapes took place last year or how many people were arrested. It's going to be really hard for policymakers to look at what crime looks like in their own community and compare it to similar communities," Jacob Kaplan, a criminologist at Princeton University, told The Marshall Project.

The FBI switched to a new system last year, but it shouldn't have been a surprise; the transition was "announced years ago, and the federal government hundreds of millions of dollars" to help departments switch over to the new system. Many agencies that didn't submit data blamed "staffing shortages and technical issues. You can see an interactive map of who didn't report in the Axios article.

I don't know about you, but to me this seems like a bad week for LEO agencies, and for the FBI, and for policy makers. And, I'd have to add, for the hundreds of political candidates who are running on a platform of fighting crime in their communities. We know they make stuff up, and talk out of their hats half the time, but without accurate data, it's hard to fact-check their nonsense, and that's bad for all of us.

Here's what I think is, hands down, a good week list story: we'll have COVID vaccines for the youngest among us.

U.S. regulators have authorized the first COVID-19 shots for infants and preschoolers. That paves the way for vaccinations for children under 5 to begin next week. The Food and Drug Administration's emergency use authorization Friday follows a unanimous recommendation by its advisory panel. The kid-sized shots are made by Moderna and Pfizer.

I've read and listened to enough interviews with medical professionals - researchers and doctors and nurses alike - who believe that this is a very good thing, and who have said they'll vaccinate their kids as soon as the vaccine is available, to convince me this is a good thing.

And it's also a good week list thing that states have pre-ordered doses of the vaccine, so that they'll be widely available where they're needed. Except Florida, of course. The alleged Sunshine State is the only state that didn't pre-order by the deadline. Why, you ask? 

Because Gov. Ron Bad Week DeSantis.

I would say we are affirmatively against the Covid vaccine for young kids. These are the people who have zero risk of getting anything

Residents will be able to get the shots from a pharmacy, or from their pediatrician, assuming there's enough quantity to go around. 

And, finally, today is the 50th anniversary of the Watergate break-in. I offered some thoughts on that earlier today - and I'd have to say, Richard Nixon would have ended up on the good week list, which is hard to imagine under normal, scandalous circumstances.

TGIF, everyone.

Happy 50th Anniversary, Watergate

Today is the 50th anniversary of Watergate, the scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon. 

And I can't help drawing comparisons between that crisis and the one in which our most recent former president finds himself knee deep.

 For example, 

• Richard Nixon had a CREEP - the Committee for the Re-Election of the President; Donald Trump is a creep. 

• Nixon had criminals acting on his behalf; Trump had hundreds of criminals acting on his behalf.

• Nixon's scandal came to light with a break-in at the Watergate Hotel, a building in DC; Trump's came to light with the break-in at the US Capitol, a building in DC. 

• The Watergate scandal had Deep Throat, the long-anonymous source who fed reporters information they published in real time; the Trump scandal has deep voices: the dozens of reporters and former staffers who have written about his administration. 

• Nixon had the Saturday Night Massacre, in which DOJ folks quit so they wouldn't have to fire the special prosecutor investigating the scandal; Trump conspired to fire DOJ staff, and had a legion of people threaten to quit. 

• Nixon's secretary, Rosemary Woods, destroyed White House documents; Donald Trump has allegedly destroyed White House documents. 

• Nixon had the 'plumbers'; Trump was full of crap with his ideas of a stolen election.

• Nixon was overwhelmingly re-elected after the scandal; Trump continues to maintain that he overwhelmingly won an election he overwhelmingly lost. 

• Gerald Ford declared "our long national nightmare" to be over when Nixon resigned; Mike Pence prevented a constitutional crisis when he refused to follow Trump's directive that he not certify the election. 

• Nixon dealt with shady characters in support of his winning re-election effort; Trump had Rudy Giuliani, Steven Bannon, and countless others helping him try to steal back an election he lost. 

• It took a long time for Republicans to turn against Nixon; it's taking Republicans a long time to turn against Trump.

• Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon; Trump pardoned just about everyone.

• Richard Nixon famously said he was not a crook; Donald Trump said "No way we lost this election!"

Let's all raise a glass to the Republican who had the good sense to quit, shall we? 

Wondering on Wednesday, 6/15/22

Ready... Set... Wonder!

So, what's wonder-full tonight? 

The folks over at Fox Entertainment continue beating the drum about the 'assassination attempt' on Justice Bret Kavanaugh and how, if he were a liberal instead of a conservative, the Dems and the media would be apoplectic over the whole thing. That was one of the featured topics of a Fox News Sunday interview this week., in case you missed it.

That got me wondering how the network covered the 'workup' on Justice Sonia Sotomayor the FBI found when investigating Roy Den Hollander, the man who killed the son of a federal judge in New Jersey a while back in 2020. 

Would you be surprised that I found only one article about that threat, which is the same number of articles as there were about Justice Sotomayor's children's book, and about her mangled pronunciation of the vice president's name? You shouldn't be. 

We've got another January 6th Committee hearing tomorrow; it was postponed from today to allow the team to get the multi-media presentation ready. Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said the postponement "is not a big deal. It's just technical issues." and that's fine. I mean, it's not like someone was having a baby or anything; that happened with Monday's hearing, when former Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien had to miss his in-person testimony when his wife went into labor. 

We did get to hear from fired Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt, who was in on the decision on election night, when Fox was first to call Arizona for Donald Trump. "We were able to make a call early. We were able to beat the competition" he testified. Not only that, but as Deadline reported, 

After Nov. 7, when networks called the race for Biden, Stirewalt said, Trump’s chances of winning were “none,” barring something totally unexpected from happening. He said that Trump was “better off to play the Powerball” than betting he would win the election.

And, there's this 

Stirewalt said that they “knew it would be significant” calling the state, but “we already knew Trump’s chances were very small and getting smaller” based on the data they saw. 

So, what's the wondering on this? First, did anyone get Trump a Powerball ticket? Did he win anything? And finally, is anyone surprised that the guy from Fox was bragging about beating the competition?

What else? Well, there were some primaries yesterday, and there were some Trump-endorsed candidates who lost (but not many) and some who won, including all the races in Nevada where Trump made an endorsement. And, Sarah Palin will be one of four candidates moving ahead to the special election to finish the term of the late Rep. Don Young, who passed away in March. 

What's fascinating about the Alaska votes this year? It's not Palin; it's that Alaska moved to ranked choice voting this year. And if you're wondering, here's what it means: 

The special primary, where voters chose one of 48 candidates on the ballot, was Saturday; the special general, where voters will rank the top four candidates from the primary, is set for Aug. 16. 

Simultaneously, two more elections — a regular primary and general — are scheduled to elect Alaska’s member of Congress for the next full two-year term, which starts in January. The regular primary election is scheduled for Aug. 16, on the same day and same ballot as the special general. That means voters will be asked to rank the four candidates in the special election, then pick one of 31 candidates in the regular primary. 

The regular general election, where voters will rank the top four of the 31 candidates, is Nov. 8.

Now, I'm a fan of ranked choice voting; it was used in the NYC elections last year, but the rest of our state doesn't have the option, and I wish we did. I don't relish having to choose from over 30, or over 40 candidates for a single race, but being able to send someone to office who earns at least 50% of the vote would be a treat. I wonder, how do the rest of you feel about ranked choice voting? Have you used it? Do you want to? Drop me a message or leave a comment.

Finally, on tonight's broadcast of ABC's World News Tonight, David Muir repeatedly mentioned that Dolly Parton had done something newsworthy. He had it in his opening 'here's what we're talking about tonight" segment, and teased it at every break. When it was finally the last minute of the broadcast, we got the scoop: Parton had donated $1M to Vanderbilt University Medical Center. "I love children..." Parton said; and we love you, Muir said, to close the show.  

Parton's great, Muir's the host of "the most watched show on all of television" so, what's to wonder about on this? Going back to the first story in the post, and the "fanboy" comment about Kimmel, I can't help asking, is there any more "fanboy" news anchor than Muir?

What's got you wondering tonight?