Wondering on Wednesday 1/31/24

 Ready... set... wonder!

It's rare for me to update my wondering a mere seven days later, but that's where I find myself today. Last week I wondered about the stock market, what Trump thought of it when he was president, and how his thinking has changed.

That was then, but this is now, and with Joe Biden in the White House, Trump is no longer excited about the market's success. Rather, he's telling his supporters that "the stock market is making rich people richer" - as if that's ever been a bad thing for an alleged billionaire. 

So, why am I wondering about this again, you might be asking?  Well, he apparently has changed his mind - again.  Not only is a booming market great again, it's all because of him! Because of his polls! Because everyone loves him and can't wait for him to be president again!

And I have to wonder, was he lying to me while he was in office, or was he lying to me over the past several weeks, or is he lying to me now?

I learned today that a judge in Delaware's Court of Chancery has tossed Elon Musk's Tesla compensation package, saying that $56 billion was an "unfathomable sum."  Kathaleen McCormick wrote in her decision, which is appealable, of course,

Swept up by the rhetoric of 'all upside,' or perhaps starry-eyed by Musk’s superstar appeal, the board never asked the $55.8 billion question: Was the plan even necessary for Tesla to retain Musk and achieve its goals?

The article I linked above has some interesting information of the corporate intrigue kind, including board members beholden to the CEO and shirking their responsibilities, angry shareholders (that's how the suit came to be), and my favorite piece of information, to which I've added the emphasis:

Amit Batish at Equilar, an executive pay research firm, estimated in 2022 that Musk's package was around six times larger than the combined pay of the 200 highest-paid executives in 2021.

I'm wondering, as I re-read that last part for the umpteenth time today, whether incentive-only compensation packages - according to the article, Musk didn't draw a Tesla salary - should have limits? And I also can't help wondering what a less Musk-friendly board would have done in the compensation negotiations.

In a Sidebar yesterday, I talked about the Oklahoma Republican Party voting to censure Sen. James Lankford, and how the meeting was subsequently deemed illegitimate by the 'real' OKGOP.  And what I'm wondering about here is simply this: how many other GOP organizations are at risk for this same kind of thing, where a cabal is bold enough, willing, and able to take over the party, even temporarily, and create this kind of havoc? And how long before we figure out they exist?

Most of us are aware of the penchant for book banning in Florida. This article by Judd Legum reminds us that the whole mess started when the Rs in FLA attacked alleged "grooming" by school librarians pushing "pornographic" materials in their bookshelves.

Florida's Republican legislature passed — and Ron DeSantis signed — several pieces of legislation that made it easier to take books off the shelves of the state's public schools. This was all seen as smart politics, appealing to parents seeking to protect their children from inappropriate content.

Some of the Rs are getting tired of taking the heat for the ridiculous bans; even noted conservative Bill O'Reilly's books were pulled from the shelves. Legislation is moving along that would "make it more difficult for people to challenge books en masse." That's happened in at least one Florida county, where every book in the library was pulled for review. Legum says the legislation

is an implicit acknowledgment that book banning in Florida schools has gone too far. It also suggests that the enormous number of books being taken off the shelves of Florida schools has become a political problem for Florida Republicans. 

I'm not surprised pols are upset about the consequences of their anti-woke, anti-LGBTQ, anti-everything approach to school libraries; here's what really got to me in Legum's article.

The majority of book challenges in the United States came from 11 people. Two of the most prolific, Bruce Friedman and Vicki Baggett, hail from Florida.

Eleven people are responsible for the majority of book challenges in the United States? How can you not wonder with me how that's even possible?  Eleven people, out of a country of over 334,000,000? How does this even happen?

And finally, Rep. Rob Menendez (D-NJ) pulled less than zero punches in comments directed towards GOP members of the House Homeland Security Committee as they considered impeachment charges against Alejandro Mayorkas.

According to the article, Menendez noted there've been plenty of hearings on the border, but none on things like "emergency preparedness, cyber threats, infrastructure protection, and more," all of which would be in the Committee's portfolio.

We have not lived up to our oversight obligation here on this committee because you all are obsessed with the border. Because you bend the knee to the ‘Orange Jesus’ as you refer to him across the aisle. 

You can watch the video of his comments here, and maybe wonder, as I often do, how much longer the folks in the House will keep it together.

What's on your wondering mind these days?

Sidebar: Sunday School 1/28/24

One more thing before I leave the immigration discussion and move to greener pastures: it's been reported that the Oklahoma Republican Party (OKGOP) has voted to censure US Sen. Jim Lankford, one of their own, for his efforts on the bipartisan bill we've heard so much about recently. 

(I didn't have room for Lankford in the recaps you can read here and here.)

Lankford has represented Oklahoma in the Senate since 2015, but apparently collaborating with the Dems and trying to solve a problem that legislators have either failed or refused to solve in decades is too much for them to take.  

According to the censure resolution, 

Senator Lankford playing fast and loose with Democrats on our border policy not only disenfranchises legal immigrants seeking citizenship but it also puts the safety and security of Americans in great danger. 

I'm not sure he's "playing fast and loose" with the Dems; I mean, leading the bipartisan negotiations doesn't sound like he was behaving in a clever and dishonest way with them, does it? 

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Lankford noted

It is interesting, Republicans, four months ago, would not give funding for Ukraine, for Israel and for our southern border because we demanded changes in policy. So we actually locked arms together and said, ‘We’re not going to give money for this. We want a change in law. And now, it's interesting a few months later, when we're finally getting to the end, they're like, 'Oh, just kidding, I actually don't want a change in law.'

Other comments about the resolution were reported by KOKH, a Fox affiliate in Oklahoma City. The station's report noted the resolution said

Lankford's 'open border deal' directly conflicts with the GOP's values... We oppose a 'path to citizenship' that would grant citizenship to illegal aliens faster than to immigrants who have come to the United States through legal means.

And, it included a statement from the (We're Not) OKGOP, signed by Wayne Hill, the party's Vice Chairman, which had this to say about the censure.

The State Committee of the Oklahoma Republican party, the Supreme Authority of the OKGOP, has condemned the actions of Senator James Lankford. The resolution calls on Senator Lankford to "cease and desist jeopardizing the security and liberty of the people of Oklahoma and of these United States." Further, "until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him.

Today's meeting was attended by 172 active Republicans from all across Oklahoma. the 124 voting members of the State Committee resoundingly approved this resolution and others as their first official act of the 2024 election year.

The OKGOP State Committee is committed to holding elected Republicans accountable to the standards set forth in the OKGOP Platform which supports limited legal immigration. It is our hope that Senator Lankford will acknowledge the direction of the State Committee and do all in his power to defend our border from the current invasion.

Interestingly. there are complaints that the Committee's vote to censure Lankford may not have been legitimate, as some members with voting rights weren't invited to the meeting. 

More interestingly, or perhaps comically is the better word, the OKGOP released a new statement today:

The meeting held by certain Republicans on January 27th was an illegitimate meeting. Proper notice was not provided to all members of the State Committee meeting. None of the actions done at the meeting are the official position of the OKGOP and the media is advised to refrain from reporting or suggesting that this was an official action of the 'OKGOP' or 'Oklahoma Republican party' regarding the motions, resolutions, or procedures done at this illegitimate meeting.

Someone's got some 'splaining to do.

Sunday School 1/28/24: Extra Credit

Your Sunday School lesson was all about immigration, and we're continuing that conversation for your Extra Credit. 

I want to note that the House Homeland Security Committee released two articles of impeachment against Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

In its 20-page resolution, the Republican-led committee accuses Mayorkas of high crimes and misdemeanors, including "willfully" disregarding immigration law...

Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn., said the committee had "exhausted all other options to hold Secretary Mayorkas accountable" and that "Congress must exercise its constitutional duty and impeach him."

Now, back to the classrooms, starting with Meet the Press. Kristen Welker talked about the bill with Democratic pollster Cornell Belcher and Matt Gorman, who worked on Sen. Tim Scott's campaign. 

Welker referenced what I characterize as the rock - Donald Trump - and the hard place - the "best possibility of getting a deal in decades" between which the Rs sit. Gorman, who believes President Biden can act unilaterally, said the whole thing reminds him of The Sixth Sense. 

It's been dead a month. No one noticed it yet... The White House and the Senate are acting like they're the only people involved in this. They're not. 

Belcher reflected on our sad history (my words, not his) of 'doing something' about immigration, only to have politics get in the way. We've seen it before, he said,

...(in) 2007 Bush wanted to do immigration. They – they attacked it as amnesty for illegals. Obama thought he had a deal with Boehner. He took it back to the House, and the Republicans killed it...

He said Sen. Tom Tillis (R-NC) who's "not exactly a liberal," says what the Rs are doing 

may be immoral, because they're killing it because president Trump thinks it's good for his politics.

Martha Raddatz (ABC's This Week) shared a taped interview in which Jon Karl asked Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-RA) about the six million people who have been apprehended at the border. 

What ultimately should happen to all those people, you know, the people who don't qualify for asylum, or totally came in illegally?

Newsom said  "You have to deal with the cards that are dealt. You've got to deal with the reality on the ground," but that the "fundamental issue" is, we need immigration reform, not just border security. 

Biden's strategy includes a pathway to citizenship "along the lines of (the GOP's) former hero, Ronald Reagan," Newsom said, adding there's a "$14B plan, right now," that gets us judges and border agents; Congress's refusal to act is just the Rs trying to

... find a crowbar to put in the spokes of the wheels of the Biden administration to disrupt any progress on this because they don't want progress, period.

Raddatz got an interesting response from National Review Editor Ramesh Ponnuru when Sen. Lindsey Graham's name came up. He noted Graham's support doesn't matter much to many Republicans; he's long advocated for "comprehensive immigration reform," but

there are a lot of people in the Republican Party who don't see things the same way Lindsey Graham does on immigration and don't trust him on this issue because they don't agree with him.

Ponnuru also shared where opposition to the bill comes from. Paraphrasing here, some Rs seem to think the 5,000 daily limit is like the rent in NYC - it's too damn high. But that's not all.

...you've got this more basic thing, which a lot of Republicans say, 'if the problem is Biden is not enforcing the laws that are already on the books, which is what they have been saying for months, then passing a new law isn't a solution to that problem.'

I want to swing back to the State of the Union classroom. Dana Bash asked former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) if she was OK with the bill not including "a pathway to citizenship, or even protections for Dreamers." 

Well, no; the fact is, is that we need comprehensive immigration reform. That's not likely with the Congress that we have right now, so we have to move forward. This arrangement that the Democrats and Republicans in the Senate have negotiated is a step forward... But we were never going to get a path to citizenship in this bill. 

I'm giving the last word to Bakari Sellers, a CNN political commentator. He chastised the Ds who "have refused to pay attention to immigration and crime in this country, saying it really didn't exist, it wasn't a problem." What's needed now is the folks who have complained,

we need our good mayors, like Frank Scott from Little Rock, like Chokwe from Jackson, Mississippi, we need Randall Woodfin from Birmingham, Alabama, and we even need mayors who don't know what they're doing, like Eric Adams in New York City, to now simply stand up for this piece of legislation and say, 'this is what we need done.'

This has to be the messaging and the messengers who can get this done for the country. This is not a problem that you kick down the road... This is something you fix right now. This is a problem. Fix it.

That sure beats merely complaining about the other side, doesn't it?

See you around campus, where I'm sure this will continue to be a topic through the election and beyond, if we're smart. 

Sunday School 1/28/24

For your Sunday School this week, I'm focusing on the immigration conversations in the classrooms.

Donald Trump doesn't want Senate Republicans to help get a bill to the House, and he doesn't want the House to pass a bill if one makes it to them. We know that because Mitch McConnell said the first part, and Trump himself has made the second part clear. 

We'll start with Face the Nation where Margaret Brennan (Interrupter-in-Chief, CBS) talked with Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), one of the negotiators of the Senate bill. Lankford said they've been working on the bill for "about four months" and they're trying to get it wrapped up so they can get into people's hands and put false rumors to bed.

So people want to be able to just see it, read it and go through it, and to be able to see the dramatic change that this really makes in how we handle our immigration system and how we work to be able to secure our border completely. That's been the simple request of Americans, whether you're Republican, Democrat, or independent. People just want a secure border, where we have legal immigration, but we're not promoting illegal immigration. And that's what we've seen in the last three years.

He said some of the language is similar to our pandemic-era Title 42, which allowed the border to be closed when we couldn't process the number of people who were crossing. Right now, he said, when we can't process them, they're just being released into the country.

That's what's driving the mayors in Denver, in Chicago, in New York City, and other places around the country crazy to say, when the border gets crowded, you just release them to our cities, and it causes all the chaos... 

With this bill, we can "turn those folks back around to Mexico," he said, which "gives the authority to the United States and to law enforcement, rather than...the criminal cartels." He said 'humanitarian parole' remains an issue, because it's "attracting more people" here, and we end up turning them loose without knowing if they even qualify for asylum.

Brennan wondered if the bill would pass without Trump's support. Lankford said he's looking forward to Trump being able to read the bill before he makes a decision, adding

... there is no question, no matter what your political persuasion is, we would not have had the immigration crisis we're experiencing right now if President Trump would have been president the last three years...

But even Trump wanted more authority on immigration, and what "he was specifically asking Congress to change" on asylum, and deportation funding, are included in the bill. 

 So, if he were to be president, this would be new authorities that he had actually asked for when he was president before.

Eventually, the interview turned to the obligatory talk of endorsing Trump. I believe there's a rule - think I saw it on Walter Cronkite's Facebook page - that every Republican must be asked the question.  

Lankford said he hasn't endorsed anyone, but Trump would "be a much better president than what we're dealing with right now, definitely on national security." Brennan asked if the $83M verdict in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case gives him "any pause about (Trump) returning to office?" Nope.

I don't want to jump in the middle of a legal case. It's been interesting the number of legal cases that have come up against President Trump and then have failed and have been dropped or have been kicked out of the courts on it. This one has actually went through. He's already said he's going to challenge it. So let the courts actually make their decisions and let the American people make their decisions.

And then, of course, because he couldn't help himself, he added

We got states like Colorado that are trying to be able to block the people of Colorado from being able to choose who they vote for. Let the American people decide this in November.

Brennan didn't mention the 60-odd election fraud cases that Trump lost or that were tossed, but she did point out that the Supremes might be making the decision on the ballot case.

Next up? Dana Bash and her State of the Union classroom conversation with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), another senator crafting the bill She asked Murphy if they have a deal. He said the same as Lankford: there's a bipartisan deal, they're working on the text, and

the question is whether Republicans are going to listen to Donald Trump, who wants to preserve chaos at the border because he thinks that it's a winning political issue for him, or whether we are going to pass legislation which would be the biggest bipartisan reform of our border immigration laws in 40 years.

He said the bill gives whoever is president "new, important power to be able to better manage the flow" of people crossing the border. He's glad Biden came out "forcefully in favor" of the bill, and noted that "Republicans have said they will let - they will let Vladimir Putin march his army in and through Ukraine if we don't pass a bill that includes border provisions and Ukraine funding."

That would be "catastrophic" not just for the US but for the "whole world." The stakes are high, and

The consequences of failure are enormous. And I do have confidence that enough Republicans in the Senate are going to join us to pass this bipartisan legislation, potentially as early as the next week or two, and we can show that Washington can still stand up and work on these big problems, even if Donald Trump is rooting for chaos.

He confirmed some of the bill's provisions, including the ability to temporarily close the border when crossings "reach catastrophically high levels." It also shortens the timeframe for hearing asylum cases from "sometimes five to ten years" to "six months in some cases." It also speeds up the process for getting people work permits.

Murphy disagrees that Biden already has the necessary authority, calling that "a political talking point." The people who say that are the people who introduced those same tools in HR2, their "massive border reform bill." And now?

...they want to keep the border in a chaotic situation for political purposes. Remember, Donald Trump didn't do a much better job. Presentations reached a 10-year high ... The only reason that fewer people started to show up was because COVID hit... So, when Donald Trump says,' I didn't need any new powers,' that's just not true. 

Also in the classroom with Bash? Gov. Kristi Noem (R-SD but I really want to be VP). Noem thinks Texas should defy the Supreme Court's ruling that the federal government can cut down Gov. Greg Abbott's razor wire, and enforce their state rights to control their border.

She told a story she heard when she was in Texas, about a mom from Nicaragua who "had been told that America is open, please come." 

She brought her daughter, her 6-year-old daughter, and was facilitated through by cartels and said where she was so mistreated was in Mexico, that she sat in Mexico for three months and was put through horrific work conditions and terrible conditions for her and her daughter for three months before they then brought her across the river and forced her across into a dangerous situation.

Later in the interview, though, here's what she said about keeping people in Mexico.

Why doesn't President Biden take action today? I mean, today can be 'day one'. He can immediately announce that he's reinstating the stay-in-Mexico policy...We have a president that has all the tools that he needs to protect our country today, and he's refusing to do that.

So, do we make them stay in Mexico, or no? I'm so confused. 

And what does Noem think of some of the comments in a video Bash played?

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): The question is, do you want to get something that will help us stem the tide of humanity coming across the border and drugs, or do you want to get nothing? SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-ND): I just reject the idea that we should reserve a crisis for a better time to solve it. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I think the best thing for the Republican Party to do right now is try to work with Democrats. 

Noem thumped her chest and accused the senators of "casting aspersions that they do not have the knowledge and the facts to speak to." 

Because they weren't around when Trump was president? Because they didn't support his border policies? Because she wants to be Trump's VP so badly, she can taste it? 

She also this about the esteemed Republicans:

So you can say a lot of things and talk a lot of talk. And U.S. senators are really good at spinning a story to make themselves look good. 

Not that job-hunting governors would ever do that.

See you around campus.

In Case You Missed It (v118)

Four posts made it out last week - three were regular features, while the fourth was a revival of one of my favorite themes. Here's a recap of the week, which started with my Sunday School classroom visits. 

I took one for the team and paid attention to all of the GOP folks who stopped by for interviews, including Margaret Brennan's chat on Face the Nation with Sarah Huckabee Sanders, notable mostly for her time as Donald Trump's many press secretaries. 

She's currently governor of Arkansas, a job her dad also held. She and Brennan talked about abortion exceptions, maternal care, and things like that before the conversation inevitably turned to Sanders's former boss. 

When asked about Trump and Biden both being too old to be part of a new generation of leaders, Sanders talked about the candidates' records, not their ages, and to no one's surprise, thinks Trump is the better choice. As to whether Trump can unite us, she said

You know, one of the things that I think is so often left out of Donald Trump's story is the patriotism and the love of country that he brought back. We haven't seen that in this president... In fact, we've seen the total opposite. 

Brennan disagreed with several things Sanders touted as Trump's successes, including immigration, the Middle East, and Ukraine, to which Sanders responded,

Well, that's why we need him to come back for four years because he didn't get to finish, but he certainly made significant progress...

 I give her credit - at least she admitted that some of Trump's most highly-touted 'accomplishments' weren't accomplished. 

Here's an excerpt from Sen. Scott's conversation with Dana Bash (CNN's State of the Union), which was featured in your Extra Credit, which was the second post of the week. As I noted, this was considered a hugely important endorsement, ostensibly because Scott chose not to endorse Nikki Haley, the person who made him a Senator. 

Or, at least equally likely, even if no one's saying much about it, it's because he's the only Black GOP senator. Anyway, here's an excerpt for you. The colorful comment is mine.

Bash talked about Scott's "very positive, very hopeful campaign." She played a video clip of Scott asking a crowd, "Victimhood or victory? Grievance or greatness?" and said it sounded like he was talking about Trump.

No, listen, I -- we absolutely, positively, unequivocally need an America that's not filled with victims.

Trump is the victim-in-chief, for Pete's sake. So, if not Trump, who was Scott talking about? 

I'm actually talking about how Joe Biden has destroyed our economy and made victims out of people waiting for the government to show up. I'm talking about having a president who's weaponizing the DOJ against political adversaries. We need Lady Justice wearing a blindfold. I want America, every single American in every corridor of this nation to have confidence in their DOJ, not a Biden-led DOJ.

 I had quite a few colorful comments in response to his endorsement, as you might imagine. 

Next up? I was Wondering on Wednesday this week about what makes a stock market record high 'good' and what makes one 'bad," and about the damage from the Citizen's United  Supreme Court decision, which had its fourteenth anniversary last week. 

And, I wondered this about Floria Man Ron DeSantis, who suspended his very expensive presidential campaign.

I'm not surprised he dropped out of the race; many folks think he was really prepping for 2028 and a run against Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA). The two debated last November, which is when Newsom famously said, "Neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024." 

After DeSantis gave his half-hearted endorsement to Trump, we were told that the 'Ron DeSanctimonious' nickname was officially retired. 

I'm half-heartedly wondering if no longer having to hear the name is why DeSantis suspended his campaign - and if his donors, and their wallets, wish he had done it sooner.

I closed the week with an OrangeVerse post. Started as a more general political poetry theme during the Obama years, it grew by leaps and bounds when Trump took office in 2016, because he's constantly talking, and because his patter lends itself to free verse quite nicely. You can find previous poems by searching the keyword 'OrangeVerse' in the 'At Your Fingertips' box at the right sidebar.

Here's an excerpt from the 62nd chapter, titled Brief but Derogatory, in which the Former Guy had choice words for Nikki Haley and her financial backers.  

I can't help noticing that, as is often the case when he accuses someone of something, it's usually done by exhibiting the same behavior he's complaining about. 

No Camp for YOU!
Nikki 'Birdbrain' Haley 
is very bad
for the Republican Party
and indeed,
our 
Country.
 
Her False Statements,
Derogatory Comments, 
and Humiliating Public Loss, 
is demeaning to
True 
American 
Patriots.

As is often the case, his poetry gets stronger the longer he talks. 

And now, you're up to date. On tap this week? Our usual three (Sunday School, Extra Credit, and WoW), a Quick Take or two, and if all goes well, a report on what's happening in Albany. 

I hope you stick around.

OrangeVerse LXII: Brief But Derogatory

The PBS Newshour has a recurring feature called Brief But Spectacular, where people from various walks of life spend two or three minutes talking about something important to them, or interesting about them. 

With a slight modification (and an apology to the wonderful folks at the Newshour), I offer you this bit of verse from the Former Guy. 

I can't help noticing that, as is often the case when he accuses someone of something, it's usually done by exhibiting the same behavior he's complaining about. 

No Camp for YOU!

Nikki 'Birdbrain' Haley 

is very bad

for the Republican Party

and indeed,

our 

Country.

Her False Statements,

Derogatory Comments, 

and Humiliating Public Loss, 

is demeaning to

True 

American 

Patriots.

Her anger should be aimed at 

her Third Rate Political Consultants

and, more importantly

Crooked Joe Biden and those

who are destroying our Country - 

NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WILL SAVE IT.

I knew Nikki well, 

she was average

at best,

is not the one

 to take on

World Leaders,

and she never did.

That was up to me

and that is why

they respected 

the United States. 

When I ran for Office and won,

I noticed that the 

Losing Candidate's Donors

would immediately come to me

and want to 

'help out.'

This is standard in Politics,

but no longer with me.

Anybody that 

makes a

'Contribution'

to Birdbrain

from this moment forth

will be permanently banned

from the MAGA camp.

We don't want them, 

and will not accept them.

because we Put America First

and ALWAYS WILL.

I'm not sure if the MAGA camp has a gate at the end of the driveway, but if there was one,  I'd guess it would be both decidedly non-pearly, and garishly orange.

Wondering on Wednesday 1/24/24

 

Ready... set... wonder!

If you've been paying attention to financial news lately, you're likely aware that the stock market is booming. The Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P have all hit or neared record highs,  sometimes on consecutive days. 

Remember how big a deal that was during the Trump administration? He talked about it all the time in interviews and on social media. I found over 140 tweets or retweets from him raving about how high the market was, how many records it hit, and how fabulous it was when he was president. For example, here's one from December 31, 2020.

That was then, but this is now, and with Joe Biden in the White House, Trump is no longer excited about the market's success. Rather, he's telling his supporters that "the stock market is making rich people richer" - as if that's ever been a bad thing for an alleged billionaire. 

So, I'm wondering, am I supposed to be happy with my 401(k) doing so well, or am I supposed to be mad about rich people? 

*** *** *** *** *** 

This week marked the fourteenth anniversary of Citizens United, the case in which the Supreme Court decided that there are no limits on how much money corporations, non-profits, unions, trade organizations, and the like can spend buying elections, because limiting their money limits their speech.

According to an article from The Hill, 

AdImpact, a political advertising tracking firm, anticipates $10.2 billion will be spent on political advertising across broadcast, cable, radio, satellite, digital and CTV during the 2024 cycle, which would make it the most expensive in history.

And, if the estimate proves true, that'd be over a billion dollars more than was spent during the 2020 cycle, the previous record (emphasis added). The article also notes that

Outside groups have dumped nearly $318 million into 2024 presidential and congressional elections as of Sunday, OpenSecrets reported.

And how does that compare to 2020? It's "more than six times" what was spent during the same time period in '20 (emphasis added).

I won't bother wondering what this does to the voices of regular folks like you and me; I mean, that's pretty obvious, right? We're not actually muzzled, but our voices are surely being drowned out. 

I do wonder, though, why the amount living, breathing people can spend is limited. After all, we're the ones who actually vote.

*** *** *** *** ***

An article from HuffPost informed us that Ron DeSantis ran a pretty expensive campaign.

The DeSantis campaign and Never Back Down combined had roughly $150 million to work with. Much of that came in the form of an $82.5 million transfer from the Florida political committee that DeSantis used to run for governor in 2019 and 2023. It’s highly likely that money dried up in the waning days of his presidential campaign, as many of the governor’s donors had already maxed out their contributions while his donor base did not show signs of expanding.

I'm not surprised he dropped out of the race; many folks think he was really prepping for 2028 and a run against Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA). The two debated last November, which is when Newsom famously said, "Neither of us will be the nominee for our party in 2024." 

As DeSantis half-heartedly endorsed the front-runner, Trump told us he would officially retire the 'Ron DeSanctimonious' nickname. I'm half-heartedly wondering if no longer having to hear the name is why DeSantis suspended his campaign - and if his donors, and their wallets, wish he had done it sooner.

*** *** *** *** ***

One more about politics, and then we'll move on - I promise. I've been talking about endorsements quite a bit lately, I know, but did you see this one?

Nikki Haley receives major endorsement from Judith Sheindlin ahead of New Hampshire primary

You may be wondering, as am I, how many people knew who Judith Sheindlin was without watching the video or googling her. And I can't help wondering how much influence Sheindlin has? I guess she's still on TV in syndication, but her show ended in July 2021. And finally, I wonder how on earth this can in any way be considered "a major endorsement."

*** *** *** *** ***

It's FAFSA season - that time when families with high school seniors sit down and try to figure out how they're going to fund further education for their kids. While there are reports of issues with the form, the lateness of it, and most importantly with the calculations, that's not what I'm wondering about. 

Rather, I'm thinking about what happens long before FAFSA - when parents fight their way through the challenge of finding available and affordable childcare - and long after, when the kids have been out of college for 10, 15, or 20+ years and still owe on their student loans. 

Here's what I'm wondering: why don't we hear the same complaints about childcare tax credits as we do about student loan forgiveness? If the argument against the former is that we shouldn't have to bail out people who can't afford college, I'd expect the same people to argue that we shouldn't have to bail out people who can't afford to raise their own children.

*** *** *** *** ***

I'll close with a silly observation. I follow a couple of 'old house' pages on social media, which share photos of houses built as far back as the late 1600s, with most being around 100 years newer than that.

Followers of the page are very passionate; for people who complain, and for those who love what they see, everything is fair game:  windows, walls, floors, and ceilings; rugs, art, and collectibles, and where they are displayed;  and most especially, the kitchens and bathrooms. The most common complaints about those two rooms are that everything is too modern, the wrong material, in the wrong spot, or just plain ugly.

I haven't officially commented on this yet, but I wonder why no one ever complains about the houses having indoor plumbing and electricity in the first place?

*** *** *** *** ***

What's on your wondering mind today?

Sunday School 1/21/24: Extra Credit

In yesterday's Sunday School, I recapped three classroom visits, all with Republican governors. 

Today, the focus is on Sen. Tim Scott's Trump endorsement. As I noted last week, most of the media is falling all over themselves over how big a deal it is. Now, you can read it for yourself. My comments are interspersed throughout the post.

Scott sat down with Dana Bash in the State of the Union classroom, where the first question was why Trump, why not Haley?

It comes right down to, what does America need for the next president? It would be four more years of Donald Trump. And why do I say that? I say that because I worked with President Trump on really important issues impacting American voters and American families. We worked together. I helped write the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, the largest tax decrease in American history.

I hope Scott remembers that many of the most impactful provisions of the bill he wrote are set to expire next year.  

Think about uniting this country. He gave the highest level of funding for historically black colleges and universities in the history of the country. We had the most inclusive economy, seven million new jobs, the lowest unemployment rates for African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, a 70-year low for women, and a 50-year low for the majority of the population,... during the Trump years.

A couple things: in some GOP circles, providing historic HBCUs funding is likely considered "woke," not a sign of unity; unemployment rates dipped even lower during Biden's term, and are fairly consistent with Trump's pre-COVID numbers; and while we know that presidents don't 'create' jobs, Biden has 'created' nearly twice as many as Trump.

We had a stronger economy, a healthy military, and a safer world. When I compare and contrast, the only, the only conclusion is Donald Trump.

Scott said he and Haley exchanged texts "several times" since he got out of the race, and he expanded upon his thinking in endorsing Trump. 

I'm not asking a question about who's from my home state. I'm not asking a question who would be -- is a good person or a better person. I think President Donald Trump is a strong president, will be a strong president again, and will have the kind of accomplishments that will unite this nation around economic opportunity.

If he's not looking for a "good person," he's found his man.

Bash talked about Scott's "a very positive, very hopeful campaign." She played a video clip of Scott asking a crowd, "Victimhood or victory? Grievance or greatness?" and said it sounded like he was talking about Trump.

No, listen, I -- we absolutely, positively, unequivocally need an America that's not filled with victims.

Trump is the victim-in-chief, for Pete's sake. So, if not Trump, who was Scott talking about? 

I'm actually talking about how Joe Biden has destroyed our economy and made victims out of people waiting for the government to show up. I'm talking about having a president who's weaponizing the DOJ against political adversaries. We need Lady Justice wearing a blindfold. I want America, every single American in every corridor of this nation to have confidence in their DOJ, not a Biden-led DOJ.

Has he not been paying attention? Has he never heard of Bill Barr? 

I want every child growing up in poverty, like I did, to have access to quality education. Unfortunately, the Democrats have sold their souls to the teachers' unions, trapping poor black kids in inner cities into failing schools and out of their best future. I want a nation where every child looks into the future and says, the American dream works for me. I was that kid.

And so when I think about bringing this country together, not under grievance, but over greatness, not being victims, but being victorious, I am talking about the future of this nation... and politicians who get in the way of that.

 Bash asked if he doesn't "see any grievance in Donald Trump's campaign for president?"

Well, here's what I can tell you. And for a person who's seen the DOJ weaponized against him, for a person who, before he was ever sworn into office, "The Washington Post" said they were going to make sure that he is a one-term president, when you look at the challenges he faced, there's no doubt that he has been aggrieved. 

I think Scott's confused; back in 2010, Sen. Mitch McConnell said “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Maybe that's what he remembered hearing?

The question is, what are the American voters looking for? Here's what they're looking for. They're looking for a president who represents their best future, and not his. That president is not Joe Biden. It's Donald Trump. 

I have concerns about a second Joe Biden term, as do many people I know, but I don't think Donald Trump represents anyone's best future, other than his own.

Bash then turned to Scott's belief that Trump will "restore law and order," which is interesting. She pointed to Trump's recent experiences with the law, including trying to overturn the 2020 election, promising to pardon his rioters (he calls them hostages), the stolen documents case, and his latest call for total presidential immunity, and asked how that equated to law and order. 

Well, he has a legal team that can answer the questions of the legal challenges that he faces.

Yes - including a lawyer who said presidential immunity would apply if the president ordered SEAL Team 6 to murder a political rival. That's kind of hard to ignore, I think.

But what I can tell you is that, when you look around the cities, when you grow up in poor communities, like I did, and you watch the crime ravishing your communities, you ask yourself what president has allowed that to happen. It's Joe Biden.

Bash didn't interrupt to ask, "What is the president's role in dealing with crime in cities and poor communities?" but I would have. 

When you have DAs around the country that say it's no longer a crime to steal $1,000 worth of goods, and those stores start closing in San Francisco and across the country, you ask yourself what president allowed that lawless behavior to continue. That's Joe Biden.

I'm not denying there are serious issues facing retail stores - we've seen the video, right? But again, "What is the president's role in telling elected DAs how to do their jobs?" And, "What is the president's role in making sure that businesses don't lie about crime in the press and in Congressional hearings?"  And, "What is the president's role in making sure politicians don't spread the same lies?"

You ask yourself, who can restore the kind of law and order in our nation to allow it to go forward... that would be Donald Trump.

Bash tried again, focusing on the 'hostage' language, noting Scott was at the Capitol on January 6th, jacket off, sleeves rolled up, ready to defend himself "presumably until I died."  Would he now refer to the folks facing prosecution as hostages?

I would say that every single person facing our justice system should have justice done. The facts and the evidence in each individual case matters. I have confidence that that process will play out. Here's what I said also in the book that I wrote. I talked about January the 6th, because I'm one of the few people who was actually there with the people outside; 99 percent of the people who showed up were there to exercise their First Amendment rights. What I said then is what I will say now. I don't hold those people at harm. I don't hold them responsible for the actions of a few. I do hold the few responsible, no one else.  People have to be responsible for themselves.

Bash tried two more times to get a specific agreement that 'hostages' was the wrong term, but Scott only said, "We should have confidence in restoring the blindfold to Lady Justice." I'm not sure dressing Lady Justice as a blindfold-wearing hostage helps. 

Scott was asked if he was comfortable with Trump 'birthering' Nikki Haley, as he did Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, and who knows how many others. His answer is laughable. 

Well, I'm watching rhetoric on all sides of the issues facing becoming president. What I mean by that is, the rhetoric from Joe Biden is terrible, but it is -- and it's salacious.

Salacious? Really? I must have bigly missed something! Has Biden campaigned making comments that are "arousing or appealing to sexual desire or imagination?" That sounds a whole lot more like the House GOP (remember Hunter Biden's photos?) or Trump to me.

Nikki Haley questions whether 70-year-olds should be allowed to run for president. I think there is so much negativity and toxicity in this aim to becoming president again or for the first time that we should be very clear and look at both sides of the comments made. What I can tell you, the average voter is more interested in their future and their kids than they are the comments being thrown around by political candidates.

And, whether it's the man he sold his soul to endorsed or anyone else, 

Well, I would like for all politicians to comport themselves in a way that is consistent with the highest office.

But I'm happy to endorse the rudest, meanest, most belligerent, most violent, most openly dictatorial, most impressively indicted, most unlike me candidate I could find, instead of gracefully serving out my term and spending time with my bride-to-be. 

The last word on this goes to CNN's Amanda Carpenter, who was in the classroom for the interview.

I mean, I've just got to comment a bit on how Tim Scott has closed his race. That interview he conducted with you made me really sad. It was really hard to watch. I think you rarely see a person with his reputation, as an optimistic, charismatic leader, sully it in the way that he did in that interview...

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 1/21/24

I visited several classrooms yesterday, mostly to listen to the Republican side of things. 

First up?  Former 2024 presidential candidate and now Trump endorser Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND) met with Martha Raddatz in the This Week classroom. 

Burgum ran as a 'unifying' candidate before pulling out of the race $12M poorer. Raddatz asked if he believes Trump has the best chance of pulling the country together. He didn't answer the question but said serving as governor was better under Trump than under Biden.

And as we know, during the time that President Trump was in office, I mean, we had peace and prosperity in America. And under President Biden, we’ve got chaos around the world...

He centered his candidate on the economy, energy policy, and national security and how they're interrelated, and says

Joe Biden is taking us in the wrong direction on all of those, 180 degrees the wrong direction, and -- and not -- I'm confident that President Trump is -- he’s going to be right on the economy, right on energy policy, and right on national security.

Raddatz asked why he supports election-denier Trump; Burgum's on record saying Biden won in 2020. After trying twice to get an answer, she simply asked if he was an election denier too. He says no.

We have to make sure that Americans have confidence in these elections... Americans lack confidence in this, and that’s why -- that’s why we’ve got to make sure going forward that we have confidence. Democracy doesn’t exist unless people can trust the outcome of an election.

Another non-answer came to a question about Trump 'birthering' Nikki Haley. In a nutshell? Everyone's mean, the Dems say bad things about each other, too, and "it's the norm" in our politics. He's wrong on that, I think, but he's not all that far from right, is he?

Down the hall in the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan talked with Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R-kansaw). 

In Arkansas, other than "to save the mother's life in a medical emergency," all abortions are banned.  Any attempts to modify the law have been blocked by the state's Attorney General. Brennan wondered if Sanders would consider a ballot initiative to modify the law.

Look, I'm proud of the fact that Arkansas is one of the most pro-life states in the country. I'm unapologetically pro-life. I believe that we are a culture that protects life, that values life. I think that's who we are as a country and I'll continue to support those measures.

Brennan acknowledged the personal belief but asked if Sanders had any interest in hearing what her constituents thought. No need for that; she said her state is "overwhelmingly" pro-life, she said, and she's proud of efforts they've made, including with adoption, foster care, education, and 

empowering every single Arkansan to have a great quality of life. We are looking at every aspect in making sure that we're doing what we can to protect and value life at every stage here in the state of Arkansas.

She didn't expand post-partum care from 60 days to twelve months; some of her GOP counterparts did. Brennan asked why not, given the state has long had a high maternal mortality rate. Sanders said she wants to "do everything we can" during pregnancy and after, and that they've made several changes already. Unlike some of her counterparts, Arkansas will be participating in a summer food assistance program the feds are offering. 

When asked about Trump and Biden both being too old to be part of a new generation of leaders, Sanders talked about the candidates' records, not their ages, and to no one's surprise, thinks Trump is the better choice. As to whether Trump can unite us, she said

You know, one of the things that I think is so often left out of Donald Trump's story is the patriotism and the love of country that he brought back. We haven't seen that in this president... In fact, we've seen the total opposite. 

Brennan disagreed with several things Sanders touted as Trump's successes, including immigration, the Middle East, and Ukraine, to which Sanders responded,

Well, that's why we need him to come back for four years because he didn't get to finish, but he certainly made significant progress...

If you're wondering, she's focused on being governor for "the next seven years," seemingly shutting out becoming Trump's veep.  

Last, a speed round with Gov. Chris Sununu (R-NH), who was heckled by Kirsten Welker on  Meet the Press. 

Is New Hampshire "make or break" for Haley?

No. No. She doesn't have to win. I mean, look, nobody goes from single digits in December to "you absolutely have to win" in January. I think that's a media expectation that's being set out there...

Is he concerned about Trump's mental capability, based on recent comments? 

I mean, look, the point is you have two nearly 80-year-olds fighting this thing out. That's not what America wants...this is not Donald Trump, the disruptor of 2016. This guy has lost his fastball... We always want that next generation. Neither of these guys represent the next generation.

Should a president have Trump's version of immunity? 

Of course not... I don't care what political party you're from, whether you're an extreme conservative or a socialist liberal – everybody should be concerned with that type of mentality going into the White House.

How can he support Trump, if he's the nominee?

I think most Republicans are going to get behind the Republican nominee...  This is how bad Joe Biden is. Six months ago Trump couldn't beat Biden...So this is where we've come, where Joe Biden is so bad that even folks would get behind Donald Trump.

And his last point?

... the more that come out, the better chance we have of beating him at the ballot box. And that's the only way to do it. The voters decide who's going to be the nominee. Not the media, not Chris Sununu, not even Nikki Haley. It's the voters, and that's the best process.

Truer words, and whatnot.  See you around campus.