In Case You Missed it (v109)

I managed to get three posts out last week - here's your recap, in case you missed anything.

For your Sunday School, I hung out in the Fox News Sunday classroom where host Shannon Bream talked with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV). He talked about his desire to get permitting reform passed; getting that considered was the deal he made for his vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, a deal that strongly perturbed his Republican colleagues. 

Bream was armed with a lot of ammo on that.

... Well, certainly, you understand where Republicans don't think they should be the ones to come across the aisle to vote for a measure that primarily benefits you, which was done in exchange for your vote on a measure they didn't support -- not a single one of them vote for the Inflation Reduction Act.

And there's more - she quoted something in 'Politico' from Sen. John Cornyn, "Given what Senator Manchin did on the reconciliation bill, it's engendered a lot of bad blood. There's not a lot of sympathy on our side to provide Senator Manchin a reward." The point of that? Why should the Rs help him now?

Manchin pointed out that the Rs, with his support, have been fighting for - for years - to get this done. 

He gently reminded any Rs watching that they weren't successful last time around.

When they had everything, when they -- in 2016 to 2020, Shannon, they had Republican president, Republican House, Republican Senate, we couldn't -- we couldn't move it because I was the only Democrat. Now we're in a position where we have a majority Democrats and our Republican friends can take it across the line.

His closing remarks were also spot on; let me know what you think.

Picking up where Manchin left off, for your Extra Credit,  I wandered down the hall to the State of the Union classroom. Jake Tapper talked with two former Tennessee governors, one of each flavor. Phil Bredesen (D) and Bill Haslam (R), are co-hosting a podcast called You Might Be Right.

Tapper delved into the perceived difficulties of trying to have a bipartisan conversation on critical issues in a time of great partisan divide. Here was his first attempt, which Haslam mostly dodged. 

Tapper asked Haslam what he'd say to folks who say it's not possible to find common ground "with people who are literally trying to undermine democracy?"  Tapper was referring to the many Rs, including the top leaders in the House, who push the Big Lie and, "in the view of many critics, don't seem to have a real commitment to democracy."

He asked it again, suggesting "it's difficult to have an argument" about important topics like taxes, foreign policy, abortion and so on "if the other side won't even accept the results of a free and fair election." 

Bredesen took the question this time, pointing out that "if we get stuck on that" there won't be a lot of progress made.

What Bill and I are trying to do is to say, look, there are some issues there that are -- they're very difficult and people are in hard corners, but there's a lot of issues in this country having to do, I mean, with the debt and with the environment and so on, that there are real problems that need solutions. And trying to explore with the public at large, not necessarily with the Congress, but the public at large, as to what some of those common grounds might be, I think, is important.

He also pointed out the difference between two governors talking, and Congress.

I mean, we both were in the business world before politics. We both were mayors and then governors. I mean, those are all jobs where you actually have to do something Monday morning. If there's a problem out there, you're expected to do something to begin to -- begin to solve it. That's just a very different environment than you have in the Congress, for example, where there's very little problem-solving going on, but there's a lot of posturing going on and working to the base. So, I hope that the combination of experiences of the two of us bring something a little different to the discussions as well.

Compare this line of thinking to the utter pettiness of Sen. John Cornyn in the Sunday School recap...  maybe Cornyn and the rest of the folks in DC should tune in to the podcast. 

I did a few good week/bad week mentions for your TGIF post; here are a couple of them.

Speaking of the gaffe master, he might have exceeded our wildest imaginations at a White House hunger conference this week, when he called out for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, who was killed in a car accident in August. Walorski was a co-chair of the Hunger Caucus, and was one of the folks who introduced the bill that led to the conference. And, of course, the pack of reporters, hungry as always for a sound-bite and air time, undertook "a series of tense exchanges" trying to get an answer as to why Biden, well, pulled a Biden. Is an answer necessary?

Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was formally sworn in this week, and will take her seat on the bench on Monday, at a time when 60% of us believe the Court is "out of touch" and 66% believe there should be term limits for Justices.  Those sentiments aren't indicative of KBJ, of course, but she's coming on the Court at a difficult time, with some tough cases on affirmative action and college admissions, LGBTQ rights, and election issues, among others.

That's a wrap on the week -- I'll be back later, hopefully with a fuller slate of posts and an empty drafts folder. 

Wish me luck. 

TGIF 9/30/22

Another week is winding down, and it's time for the good week/bad week accounting. Here are just a few of the folks who earned a mention.

The state of Florida had a mixes week. On the latter, the cat-4 Hurricane Ian made a mess of things, tossing boats and houses and piers around, causing massive flooding, and cutting power to millions of customers as it crossed the state. On the other hand, many people evacuated on time, and many of those who didn't rode out the storm and lived to talk about it. We'll learn more in the coming days on how deadly it was, but the initial reports were not as bad we expected. On a personal note, I'm grateful that all my friends and family in Florida are safe.

Staying in the Sunshine State, Gov. Ron DeSantis is doing his darnedest to act statesmanly, given his presidential aspirations, but his past - and votes against disaster funding for another hurricane in a far-off place (the blue states of New Jersey and New York) - are cropping up on social media. His staff said the Gov has no time for pettiness, which is a first, I think; he's a master of the petty, in fact. But when push comes to shove, or when storm surge comes to the Gulf Coast, he's willing to set that aside and work with President Biden, at least until there's talk about making fiscally responsible disaster aid demands. 

Speaking of the gaffe master, he might have exceeded our wildest imaginations at a White House hunger conference this week, when he called out for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, who was killed in a car accident in August. Walorski was a co-chair of the Hunger Caucus, and was one of the folks who introduced the bill that led to the conference. And, of course, the pack of reporters, hungry as always for a sound-bite and air time, undertook "a series of tense exchanges" trying to get an answer as to why Biden, well, pulled a Biden. Is an answer necessary?

Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was formally sworn in this week, and will take her seat on the bench on Monday, at a time when 60% of us believe the Court is "out of touch" and 66% believe there should be term limits for Justices.  Those sentiments aren't indicative of KBJ, of course, but she's coming on the Court at a difficult time, with some tough cases on affirmative action and college admissions, LGBTQ rights, and election issues, among others.

Beto O'Rourke, who's running for governor of Texas, received support from family members of Uvalde school shooting victims. They traveled nearly five hours by bus to hold a press conference an hour before the only debate between O'Rourke and Gov. Greg Abbott who, in these folks minds, "had not taken enough action on gun control measures" since the shooting four months ago.

I hope you had a good week.

TGIF, everyone.

TGIF 7/1/22

It's list-making time again; here are a few of the likely suspects for good week or bad ween mention.

Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to Mark 'That's Me in My Rusty Trailer, Yes Siree Bob!' Meadows, former president Trump's fourth Chief of Staff, has been attacked practically since she began her testimony under oath before the January 6th Committee. Which, if you've paid any attention over the last several years, usually is a sign a person's doing some damage in Trumpworld.

The attacking, of course, is coming from anonymous sources, or from right-wing commentators, and from the former president himself. I think he actually paid her a compliment: he said he hardly knew her, which means that what she said she observed or heard while working just steps from the door of the Oval Office, or while she was in the tent at the Steal the Damn Election rally, is probably true. 

She cannot be held to account for what she said she was told by others, but surely if they think she lied or misrepresented them, their lawyers can probably figure out how to get hold of Rep. Bennie Thompson, Rep. Liz Cheney, or any other member of the Committee. 

And no, for the folks in denial, the committee hearings are not a trial, the House is not a courtroom, and if you wanted to have the chance to cross-examine someone, maybe your guy Kevin 'I Might Not Be Your Speaker Much Longer' McCarthy hadn't played his cards so badly, you might not be in this situation now. 

• Good week: Hutchinson, until someone contradicts her under oath.
• Bad week: Meadows, Trump.
• Mixed week: Cheney, for her unforced error of hugging Hutchinson after her testimony.

President Biden has thrown his support behind a filibuster 'carveout' to codify Roe v Wade. It will take a bigly miracle for this to happen, and the chances of that are probably slim to none at best. First of all, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-Coal in Everyone's Stocking!) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Why Am I Doing This?) are opposed to doing that; second, there's bipartisan disagreement on how far they should go with abortion legislation, and third, Sen. Pat Leahy (D- The Only Real Democratic Senator from Vermont) is going to miss at least some time as he rehabs from hip surgery, so there clearly aren't the votes.

• Good week: no one.
• Bad week: Biden and Leahy, for vastly different reasons, and Chuck Schumer, who can't wrangle his caucus to save his life.

Finally, the 2021-2022 term of the Supreme Court has come to an end, with many late decisions that, while not unexpected, sent shockwaves throughout the country. There was joy in Mudville, and there was mud in Joyville. There were some strange crossover decisions, with conservatives joining the liberals, and vice versa which confused a lot of people. Justice Stephen Breyer officially retired, and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was sworn in, ready to start on the first Monday in October.

• Good week: the Religious Right, the NRA, and Mitch McConnell, who is probably most responsible for two of Trump's justices being on the Court.
• Bad week: women, government as we know it, well-regulated militias, and people who don't think religious coercion is a good thing.
• Mixed week: immigration and climate policies.

On the above, we may not yet know the real impact of this term, what the new "conservative" majority means, and how much further backward, or sideways, we'll go in the 2022-2023 term.

TGIF, everyone.

Sunday School 4/10/22: Extra Credit

For your Extra Credit, we'll spend time with the classroom roundtable gangs, starting with What's-his-name on Meet the Press, who had Anna Palmer (Punchbowl News), Josh Lederman (NBC News), Carlos Curbelo, (Florida Man), and Kimberly Atkins Stohr (Boston Globe). 

Stohr talked about the importance of the elevation of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court - and not just for Blacks.

It's important for all Americans to see that the default of a Supreme Court Justice is not in the mold of a white male. That it can be anybody, and that it should be reflective of the country. So, this is an incredible, incredible moment.

Curbelo, a former Florida Congressman, said "by today's standards," Jackson's confirmation was pretty smooth, and that it was a "big win for this administration and a big deal for the country." And he pointed to "identity politics in reverse" being what kept 47 Republicans from voting for her

I think Republicans want to make the point that we don't have to emphasize these kinds of issues, even though they are historic.

They talked a lot about the toxicity of politics, and the fact that the Rs have pretty much shut the door on any other Biden SCOTUS nominations, should an opportunity come up, and that no Senate will confirm the other party's nominee, no matter which party is sitting where. 

Probably the most astute point, when the conversation turned to this being 'Biden's last big thing,' came from Stohr, who noted 

...Democrats have shown time and time again, they talk about the problems that need some sort of policy or legislative solutions. Republicans find issues that they can campaign on and win elections on. And that's exactly what's happening right now... Democrats are always two steps behind.

At least two steps, she should have said. 

Let's head down the hall to the right and check in with Dana Perino on Fox News Sunday and her panel: Brit Hume (Fox News), Julie Pace (AP), and former Rep. Harold Ford Jr. (D-TN).

There was lots of talk about Ukraine; Hume thinks we're not doing enough, now that the goal has seemingly shifted away from helping ensure Ukraine gets a good deal in talks with Russia, to the possibility of Ukraine winning this thing.

... I think if Ukraine is going to win, we are going to need to do more. And the question arises whether the Biden administration will be willing to do that or is their fear of a direct conflict with Russia such that we will continue to hold back on some things, certain kinds of large weaponry, airplanes, and so forth.

Ford generally agreed, but instead of asking whether the administration is ready to do more, he wondered

Are the American people ready to escalate? I think the administration probably would be, but are the American people ready to shoulder and accept the consequences, which could be worse than what we are seeing right now, can certainly see American casualties as well. I don't know the answer to that, Dana.

Turning to the economic fallout from the war, Pace pointed to the first round of the French presidential election, saying it could be a test of how folks in the West

are going to respond to a lot of the economic pain that they are feeling, which in some instances -- not all -- but in some instances is a direct result of some of the actions that the US and Western European countries have taken to try to hold Russia to account... how will Western nations, Western citizens, balance their outrage over that with their feeling of economic pain, how much economic pain are they willing to sustain in order to punish Russia for what they are seen. And I think that's a balance that could change in the coming months.

It's likely to be an issue in Europe, and here in November, she thinks. 

Finally, here's what was going on as Jon Karl tried to wrangle the panel on This Week. Hanging out with him were regulars Chris Christie and Donna Brazile, along with Rick Klein (ABC) and Laura Barron-Lopez (Politico).

Part of their discussion related to former president Trump's ability to maintain control of the GOP; they used a clip from Trump's recent rally to kickstart the conversation.

I endorsed another person today, Dr. Oz, in Pennsylvania... (APPLAUSE) Dr. Oz. (APPLAUSE) Great guy, a good man. He's a good man, Harvard-educated, tremendous, tremendous career. And they liked him for a long time. That's like a poll -- you know, when you're in television for 18 years, that's like a poll. That means people like you.

After the laughter subsided, they got down to the nitty gritty: the fact that it seems Trump is endorsing "candidates that don't appear to be on track to win," including Oz. Klein says it's "totally fascinating" that Trump's putting himself on the line, and that, "in a bunch of cases, it could blow up in his face." A notable example? Trump's efforts to get rid of Georgia's governor and secretary of state.

So, this is a big moment, I think, for Donald Trump. I think the conventional wisdom about him is this kingmaker, as the biggest force in the Republican Party. It's going to be tested when you have actual Republican primary voters in a range of states, starting next month.

Barron-Lopez said none of this means he has lost his grip on the party, 

because we see Republicans, time and time again, repeating, whether it's the big lie, or repeating, you know, other claims and attempts to try to change election laws in -- in states, in order to make it so Republicans have a better edge in future elections. So that's continuing. That isn't going anywhere.

Brazile sums it up this way:

This is a battle, again, the establishment of the Republican Party is trying to re-emerge themselves after what I call the four years of a president who is still gone mad. He is still holding people to the 2020 standard that he won the election and what Republican incumbent governors are trying to do is to push away Donald Trump, to push him out of the process. But he is still a big force...

We'll close with Christie taking issue asking Republicans who they're voting for in 2024.

...don't ask me who I'm going to vote for in 2024 because, let me tell you right now, if Bernie Sanders were the Democratic nominee for president in 2024, there is not a chance in the world I could vote for a socialist for the president of the United States. So, since we don't know who the candidates are going to be, why answer the question?

I don't normally agree with Christie, but if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee in '24, I'm not voting for him, either.

See you around campus.

TGIF 4/8/22

Who had a week, and what kind of week was had? 

The House of Representatives referred two more Trump flunkies - Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino - to the DOJ for criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress. A bad week for them is a good week for us.

And let's throw another bad week into the mix: Will Smith, who resigned from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences a week ago, has been banned from attending the Oscars or any other Academy event for ten years. The ban includes both in-person and virtual appearances. 

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will become Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson - a good week for her, and for the rest of us. All 50 Senate Democrats and three reasonable Republicans voted for her elevation to the Supreme Court. Jackson, speaking to a Rose Garden gathering, said in part

In my family, it took just one generation to go from segregation to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Sens. Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham, and Rand Paul had a bad week. Paul, for not being on time to vote against Jackson; everyone had to wait a reported 25 minutes for him to drag himself to the cloakroom, open the door, and toss a thumb's down before slinking away. The cloakroom vote was necessary because he couldn't trouble himself to put on a tie. Neither could Graham, according to reports, although he was wearing on earlier in the day. As for Cotton, he suggested that Jackson might have defended Nazis at Nuremberg, a comment so nasty that even John Roberts of Fox News challenged it. Cotton's a jerk, with or without a tie. 

Tiger Woods is having a good week; he's playing competitive golf again. Against almost all odds, Woods made the cut in the Masters, a tournament he's won five times. A mere mortal might have been killed in a similar accident, or ended up losing their leg. But Tiger Woods is no mere mortal, is he? 

Russia had a bad week; the Senate voted unanimously to strip the most-favored-nation (MFN) trade status from the country, and to ban imports of Russian oil products. The House also passed both bills, although not unanimously. Voting against the MFN removal? Marjorie Taylor Greene, Thomas Massie, and Matt Gaetz. Let's give them a heartfelt bad week round of applause.

The jury in the trial of four men accused of plotting to kidnap and murder Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer had an interesting week, which caused a bad week for the government and a good week for the four defendants. Two were acquitted; the jury failed to reach a verdict on charges against the others. It sounds like the jury believed the defense theory that the FBI went off the rails on this one; or, maybe the defendants truly had a jury of their peers?

In another high-profile case, a Minneapolis police officer who killed Amir Locke in February won't face charges. Body cam video released this week shows Locke, who was not a subject of the no-knock warrant being executed at his cousin's apartment, holding his legal gun in a manner that led to the officer to shoot him three times, within ten seconds of entering the apartment. To me, this deserves a horrible week mention - there are no winners here, that I can see.

Let's end on a good week note, OK? How about dogs being reunited through pet DNA testing? A Texas woman had adopted one of the pups; an Oregon woman adopted the other. The women had the DNA tests don on their dog and a match was made. The women via social media, and a play date was arranged. There's video - and who doesn't like cute pet videos?

TGIF, everyone. 

ICYMI (v82)

 Time to recap last week's posts, in case you missed anything.

The week started with a visit to the Sunday School classrooms, where we heard from The Grim Reaper himself, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. He offered some thoughts to Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation on Putin's war, including that

The Ukrainians have killed more Russians in three weeks than we lost in Afghanistan and Iraq in 20 years. 

Given how well the Ukrainians are doing, he suggested an open purse - and an attitude adjustment - might be helpful. 

If Ukraine needs more aid, on top of the $13.6B that was just approved, "we ought to give them more." And,

Look, I think we need to change our attitude here. The Ukrainians could actually win this thing and that's - the attitude we ought to have, that we're in it to help them win.

I also covered UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who joined Jake Tapper in the State of the Union classroom.

For your Sunday School Extra Credit I wandered into the host's chat with Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) in ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom. Barrasso and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) traded a few barbs separately, including on the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to move up to the Supreme Court.

George picked up with Sen. Barrasso where he left off with Durbin, asking if Hawley was engaging in what Barrasso specifically said should not happen with Jackson: "a process of character assassination." Barrasso said "the whole process is going to be fair, respectful, and thorough." And he offered an attack on Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

I’m less concerned about her statements than I am about Chuck Schumer's statements. He said she's going to rule with empathy. A judge ought to be making decisions based on the law as written, not the way they feel about it. So, he also said check her record. And going through the record, there are some concerns that people have about her being perceived as soft on crime. That's all going to come out with the hearings but they're going to be respectful, they’re going to be thorough and they’re going to be fair, George.

We now know what happened on the 'respectful' part, don't we?

I was Wondering on Wednesday about the KBJ hearings, and the approach the Rs took in their questioning, much of it focused on Judge Jackson's sentencing of child pornography defendants. For some reason, this is a GOP Most Favored Topic - remember Pizzagate? Anyway.

And I wonder why these child-porn-focused Republican senators are now asking to receive additional information on these cases, including pre-sentencing reports? And why is Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin withholding information from the Republicans, if in fact that's happening here?

Truth be told, there's a simple way to resolve that conflict, and I wonder why no one has suggested it yet: have the FBI urgently investigate, like it did with the sexual harassment allegations against Brett 'I Really Like Beer' Kavanaugh, and then the senators can all go into a SCIF or something and have the report read to them. Oh wait - we all remember how that went.

That didn't happen, of course. We know they didn't really want to see the reports; they just wanted their moment in the spotlight, to pound their chests and scratch themselves and pick bugs off each other... 

Interestingly, that whole "moment in the spotlight" stuff came up in my TGIF entry. In a blitz of mostly bad week items from the hearings, I dropped this kudo.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) had a good week, for calling out the bad behavior of his colleagues - and not just the ones making fools of themselves in these hearings. While explaining why he doesn't want cameras in SCOTUS proceedings, he offered this bit of wisdom, with which I can't argue. 

I think we should recognize the jack-assery we often see around here is partly because of people mugging for short-term camera opportunities.

And later, after my  post was published, we learned that he was going to vote 'no' on Jackson, even though there'll be no change in the balance of the Court. 

Sasse can't vote for an "extraordinary person with an extraordinary American story" who "love(s) this country" and who has "impeccable credentials and a deep knowledge of the law..." because she's not an 'originalist.' 

But boy, she's damn qualified., isn't she?

I'll be back with a special post for this special day - stand back and stand down, or something.

TGIF 3/25/22

After last week's all good news TGIF, we're back to the regular format, where both good and bad week stories are included. Let's dive in with a good week mention, to get us off on the right foot. 

Some great unemployment news came out Thursday, giving the Biden team a bit of a good week. It's possible you missed it; good news doesn't garner wall-to-wall coverage in the press like bad news does

Here's the scoop, from the White House:

This morning, we received news that the number of Americans on unemployment insurance fell to its lowest level since 1970 and the number of Americans filing new claims fell to its lowest one-week level since 1969. 

Now, it wasn't just the White House talking about the great numbers. Reuters concurred. 

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits dropped to a 52-1/2-year low last week, while unemployment rolls continued to shrink, pointing to rapidly diminishing labor market slack that will keep boosting wage inflation.

Piggybacking on that good news, I'll give a shoutout to businesses that are paying higher wages to get and keep good employees. I'm especially proud of them for not waiting for the government to order them to do that.

Hearings were held this week on Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson. As with other recent SCOTUS hearings, we saw a teeny bit of time spent on learning about the nominee, and an overwhelming amount of time spent on career advancement, harassment, and showing off by Judiciary Committee members. Here are some noteworthy takeaways from the hearings, both good and bad.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) had a good week, for calling out the bad behavior of his  colleagues - and not just the ones making fools of themselves in these hearings. While explaining why he doesn't want cameras in SCOTUS proceedings, he offered this bit of wisdom, with which I can't argue. 

I think we should recognize the jack-assery we often see around here is partly because of people mugging for short-term camera opportunities.

On the very bad week side of the ledger, there's Sen. Ted Cruz (R- Cancun). I've made no secret about my dislike of him over the years, and nothing he said this week changed my opinion of him.

Of all the folks on the Judiciary Committee, he was the most hypocritical, especially on the issue of critical race theory. Here's what he thinks about that, and about Judge Jackson being on the board of the school that he says

aggressively teaches critical race theory, and that is an extreme and divisive theory that pits children against other children, divides us based on race, and teaches a false and revisionist history of our nation.

The problem? He sends his daughters to a school that espouses a similar philosophy. For example, statements by school leaders after the murder of George Floyd said the school

must be antiracist and eliminate racism of any type - including institutional racism - within our school, community, and beyond.

And, from the school's website, we learn that "cultural proficiency, diversity, global awareness and inclusivity" will be incorporated "into all facets of the curriculum." One can't help thinking Cruz has never looked at his daughters' homework. Unless  he only gives a hoot about this stuff when the cameras aren't on.

In fairness, I must give the Rs on the committee a wee dollop of credit; it seems the idea of boycotting the vote to move Judge Jackson's nomination out of committee is DOA. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said

There's not going to be any boycott. There's zero, not one iota (of a chance) that we would boycott.

Other senators, including the despicable Lindsey Graham (R-Shriekerville) said he didn't think that was the right way to handle it. John Cornyn (R-TX) said they should

show up and try our best to be on our best behavior and treat the nominee respectfully. (Emphasis added)

Good luck with that, if what they showed this week is any indication. 

Speaking of being on best behavior, Judge Jackson was remarkable. Her grace, tolerance, and patience were on display throughout the hearings. There was a moment, though, when she took a very long pause before answering one of Sen. Cruz's questions. Elie Mystal of The Nation explained what that pause meant; in part, she said

It’s the calculation when black people try to decide: “Am I gonna risk it all for this?” 

Jackson took a moment to decide if it was worth it to throw everything away—her chance, her good name, maybe even her whole career—just to tell Ted Cruz, a man she’s known for over 25 years, what she really thought of him. 

She decided against it, of course.

And in that moment, she proved herself better than Cruz, Graham, Cornyn, Hawley, and all the rest of them. 

I'll close with one more reference to Cruz; as I said, he had a very bad week. USA Today columnist Rex Huppke addressed the same question as Elie Mystal - did Jackson think babies are racist? Here's his take.

Some viewers wondered why a man who looks like he rubbed honey on his face then rolled on the floor of a barbershop would pose such a question. In fact, the collective eye roll was so intense the Earth briefly tilted off its axis.

But I stood and cheered the bold senator from Texas/Cancun. He was speaking truth to power and addressing an issue few Americans have ever been willing to face: Babies are incredibly racist. 

We know this, he opines, because babies "are silent on the issue." 

If babies aren’t racist, and if a clearly intelligent and serious U.S. senator is out there floating a possible epidemic of infant racism, don’t you think babies themselves would stand up, immediately fall down, and then assure everyone they don’t have a racist bone in their soft and pliable bodies?

Of course, they would. 

TGIF, everyone. 

Wondering on Wednesday 3/23/22

Ready... Set... Wonder!

What's wonder-full today? 

My local newspaper ran an article letting us know that gas prices in my neck of the woods fell a dime a gallon in just ten days. Now, if you've been paying any attention, every time the price of gas goes up, or there's even a hint that it's going to go up, the angry folks on the right throw a mass conniption fit, which apparently causes them to run around putting Joe Biden "I Did That!" stickers on gas pumps, yell out their windows that they're mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore, and run out and order overpriced gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs which they drive around potholes and stones in the road and stuff.

And I'm wondering, why the heck they aren't thanking Joe Biden for lowering the price? Is it because they really know that presidents don't have a whole lot to do with gas prices? 

You may have heard the news that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been hospitalized since last Friday. Keep that thought in mind as we reflect on Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-Some pissed-off place south of North Carolina) and his questioning of SCOTUS nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Graham was particularly interested in how other people, or outside groups lobbied hard to have Jackson be Biden's pick; or, maybe, they lobbied hard to have Judge J. Michelle Childs, from South Carolina, not be Biden's pick. Either way, Jackson herself had nothing to do with that, Graham knows that, and he doesn't give a dried-out palmetto leaf if we all know he knows.

I think it does matter that the groups that came to your aid at the expense of Judge Childs - how did that happen and why were they doing what they were doing? What is it about your nomination that the most liberal people... threw in their money, their time, their support, and threatened Joe Biden if he picked Judge Childs? 

So, here's what I'm wondering: if Justice Thomas is unable to return to the bench, for whatever reason, how hard would Senator Graham lobby to have Judge Childs replace him?

And, sticking with the Judiciary Committee hearings on Judge Jackson's nomination, I wonder why so many Republicans want to spend so much time talking about child pornography? 

And I wonder why these Republicans are expending so much effort on how Judge Jackson sentenced offenders in these cases, when what she did was exactly what other judges were doing? 

Were those judges questioned on this issue? Not just soft-on-crime-liberal-Democrat appointees, but Republicans, too, the ones recommended by the Heritage Foundation (they're the folks who fan themselves with their pocket copies of the US Constitution if it gets too hot in the freedom-loving trenches)? Judges nominated by Donald "Only the Best People" Trump, their appointments strongly supported by these same porn-focused senators?

And I wonder why these child-porn-focused Republican senators are now asking to receive additional information on these cases, including pre-sentencing reports? And why is Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin withholding information from the Republicans, if in fact that's happening here?

Truth be told, there's a simple way to resolve that conflict, and I wonder why no one has suggested it yet: have the FBI urgently investigate, like it did with the sexual harassment allegations against Brett 'I Really Like Beer' Kavanaugh, and then the senators can all go into a SCIF or something and have the report read to them. Oh wait - we all remember how that went.

There was much more from the hearings that inspired wonder, like the war criminals issue involving George W. Bush (but curiously not Barack Obama) question and the definition of 'woman' but I'll leave it here, and you can wonder out loud or to yourself, as you prefer.

I'll close out tonight's wondering where we started - with gas prices. It seems that, in addition to the blame game, some folks in DC want to try and help. And we know there's a whole lot of wondering going on when that happens, right?

We've got three federal proposals - and it's only March 23rd. Who knows how many more there'll be, since the House isn't occupied with Daylight Savings Time. One would provide a

monthly energy rebate of $100 per person. That refund would kick in for the rest of 2022 (if) the national average gas price topped $4 a gallon during any given month... both joint and single tax filers would receive $100 each, while each dependent would also receive $100 each. In other words, a family with two kids could receive up to $300 a month in rebate checks. 

The second would offer less money, but would be paid for, I think. It'd offer

a quarterly rebate to consumers based on a tax levied on oil and gas companies. The Big Oil Windfall Profits Tax would charge a per barrel tax equal to 50% of the difference between the current price of a barrel of oil and its pre-pandemic average price between 2015 to 2019... if the per barrel price sits at $120, the tax would raise about $45 billion a year — providing single filers with $240 annually and joint filers with $360 each year. 

The last proposal would also be paid for, but differently, and we have no idea how much money's involved. It would

create a rebate based on oil company profits. It's unclear how much Americans would receive because the plan is based on taxing this year's profits from oil and gas companies. 

So, what's the wondering on this one? Well, for starters, how much more appetite is there for sending checks to Americans who may or may not need them? Didn't we learn anything from the previous stimuli? And, what are the chances that any of these will make it through the legislative process before the midterms? I'm guessing slim to none, but maybe that's just me.

What are you wondering about tonight?

Sunday School 3/20/22: Extra Credit

This week's Sunday School lesson focused mostly on the war in Ukraine, so I'm going to share some of the other stuff that made the list.  

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) was a guest in ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom, where he was asked by the host about China, and its support for Russia. Durbin said China's president 

has to decide his place in history and China's place in the world. If they are going to be part of Putin and his barbaric conduct in Ukraine, he's going to run the risk of discrediting his own nation. He has to think twice about that.

George, like all the other pundits in the universe, was unable to resist talking about "inflation, higher gas prices across the board." He played a clip of Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), who was also on the show, saying

Biden would rather turn to dictators like those in Iran and those in Venezuela rather than turn against the climate elitists who dictate the energy policy of that Democratic Party and of his presidency. So now he's trying to pass the buck to Vladimir Putin.

Durbin said it was "hard to deny" that our cutting off Russian oil has impacted Americans, and he mentioned some of the steps being taken to help alleviate that. And, about Barrasso's comments?

We’ve got to make sure that we’re sensible not only about Putin, the war, and these Russian oil supplies, but also sensible in what my friend John Barrasso calls these 'climate elitists.' We are fighting and waging a war against climate change. It is a war which will decide what... the world looks like for the next generation. Let’s take both of these very seriously.

George wondered about the tone of attacks on Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, specifically mentioning those of Sen. Josh Hawley (R- Insurrection Lunatic Fringe). Durbin said 

Judge Jackson has been scrutinized more than any person I can think of. This is her fourth time before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In three previous times, she came through with flying colors and bipartisan support, the last time as soon as just last year.

As to the accusations, "there's no truth to what he says." And, to Hawley himself?

... he's part of the fringe within the Republican Party. This was a man who was fist-bumping the murderous mob that descended on the Capitol on January 6th of the last year. He doesn't have the credibility he thinks he does.

George picked up with Sen. Barrasso where he left off with Durbin, asking if Hawley was engaging in what Barrasso specifically said should not happen with Jackson: "a process of character assassination." Barrasso said "the whole process is going to be fair, respectful, and thorough." And he offered an attack on Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

I’m less concerned about her statements than I am about Chuck Schumer's statements. He said she's going to rule with empathy. A judge ought to be making decisions based on the law as written, not the way they feel about it. So, he also said check her record. And going through the record, there are some concerns that people have about her being perceived as soft on crime. That's all going to come out with the hearings but they're going to be respectful, they’re going to be thorough and they’re going to be fair, George.

On the fairness of Hawley's attacks, Barrasso was about as forthcoming as then Judge Brett Kavanaugh in his hearing before the same committee. 

Well, he's going to have his opportunity to question the judge as will all the members of the committee. The last time we had a hearing with Kavanaugh, he was accused of being a serial rapist with no evidence whatsoever. So, I think we're going to have a fair process and a respectful process, unlike what the Democrats did to Justice Kavanaugh.

Back to gas-passing we went; Barrasso was asked about Durbin agreeing with the so-called "climate elitists" that we must take climate change seriously. Here's his, um, "response."

Well, Joe Biden can't hide from the fact that he is the president of high gas prices. And they're looking for anyone to blame, whether it's Putin, whether it's Republicans, whether it's the energy companies, whether it's COVID. The Democrats have a very big problem with 40-year high inflation, highest gas prices ever. When Joe Biden came into office, it was $2.38 a gallon for gasoline. Americans paid $1,000 more for energy last year than the year before. And on polling last week, 70% of Americans say more American oil and gas, and less emphasis on climate.

"Good answer, good answer!" said the GOP Family Feud fans.

George finished the interview by offering Barrasso the opportunity to spell out the "three specific things" President Biden needs to do if he wants to lead from the front.

Well, number one is, he needs to tell NATO that we collectively are going to supply the people of Ukraine things that they know how to use, whether it's drones, planes, missile systems.

Number two, he has to say that he is going to go from Brussels to the eastern front of NATO to show the resolve of NATO and the United States' commitment as well.

And, third, he needs to say to the people of Europe who are really in a tough situation with regard to energy and the dependence that they have on Russian energy, that we are going to increase the exporting of liquified natural gas from America to them.

"Even Germany," he said, realizes that "energy security is much more important than climate zealotry." And, Barrasso said, he's got bipartisan legislation to make this happen. 

Truth be told, the gentleman from Wyoming has been introducing variations of his bill at least since 2013. For those in the back of the room, that's years before Biden started "leading from behind." And, of course, all this happens because his state has a boatload and a half of natural gas buried within its borders, not for any altruistic reason whatsoever. 

One final note: as I write this, a screeching Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-?????) has stormed off the dais shortly after his first few minutes of questioning in Judge Jackson's hearing were over. Several of his questions pertained to his choice, Judge Michelle Childs, not being the person sitting at the table in front of him. I think we can take that "fair and respectful process" idea with a grain of salt. 

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 3/20/22

Let's dive into the Sunday School classrooms, starting with Margaret Brennan and her chat with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Some dark place in Kentucky), on CBS's Face the Nation.

Among their topics? All things related to Ukraine; Ketanji Brown Jackson, and COVID. Here are your grimly reaped highlights, starting with his take on the Russian invasion.

The Ukrainians have killed more Russians in three weeks than we lost in Afghanistan and Iraq in 20 years. 

To that end, he "is perplexed" with our not helping get the Russian MiGs from Poland into Ukraine, even as he realized that we're given loan guarantees to countries who send those planes to their neighbor, so they can order new stuff from us. And, if Ukraine needs more aid, on top of the $13.6B that was just approved, "we ought to give them more." And,

Look, I think we need to change our attitude here. The Ukrainians could actually win this thing and that's - the attitude we ought to have that we're in it to help them win.

Brennan didn't ask his thoughts on why Poland felt the need to involve the US in the delivery of the MiGs to Ukraine, instead of sending them directly. 

He referred to the lunatics in his party as "lonely voices out there that are in a different place" - Cawthorn, Greene, and the rest of them - but he thinks his party is unified in its support, and he suggests we shouldn't pay much attention to the nut balls. 

He wouldn't answer repeated questions on how he's going to vote on the Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson SCOTUS nomination. He said he "had a very good conversation" with her, in which he touched on court-packing.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Breyer both publicly opposed court packing that is trying to increase the number of court- court members in order to get an outcome you like, that would have been an easy thing for her to do to defend the integrity of the court. She wouldn't do that. 

He did say she'll "be treated much better than Democrats typically treated Republican nominees like Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh."

On COVID, he pointed to the $2T package, "passed on an entirely partisan basis" and said much of it hasn't been spent. That said, he's "willing to listen" to the argument on why more is needed, and on how we're going to pay for it.

Next up? Jake Tapper and UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield on CNN's State of the Union. 

Right off the bat, she made it clear that our role is to support Ukraine's efforts, not to make decisions for them - so she didn't have a lot to offer on the risk that Zelenskyy "might give away too much" in a deal with the Russians. Similarly, she couldn't or wouldn't comment on whether we'd recognize Crimea and the Donbass if Zelenskyy let those areas go to Russia in a peace deal. 

On the possibility that Poland will introduce a proposal for a NATO peacekeeping mission to Ukraine, the Ambassador reminded Tapper that

the president has been very clear that we will not put American troops on the ground in Ukraine. We don't want to escalate this into a war with the United States. But we will support our NATO allies. We have troops, as you know, in NATO countries. And the president has made clear that, if there is an attack on any of our NATO countries, under Article 5, that we will support those countries and defend those countries.

Asked about reports that resident of Mariupol "were taken to camps" inside Russia, or "redirected to remote cities," Thomas-Greenfield said she'd heard it, but can't confirm it.

But I can say, it is disturbing. It is unconscionable for Russia to force Ukrainian citizens into Russia, and put them in what will basically be concentration and prisoner camps. So, this is something that we need to verify. Russia should not be moving Ukrainian citizens against their will into Russia.

"Damn straight, Skippy," I agreed unprofessorially. 

The last two points?  First, Russia knows, because we "have been clear...we will respond aggressively to what they're doing" if they bring chemical weapons into the mix. And they might - after all, "they have used chemical weapons against their own people," for Tsar Pete's sake, the bastages.

And second, as far as Thomas-Greenfield knows, "it's not on the table" for President Biden to go to Poland. 

Remember, we have discouraged Americans from going into Ukraine. This is a country at war. I can't imagine that it would be on the table.

See you around campus.