TGIF 3/15/24

It's been a while since I've posted - life and stuff interrupting. I'm sure you all know the drill. I'm happy to get back into the swing of things, starting with today's good week/bad week lists. 

Fulton County, GA District Attorney Fani Willis, who brought the RICO case against former president Donald 'Orange Jesus' Trump, his former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and several other co-defendants, dodged a bullet when Judge Scott McAfee ruled that she can stay on the case, provided she fires her former romantic partner Nathan Wade. I never really understood why Willis was the one accused of receiving financial benefit from the pair's relationship; it seems to me Wade was the one who had a financial interest in it, with his firm earning some $650,000 from the case since he signed on.

I think Judge McAfee had a good week; he reached a reasonable conclusion here, and on his decision to dismiss, without prejudice, a handful of charges due to a lack of specificity. Importantly, he didn't mince words criticizing Willis for her insanely poor judgment. I mean, where I used to work, we trained everyone in the company from the lowest person on the totem pole to the CEO and our Board of Directors, on why a boss/employee relationship is wrong; I can't imagine she didn't intuitively know that.   

Oh - by the way, Wade resigned from the case, "in the interest of democracy, in dedication to the American public, and to move this case forward as quickly as possible."

*****     *****

The OJ and President Joe Biden officially became the presumptive nominees of their parties, each having secured enough delegates to win the nomination on the first ballot at their respective party conventions this summer. To me, that's not news, but it seems news to newspeople. who now get to say extra words when talking about the candidates. Like tens of millions of voters, I wish we had different choices. 

*****     *****

In my heart of hearts, I wish this was a fake picture, but of course, it's not. 

I mean, the guy in the middle triumphantly autographed Bibles after a tornado struck Alabama, leaving 23 people dead and thousands dealing with the aftermath. And grinned, with an upraised thumb, while Melania stood next to him holding a baby orphaned in a mass shooting. There's really no reason to be shocked at him posing, grinning as usual, with a newly-autographed poster of a murdered college student. 

What's appalling, though - in addition to her smiling family surrounding the autographing OJ, is that he spelled the victim's name wrong - on a poster telling everyone to Say Her Name. This stuff can't be made up - it really can't. 

*****     *****

President Biden gave what could have been his last State of the Union address last week. According to the official time-keeping, which starts when the President addresses the Speaker of the House, he spoke for one hour, seven minutes, and 17 seconds. If you didn't watch the speech and happened to see or hear the news more than once in the days since then, you might think the only thing he said was "She was killed by an illegal," and the only other highlight was that he didn't say the OJ's name 13 times. We are done such a disservice by the media, we really are.

*****     *****

Shockingly, former Vice President Mike Pence has announced he will not endorse the OJ - and he "will never" vote for Biden. I say 'shockingly' because Pence raised his hand when Brett Baier asked which of the GOP presidential candidates would support Trump "if he were convicted in a court of law."

TGIF, everyone.

Sunday School 5/8/22

A governor, a state official, a member of Congress, and a US Senator walk in to a classroom - well, four classrooms - to talk about abortion. We'll take them in that order.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves talked with Jake Tapper in the State of the Union classroom. Mississippi has a 'trigger law' that will make all abortions illegal, except in cases of rape or where the mother's life is at risk; currently around 3500 abortions are performed annually. 

Reeves said that his state has "started doing the hard work of what a post-Roe-Mississippi will look like," and that if a majority of the SCOTUS justices are going to overturn Roe

we must understand that, while this is a great victory for the pro-life movement, it is not the end. In fact, it is just the beginning. And the beginning is we must show that being pro-life is not just about being anti-abortion. And so, in our state, that -- the work that is being done goes in two directions.

He said they have to do whatever they can to "make it easier on those moms who may be in unwanted pregnancies" and so, 

...I have signed legislation to provide help and resources and money to the 37 pregnancy resource centers that are located in every region of our state. We want to make sure that we get those individuals, ladies and women and expectant mothers, the help that they need from a health care standpoint, but it's not just about the health care. It's about other resources that are available to those moms.

And, the other piece of making things better while forcing women to bear unwanted children is about "the next phase of the pro-life movement."

And what we're trying to do is focus on making adoption easier in Mississippi. We're focusing on improving our foster care system... we're investing in that system over $100 million to improve technology at the Department of Human Services and at our Child Protection Service (CPS).

Tapper gave some grim Mississippi stats: the highest rates of infant mortality and child poverty in the country; no guaranteed paid maternity leave; a rejection of extended paid post-partum care through Medicaid; and a "long-running federal lawsuit" against CPS. He asked why anyone should believe Reeves saying he's concerned about taking care of these babies, or the women. Reeves said he didn't want to hide his state's problem, he wanted to fix them.

It's due in large part to poverty. And so we are focusing every day on fixing the challenges that are before us... when you talk about these young ladies, the best thing we can do for them is to provide and improve educational opportunities for them... We have got to continue to work to provide workforce opportunities, jobs for these individuals. But to do that, they have got to improve the quality of their skills. And we as a state are investing heavily in that.

In 2012, Mississippi was 47th in spending on education; in 2022, the state is ranked 46th; it plans on investing $49M in American Rescue Plan funding in education over the next couple of years. And, the state has only the $7.25 federal minimum wage. Notably,

The 2019 Mississippi Minimum Wage Act, or Senate Bill 2150, aimed to gradually increase the Mississippi minimum wage to $10 an hour by 2022, but this proposal died in committee. In 2021, Mississippi lawmakers continue to debate if and how the state should go about increasing the minimum wage. With Mississippi being the last state to not have a law requiring equal pay for women and men, there is still much discussion to be had.

Seems there's a tough row to hoe there... Maybe taking care of those other things first would make sense? 

Down the hall in the Meet the Press classroom, Michigan's AG Dana Nessel talked with What's-his-name. Her state also has had an abortion ban on the books since 1931; the ban would go into effect when Roe is overturned. Nessel has said she won't enforce that law, but she can't prevent the 83 prosecutors in the state from doing so. She called the law "incredibly draconian and strict," saying it has "virtually no exceptions - no exception for rape, for incest, no exception for medical emergencies." 

Not only that, but there's also a law against selling any drug or combination of drugs "designed expressly for the use of females for the purpose of procuring an abortion," with misdemeanor penalties in play. There's a registry requirement (name of purchaser, date of sale, and the name - and residence - of the prescribing physician.) Nessel also agreed with What's-his-name that even when a woman has a miscarriage, doctors may not want to perform the standards procedures to remove the fetus for fear they could end up in prison. 

To protect female Michiganders of child-bearing age, 

... I think each and every eligible voter in the state should be signing on to the you know, Reproductive Rights for All petition, and then coming to the polls and voting on it in November and voting for every pro-choice Democrat up and down the ticket, whether it's for federal office or for state office.

She'll also fully support lawsuits going to her state's Supreme Court arguing that the right to an abortion is a fundamental right in the Michigan Constitution "under our equal protection clause, under our due process clause...even if the US Supreme Court decides otherwise.  

She'd like to see both a constitutional amendment and a favorable decision from the state Supreme Court.

Let's be clear: women in my state, and in states all over America are going to die because of this position. And I heard the Mississippi governor when you interviewed him, he refused to answer the question of whether or not he would sign a bill completely outlawing the use of birth control. That is not in line at all with how Americans see their rights. And politicians do not belong in our doctor's offices. They don't belong in our bedrooms. And they should not be making these kinds of decisions on behalf of the American public and on behalf of women across America.

Moving south down the hall we meet Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who talked at length with Margaret Brennan in the Face the Nation classroom. Grace has been outspoken about being molested at 14 and raped at 16, and that she's pro-life, with exceptions for rape victims. Mace said the fetal heartbeat bill that South Carolina passed has exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother, in part because she told her story.

I felt it was really -- a really important story. A story that's often missed and not told because women are afraid. And you can even see in public comments and on social media when I talk about it, the ways in which that I get attacked for telling that story. And one of the things that I think, you know, partially that's missing in this conversation is that, when you have victims... And it's important for -- for some of us to step forward and tell those stories that are often missed in all of this as well.  

She said she would support Congress passing a bill with those protections, but that what people are missing is that if Roe is overturned, 

it's not an all-out federal ban on abortion, but it puts it back into state legislators and into Congress. You saw Congress a couple of years ago ban late- term abortions, for example. And so, what this does is it puts it back to the states, it puts it back into Congress to deal with and figure out.

They talked about polling; Brennan noted national polling shows "a majority of Americans want to kind of keep the status qu0, but "more than two-thirds of Republicans say abortion should be generally available or available with stricter limits" and wondered if it's a mistake to "just paint this as pro-life, pro-choice?" 

Mace (correctly, I believe), pointed out that "some of the polling is murky, too." It depends on "how you ask the question and who's paying for the polling." And, she gave examples of where we're more liberal on this than they are in Europe, and that it seems, based on some polls, that only 25% - 30% of Americans support abortion without restriction.

Finally, we turn to Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), who stopped by the This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom to talk with Martha Raddatz about some of the political aspects of the Alito Draft. You know, things like "Do you believe there should be a litmus test? The Democrats have several candidates who do not support abortion rights." Klobuchar didn't gasp, which is more than I can say for myself. 

Instead, she talked about the Dems being a party where people recognize the difference between their personal beliefs and the rights of women to make their own personal choice. And, she added,

I think what you see in our party, is a party that is clearly pro-choice. It believes that a woman should have a right to make her own reproductive health decision when it comes to abortion. That is a position of our party and I think you see it in primary (after) primary. That matters to our voters, certainly now more than ever.

Next question? Senate Dems are going to push for a vote to codify abortion rights, "but it's almost certainly going to be blocked..." That being the case, Raddatz wondered about the options abortion rights advocates - and Democrats - have. Klobuchar said

If we are not successful, then we go to the ballot box. We march straight to the ballot box. And the women of this country and the men who stand with them will vote like they've never voted before because this is 50 years of rights in a leaked opinion where Justice Alito is literally not just taking us back to the 1950s, he's taking us back to the 1850s. He actually cites the fact that abortion was criminalized back when the 14th Amendment was adopted. And so this is a really extreme thought.

And, Raddatz asked if abortion rights should be "the principal issue for Democrats at the ballot box." The senator said "it will not be the only issue." She mentioned the economy, the president's leadership vis-à-vis Ukraine, preserving our democracy, and the extremism the Rs are showing as issues that matter to voters.

But, clearly, when... especially a new generation of women are looking at this and saying, wait a minute, my mom and my grandma are going to have more rights than I'm going to have going forward? I'm going to have to look at a patchwork of states laws with 15 of them already looking to ban medication abortion, which is what people do online and things like that. They're going to look at this and say, what world do I live in?

So, yes, "it's going to be a major issue going into the fall." 

And the final question from Raddatz: in states where abortion would "almost immediately be banned" if Roe is overturned, polling shows most adults "believe abortion should be illegal in most or all cases." Doesn't that mean the laws reflect what the people want?

Klobuchar said, like many people, she thinks 

why should a woman in Texas have different rights and a different future and a different ability to make decisions about her body and her reproductive choices than a woman in Minnesota?

She asked, rhetorically, about putting yourself in someone else's shoes, no matter how hard it might be, and thinking about "a waitress in the middle of Texas who has to make a decision...she's going to quit her job to get on a bus and go 250 miles" to have an abortion.

Those are the kinds of things that are going to be happening. It's especially going to fall on the backs of poor women, women of color. This is just wrong. And that is part of why Justice Blackmun, who is a Republican-appointed justice no less, made that thoughtful decision, looked at the Constitution and said, the right to privacy includes the right for women to make a choice like this.

Four people, all coming from different places, talking about one of the most contention issues we have. 

See you around campus. 

TGIF 2/7/20

It's list-making time again.

Religion had a bad week, I think - or maybe it was a good one, I'm not sure. I'm not religious, so it's hard for me to tell on these things.

But we do know the president, The Chosen One, according to a former Cabinet member and countless evangelicals, the guy who alleged to be a member of church but hadn't been seen in it for years, who so loves the Bible he can't even pick  a favorite verse or even say whether he's an Old Testament or New Testament guy, denigrated prayer and religion in general, at the National Prayer Breakfast.

And then went on to laugh about it with some of the same people a few hours later.

Hail to the Chief had a bad week. Sadly, because the president decided to re-celebrate Festivus - actually, every day is Festivus for him - in the East Room at the White House, he was given this ceremonial musical honor before babbling for over an hour in what the White House website refers to as Remarks By President Trump to the Nation. He described it much better himself, I think.

And this is really not a news conference.  It’s not a speech.  It’s not anything. 

Truer words, and whatnot. But he did spend time on the bodies of Steve Scalise and Jim Jordan, so I'd say they had a bad week.

Nancy Pelosi had a bad week, and I'm not going to be convinced otherwise, even given that she was attacked at the breakfast by Trump and responded appropriately, I think, after that. The rest of her week is not wiped away by that.

Susan Collins? Yeah, bad week. I mean, what on earth was she thinking, saying that she believed the president "has learned from" the impeachment? I mean, that's a 'When Harry Met Sally' moment right there - I want whatever the heck she's having, for sure.

Who else is on the list? It's not a person, but payback, the b*tch, is having a very good week. Let's see: Mitt Romney (who had a great week, by the way)? Attacked at the aforementioned prayer breakfast.  Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman?  Removed from the NSC, escorted out of the White House, and transferred to the Department of the Army - as was his brother, Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, guilty of being his brother's twin. Gordon Sondland? Recalled as Ambassador to the EU. Expect more of that.

Let's see, what else. Iowa had the worst week ever as the first-in-the-nation vote; results from the caucus were delayed, the app was bad, Republicans supposedly jammed the phone lines (all that took was a Google search to find the number), and the vote is so close, it's almost truly a dead heat. That Guy From Vermont (TGFV) and Mayor Pete 'won', but TGFV 'lost' because he did much more poorly than expected.  The Des Moines Register had to kill their last poll before the caucus, which didn't help. And, really, nobody showed up to vote. Not nobody, really, but way fewer bodies than many (including TGFV) had hoped. That's likely bad for Democrats - not just in Iowa but more broadly.

And speaking of TGFV, there are a number of reports floating around that Republicans are planning on turning out in droves in open primary state, and planning on voting for TGFV - which shows you who the president isn't afraid of (in case you missed that in his SOTU.)

Ah yes, the SOTU, forever stained by the presentation of the presidential Medal of Freedom to Rush Limbaugh.

TGIF everyone - TGIF.

Email of the Week (v9)

Thursday is 'Email of the Week' day, when I plow through a hundred or so emails from the handful of Democratic presidential candidates I'm following to see what's going on.

I received 160 emails this week from the gang of eight candidates I'm following.As usual, Mayor Pete led the way with 48 emails,  followed by Elizabeth Warren (29) Amy Klobuchar and That Guy From Vermont (24 each), Andrew Yang (20) the new guys, Mike Bloomberg and Deval Patrick (7 each) and Tom Steyer (1).

Fundraising, Iowa (pre- and post-caucus), upcoming debates, and New Hampshire were hot topics, as were pointed barbs at each other. 

There were even a couple of emails from Cory Booker, who's now running for his Senate seat instead of for President.  Here's one of them, with the subject line Trump is tearing our country apart.

I just walked out of the President’s State of the Union address.

What we heard from Donald Trump tonight was more of the toxic division that we’ve become accustomed to. He’s tearing us apart instead of bringing our country together.

I’ve always believed that the ties that bind us are stronger than the lines that divide us. As we work to elect a President and members of Congress this fall, it’s important that we choose candidates who will help unite us instead of pushing us further apart.

That’s where you come in, Sue.

I’m running for re-election to be one of those leaders. Please send in a donation now so I can keep a message of unity at the forefront of our national politics.

Our country is deeply hurting right now -- and the past three years of Trump’s hatred and bigotry have only added to the pain that millions of Americans are feeling.

As I said often during my campaign for president, defeating Donald Trump is only the floor -- not the ceiling. Once he’s out of office, we’ll then have to begin the hard work of healing a country so wounded that it elected someone like him in the first place.

I’m ready for the challenge before us, but I’m going to need your help. Invest in our campaign today to send me back to the Senate for another term.

Let’s also do everything we can to ensure that this was the last State of the Union address Donald Trump will deliver as our president.

Sincerely,
Cory

That was almost the winner, but since Booker is no longer running for president, I went back through everything, and that's when I found this one Andrew Yang. Short and sweet, it earned the coveted Email of the Week recognition.

Sue --

Last night during the Iowa caucuses, the entire nation realized something the Yang Gang has known since the beginning -- we desperately need a president who actually understands technology.

This is a HUGE opportunity for our campaign to win over every single voter who saw what happened in Iowa last night and is now looking for a president who is ready to lead us into a future that is already here.

If we act now, we can make sure all these voters know that Andrew will be that president. So make a rush donation before the end of the day to help us reach these voters!

Sure, he's asking for money - but in that first sentence, he hit the nail on the head.

We don't need someone who merely knows how to tweet and who thinks that Rudy 'The Butt-Dialer' Giuliani is a tech security expert - we need someone who understands that whatever the heck ends up being the result from Iowa, whenever we get it, we can't have leaders who don't understand how critical it is that our election technology is both world-class and works as intended.

And, honestly, that whatever we do, it cannot fall victim to something as simple as a bunch of goofballs calling in, jamming the lines, and preventing votes from being reported.

Users on a politics-focused section of the fringe 4chan message board repeatedly posted the phone number for the Iowa Democratic Party, which was found by a simple Google search, both as screenshots and in plain text, alongside instructions.

"They have to call in the results now. Very long hold times being reported. Phone line being clogged," one user posted at about 11 p.m. ET on Monday, three hours after the caucuses began.

"Uh oh how unfortunate it would be for a bunch of mischief makers to start clogging the lines," responded another anonymous user, sarcastically.

Some users chimed in, posting alleged wait times on hold, imploring others to “clog the lines [and] make the call lads.”

Because if the goofballs can take us down so easily, can you imagine what the professionals can do? 

Wondering on Wednesday (v196)

Ready... Set... Wonder!

So, we heard from #IMPOTUS last night about the State of the Union - and what a production it was. 

It started out with Trump not shaking Nancy Pelosi's hand, moved to her not giving him the  traditional introduction, and then got into the heart of Trump's real or imagined accomplishments, many of which the Republicans have never been in favor of before, and really aren't in favor of today. But those things, including all that talk about women and blacks and Asians and stuff- and sucking up to the president, or course - keep them in office, so it's all good. 

At the end of it all, after some 90 or so sniff-free minutes,, there was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tearing up her copy of Trump's speech. 

People are unlikely to remember the numbers and lies and misstatements and alternative facts, and even the truths he recited, They'll be unlikely to remember the guests, including Venezuela's Juan Guaido, a Philly fourth-grader, the obligatory families of crime and terror victims, and a family reunification in the balcony? No, not *that* kind - don't be silly. It was a four-times-deployed soldier and his family. People will probably remember the centenarian Tuskegee Airman and his great-grandson. But will they remember 

• chants of "four more years" and "USA USA USA" but surprisingly, not "Lock Him Up" - I wonder if that's because there could be confusion on who 'him' was, Trump or Biden? Nope.
• Lots of women in suffragette white (ADD fact: Bowie's 'Suffragette City' was recorded on 2/4/72);  some walked out; others chose not to attend at all. Maybe, but not for more than a couple of days.
• chants of "H.R. 3" from the Dems, telling the Senate to do something with their bill on prescription drug costs instead of waiting for Trump to do one? Again, probably not, since that's just one of some 400 bills that the Senate is ignoring;
• or a Parkland parent being escorted out, and later, apologizing. I hope he gets remembered. 

People should long remember the gag-inducing presentation of the Medal of Freedom to Rush Limbaugh, misogynist-racist-birther-rude guy extraordinaire - because that should go down in history as one of the worst moments in SOTU history, I think.

But people will definitely remember Pelosi's stunt. About that, I don't wonder a single bit.

Because every Republican running for re-election will have that video clip in their ads. The president will be showing it at his rallies, probably with unlicensed music blaring in the background. He'll mention it in his daily calls to his personal news network. 

It will be tweeted hundreds of thousands of times, in this kind of context, ludicrous as it is. 

Trump's base is in an uproar, and will continue to be, especially since he was just officially acquitted on both counts of impeachment, and because they are looking for red meat to chomp on until November. And he's got way more advocates - and money - and experience - for that kind of thing than anybody else. 

The Dems and Independents and non-affiliateds? Well, no surprise there - three camps:

• "Whoo hoo, Pelosi rocks, that was awesome!" Or
• "Well, she probably shouldn't have done it, but come on, Trump has torn up the Constitution and is a con man and just invited election interference from a foreign country and and and...", Or
• "What the actual hell was she thinking?" 

No need to wonder where I stand on that.  Or where this guy stands.

A couple of other things this week? First, you don't need to wonder if SecState Mike Pompeo watches The Simpsons. Clearly, with his hopelessly wrong tweet, sent from his personal account, the answer is no. 

Trying to clap back at Pelosi for her speech-tearing move, he thought this was a good meme. Sadly, for him at least, she tore up her speech because, as she saw in person, 

The city of Washington was built on a stagnant swamp some 200 years ago, and very little has changed. It stank then and it stinks now – only today it is the fetid stench of corruption that hangs in the air.

And finally, on the day that Utah's Senator Mitt Romney became the first person to vote in favor of convicting his own party's president in an impeachment trial, you don't have to wonder - at all - what the reaction would be from said party. 

It seems they're calling for him to be kicked out of the GOP. 

#MAGAMA

Wondering on Wednesday (v163)

Taking a look at the president's State of the Union - let the wondering begin.

Here's what he said, according to the written transcript, to open his speech (there were some ad libs throughout the night):

As we begin a new Congress, I stand here ready to work with you to achieve historic breakthroughs for all Americans. Millions of our fellow citizens are watching us now, gathered in this great chamber, hoping that we will govern not as TWO PARTIES but as ONE NATION.  The agenda I will lay out this evening is not a Republican Agenda or a Democrat Agenda. It is the Agenda of the American People.

He also noted

There is a new opportunity in American politics, if only we have the courage to seize it. Victory is not winning for our party. Victory is winning for our COUNTRY.

And, there was this

But we must reject the politics of revenge, resistance and retribution - and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise and the common good. Together, we can break decades of political stalemate. We can bridge old divisions, heal old wounds, build new coalitions, forge new solutions and unlock the extraordinary promise of America's future.

The decision is ours to make. We must choose between greatness or gridlock, results or resistance, vision or vengeance, incredible progress of pointless destruction...

Members of Congress: the State of our Union is Strong.

Let's look at what he put on the table to entice people to join him.

Seeking Unity in the State of the Union

News has it that the president is seeking to give us a message of unity in tonight's SOTU, which will be coming your way at 9PM eastern time.

He's tried giving us that message before - think Charlottesville, for example - with limited success. Usually that's because he's not able to restrain himself - and his handlers are not able to restrain him - from tweeting nastiness, lies, or self-defeating misinformation within hours of giving a speech. He's hampered by that whole, "I'm talking to you, not to myself" trap that ensnares so many people in public life, but maybe tonight will be different.

For example, we're told in this report recapping an appearance by Kellyanne Conway on Fox and Friends, that the president will focus not only on unity, but on an "end to retribution and  resistance politics"- but Conway was not optimistic that his "rivals.. will respond well." And, she said,

It's a very uplifting address to celebrate milestones of American greatness, including those that have anniversaries coming up in 2019... When he is calling for unity and he is talking about actual portraits of Americans who have achieved greatness on behalf of all of us, including our brave men and women in uniform... (if there is) anybody sitting there with their arms folded, looking like they're sucking lemons, he is calling for unity and working together. They will need to decide if they're serious about that as well. 

She also added that the president wants the legislature to "do its job" including "meaningful immigration reform" with a physical barrier that "you can't crawl under, climb over, drive through or walk around."

(As an aside, I noticed that the president's advisor didn't mention the pole vaulting option; she might want to look at that, now that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker again.)

Finally, Conway noted, he'll tout his many accomplishments, which bad people deny, and he'll address late-term abortion, a topic that will delight his base and antagonize people who believe that the government doesn't need to be between the patient and her doctor. You'll recall that was a huge rallying cry for the Republicans on why the Affordable Care Act was a horrid idea for the country.

Go figure.

Wondering on Wednesday (v161)

Wednesday.

Wondering Wednesday.

And tonight, I'm wondering about hamberders. Do they taste better, you know, with covfefe? Do they multiply, almost as if by magic, going from 300 to 1000 in only the amount of time it takes you to eat a handful of french fries?

And just out of curiosity, I wonder how the president managed to personally pay for all of the fast food he ordered for the Clemson University Football team?  Estimates range from around 800 bucks to maybe as high as $3K - and the food came from a variety of all American fast food companies, not sure exactly many separate locations were involved. But did they send someone to deliver to the White House, and Trump answered the door with a handful of cash? Did he use loyalty points? Or maybe he ordered via Grubhub? Inquiring minds want to know...

I'm also wondering what would happen if the president refused the request from Nancy Pelosi to either delay giving his State of the Union address to a joint session of Congress, or to simply deliver it in writing. First of all, I'm surprised Pelosi made that move to remind Trump that she's in charge of the House, and it is the House Speaker who invites the president to deliver his SOTU,  but I don't know if the president is in the mood for this type of shenanigans at the hands of "MS-13 Lover" Pelosi.  Even though delivering it in writing would not be a bad thing - after all.

Although George Washington and John Adams delivered the State of the Union in person, presidents for over a century delivered it via writing. It wasn't until 1913 that President Woodrow Wilson began the practice of delivering a speech to Congress as a way of rallying the nation behind his agenda. 

He does have a couple of other options - three that I can think of off the top of my head, actually. He could tweet the darn thing, which I think would be bigly hysterical. He could deliver it on the state television network, releasing it in dribs and drabs starting with Fox and Friends, and finish up with his advisor Sean Hannity acting the part of benevolent assistant or something. Or, he could simply post it on whitehouse.gov and anyone interested could find it there.

What else... Oh, yeah - Rep. Steve King, the racist American nationalist from Iowa? He was stripped of his committee assignments by House Republicans as a show of distaste for his latest comments in an interview with the NY Times. King says he was misinterpreted, or something - after all, he noted,

There is no tape for the interview that I did. It was 56 minutes. There are some notes on the other end, but there is no tape. There's no way to go back and listen. The NY Times has a different version of this. They make a habit of attacking the president, as a matter of fact. 

Which is meaningful how, I wonder, to his comment and the actions of his own party against him?  And if you're being accused of being a racists and saying things that are horrible and reprehensible and all that, do you really want to claim this president as a soul mate?

I have to wonder about that, I really do. Iowans should wonder about that, too, I think.

Sunday School 3/4/18

Kinda of in a funk today, so my attention span was limited and I only visited one classroom, CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper at the helm.

The first guest was Peter Navarro, who is the White House Director of Trade and Manufacturing Policy. Navarro's goal today was to convince us that president Trump's surprise announcement of tariffs - 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum -- was a great idea, good for the president, good for our steel and aluminum workers, and #MAGA.

Navarro said the tariffs would go into effect next week, maybe the week after, once the White House lawyers get all their ducks in a row. Tapper played some video of the president blaming China for overproduction and saying that needed to be addressed, and then he reminded Navarro that China doesn't make the top ten steel importers into the US. Here's how Navarro responded:

So, the bigger picture is that China has tremendous overcapacity in both aluminum and steel. And so what they do is, they flood the world market with this product. And that ripples down to our shores and to other countries. So China is, in many ways, the root of the problem in both aluminum and steel for all countries of the world.

But let's be clear here about what the president's doing. Let's lay this on the table. This is an action, basically, to protect our national security and economic security. And the president was quite clear. We can't have a country that can defend itself and prosper without an aluminum and steel industry.

Silly me - I thought we couldn't be a country without a border wall, and without getting rid of chain migration and stuff. I was wrong, I guess.

Tapper reminded Navarro, speaking of national security, that the Pentagon was not in favor of what Trump did.

The Pentagon wrote a memo about the tariff, saying, indeed the unfair steel practices do create a national security problem. But the Pentagon also said that the US should use targeted tariffs and avoid angering allies who are needed for other diplomatic national security reasons, such as Canada, such as South Korea. If you are invoking the national security exemption, should you not also be listening to the Pentagon on how to apply these tariffs?

Navarro's answer was reminiscent of Trump's "I alone can fix it" comment.

What I love about this president is, he listens to all points of view, both within his government and outside, and then he makes the tough decisions. 

Which includes ignoring the Pentagon.

Also on the show was Ohio Governor John Kasich, who is considered a potential challenger to Trump in 2020. Tapper talked to him about the president's trade tariffs (Kasich is not a fan) and the president's 'gun control without due process' plan; Kasich is again not a fan. Rather, what he's trying in Ohio is a restraining order, which comes with due process.

In terms of our gun retraining order, it means, if you have somebody in the family who sees trouble in the family, they have an ability, either go to law enforcement or the court in order to get those guns out of that person who's having a very difficult time, get the guns away from them. If you're a neighbor or somebody outside, you can go to a police officer who can investigate and then go to the judge. There's got to be speed in this, because we don't want people who are emotionally - you know, emotionally in upheaval, who could pose a threat either to themselves or to somebody else, to be in a position where they can have a gun.

Kasich also noted that the agenda changes, quickly.

And by the way, have we forgotten the Dreamers, the DACA, the young people who came here? They're not even in the news anymore. And I don't - I can't believe Congress is -- Congress has got to do something on guns. 

And you know what? I think the president will sign something. If he doesn't, send it to him anyway. I mean, the deal is that you don't ask permission. You legislate; you get it to the president, you see what he does.

 I believe he will sign some really good, strong, common sense gun legislation. Send him the Dreamers. We can't be taking these kids that have been -- or young people who have been here, some of them for 20 years, and ship them out of the country for political reasons. 

Tapper also asked Kasich about 2020, and whether someone should challenge Trump, even if it's not Kasich who does it. .

Well, come on Jake. We don't know what's going to happen next week. That's not -- you know, all I'm doing is making sure that, both now and when I'm out, that I can have a voice that can help the country, that can bring it together. That's all I'm particularly interested in at this point. And if I go any further than that, Jake, I won't be able to get in my house tonight. My wife will have it barricaded. 

So, I'm not going there.... 

And, listening to the entire exchange  between Kasich and Tapper, I was reminded why I liked Kasich more than any of the rest of the Republicans. First, he's reasonable, and second, he has a great sense of humor and hes not afraid to use it - which is something we could use a whole lot more of in DC.

See you around campus.

Trump in Transition (v27)

Last night, president Trump gave his first State of the Union address.

He let us know that, in his opinion, the state of the union is strong, even as he left unsaid anything about the American carnage he spoke of so ominously just a year ago.

He touched on a lot of stuff in the relatively sniff-free hour and twenty minutes or so, after moving very quickly to the podium, almost as if he couldn't wait to get started so he could get back to the residence to watch the playback on his personal news network.

What did he tell us? The usual suspects: stock market, economy, jobs, unemployment of all kinds - those numbers that he repeatedly declared to be face while on the campaign trail are now truer than true, because he claims them as his own. He spoke of the tax cuts, and tax reform, and the increase in take-home pay we'll be seeing, and of course the corporate tax cuts, sold as a 14% reduction but in reality, barely half that in terms of what most companies actually paid. And of course the bonuses, but not the layoffs and the closings. The American Dream is a dream of dollars, plain and simple, he would have us believe.

In America, we know that faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, are the center of the American life. Our motto is "In God we trust."

Some of us are old-school and remember the motto that came from our founding fathers: E Pluribus Unum, the one that includes all of us and binds us to each other in a way that IGWT does not. Like I said - old school.

He told us about the "bonds of trust" between the people and their government, including deregulation, new judges and support for the Second Amendment and "historic actions" to protect religious freedom, even if it steps on the rights of other Americans to participate freely in society, within the confines of our laws and regulations.

All Americans deserve accountability and respect -- and that is what we are giving them. So tonight, I call on the Congress to empower every Cabinet Secretary with the authority to reward good workers - and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people.

Yep - that's what he said. Cabinet Secretaries, prepare to mobilize to remove those who fail the people president...

He talked about energy and trade of course - and about lower drug prices and coverage for clinical trials for the terminally ill, but did not talk about how these would be paid for or by whom.

Tonight, I am calling on the Congress to produce a bill that generates at least $1.5 trillion for the new infrastructure investment we need. Every federal dollar should be leveraged by partnering with state and local governments and where appropriate, tapping into private sector investment - to permanently fix the infrastructure deficit. 

There is no question we need to do a ton of work on infrastructure - and there's no question that this will require foreign private sector investment - lots of it; how the administration will handle that remains to be seen. Just as a for instance, are we going to be in the position of having a foreign country control one of our airports?

He called for a massive military buildup - "unmatched power" is how he described it, and we can see

He called for moving from "welfare to work, from dependence to independence, and from poverty to prosperity." We should all agree on that, for everyone - just not sure how Congress is going to make it work. Drug testing, probably. That's the answer to everything, right?

Gangs, gangs, gangs - gangs were all over the speech. Well, MS-13. Not the rest of them. Immigrants committing crimes, or acts of terrorism committed by 'chain' immigrants. He spoke of his four pillars for immigration which include a path to citizenship for 1.8 million illegals, border security, ending the visa lottery and chain migration and moving to a merit based system, which will bring in skilled workers only. And fighting opioids, although the administration has been slow to provide any significant funding for this effort.

Guantanamo will remain open, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and we're moving our embassy there, there rest of the world be damned. Trump claimed that the move was "unanimously endorsed by the Senate" just months before, ignoring the other part that was, in the same bill, unanimously endorsed: that the Senate

reaffirms that it is the longstanding, bipartisan policy of the United States Government that the permanent status of Jerusalem remains a matter to be decided between the parties through final status negotiations towards a two-state solution.

And then, this, after talking about the UN resolution which condemned us for our interference in the two-state solution:

That is why, tonight, I am asking the Congress to pass legislation to help ensure America foreign-assistance dollars always serve American interests, and only go to America's friends.

Like many people - most, probably - I have no idea exactly what that means - but we are already withholding $65M of aid passed through the UN Relief and Welfare Agency to Palestinians. Who might be next? And how is 'friendship' defined, and by whom?

After a long discussion about the horrors of North Korea, he closed by talking about monuments to our heroes, and to freedom, including the Capital building as a monument to us.

Americans fill the world with art and music. They push the bounds of science and discovery. And they forever remind us of what we should never forget: the people dreamed this country. The people built this country. And it is the people who are making America great again. 

As long as we have confidence in our values, faith in our citizens and trust in our God, we will not fail.  

Our families will thrive. Our people will prosper. And our nation will forever be safe and strong and proud and mighty and free.

The blended poll of Trump's approval today?  39.5% approve, 54.9% disapprove.

Preparing for the SOTU

Tomorrow we'll hear from the president for the first time in a State of the Union (SOTU) address.

This will be a new experience for the president and it may be a new experience for some viewers - for example, those folks who wouldn't have been caught dead watching an Obama SOTU. With that in mind, I thought I'd provide some helpful hints for the newbies.

• There's going to be a lot of yelling and hooting and hollering, but it's nothing to be concerned about. It will sound weird, for sure, but just think of it as a bunch of bad cheerleaders doing separate but equal versions of their college stadium cheers, and you'll be OK. 

• While some will be yelling, others will be sitting, sullenly, waiting for the noise to fade so the president can get back to the speech. You'll know these people as Democrats by their hissing dark demeanor and dark clothes.

• The First Lady will be sitting with a bunch of people the president thinks are helpful to his message. You can count on a heart-tugging story about a veteran or veteran's family; there'll almost certainly be some people victimized by gangs; there'll be a hard-working middle-class guy, usually a tradesman of some kind, and/or a small businessman or two. These are standard categories of guests, so don't think it's something new and different this time around. This president is merely following the script.

• Speaking of the First Lady, she'll be cheered by the people of the president's party; pitied by the people of the opposition party ("how hard it must be for her to be married to him..."), and fawned over by the press. 

• In the case of this First Lady, she'll likely be accompanied by the children of her husband, but not her own child, because, at least so far, she's been pretty successful in keeping him out of the mix. You should all hope that continues, for his sake - and hers. 

• At some point, it will look like the Speaker of the House and the Vice President are about to hug, maybe even kiss, they'll be so giddy about what the president is saying. I can assure you, without the slightest hesitation, that there will be no kissing between these two gentleman, and so there's no reason for you to avert your eyes. 

• I don't recall there ever being a televised playing of the national anthem during a SOTU - frankly, that would leave less time for the clapping and almost kissing - so you do not have to stand, and no one will yell at you if you take a knee. You can even leave your hat on; I won't tell.

• You can pretty much count on the president using several buzzwords during his speech; again, they all do this. Here are several you might anticipate: carnage, MS-13, crime, America First, drugs, rapists, murderers, infrastructure, obstruction, bipartisanship, tax cuts, ISIS, opioids, Ivanka, Supreme Court, FBI, collusion, Russia, Putin, North Korea, Jerusalem, religious freedom, military, the wall, immigration, racism, jobs, My Generals, DACA, middle class, and so on. Feel free to add others you'd like to hear. 

• Tradition has it that every time the president says one of the buzzwords, you are supposed to take a drink. That's why media coverage, especially on Fox, seems somewhat disjointed; it may even seem like the reporters were watching a different speech than you were. You can solve this by participating in the drinking game - it helps, it really does. 

• Kiefer Sutherland will not be attending the SOTU - as the Designated Survivor, he'll be left behind to save the world in the event of a national emergency. 

• This president has a habit of sniffing when he reads from a teleprompter; I believe it's an allergy or something. If you've only watched his rallies or followed him on the Twittery thing, you may not have experienced this before. Don't worry -- he's still your president, even if he sounds like one of those people who is causing our crime wave. 

• With any luck at all, he will keep his remarks short. I've never been lucky, but hey - you never know.

• After the president's remarks, a Democrat will give a speech that no one's expecting you to watch. Most of the networks don't usually cover the other party's response but this year they might, because the speech is going to be given by a Kennedy. It won't be anything you're interested in, but it might be fun to  see how it play out.

I hope you find this information helpful. If you have any questions while you're watching the speech, I believe the phone-a-friend lifeline will be turned on for the duration.

Sunday School 2/5/2017

We visited three classrooms today.

First up: Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union chatted with Still Not a Democrat Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders about (so-called) President Trump when Tapper asked about changes to the Dodd-Frank regulations.

You know, it's hard not to laugh to see President Trump alongside these Wall Street guys.  I have to say this Jake. And I -- I don't mean to be disrespectful. This guy is a fraud. This guy ran for president of the United States saying "I, Donald Trump, I'm going to take on Wall Street. These guys are getting away with murder." And then, suddenly, he appoints all these billionaires. His major financial advisor comes from Goldman Sachs and now he's going to dismantle legislation that protects consumers...  

So, I hope that all of those folks who voted for Mr. Trump because he - they thought that he would stand up for working people, man, this guy is - you know, he's a good showman. I will give you that. He's a good TV guy.  Look at his cabinet. We have never had more billionaires in a Cabinet in the history of this country. Look at his appointees. These are people who are going after the needs of working families. the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. That is called hypocrisy. And by the way, I think people like Mitch McConnell...who is a mainstream conservative politician, are going to be put into a very, very difficult place.

Next, we checked in with John Dickerson on CBS' Face the Nation, where VP Mike Pence was trying to defend his boss's indefensible comments to Bill O'Reilly about America, and Russia. ICYMI, O'Reilly asked if Trump respected Putin. Here's how it went

POTUS: I do respect him

O'Reilly: Do you? Why?

POTUS: Well, I respect a lot of people, but that doesn't mean I'm going to get along with them. He is a leader of his country...

O'Reilly: He is a killer, though. Putin is a killer.

POTUS: A lot of killers. We have got a lot of killers. What, you think our country is so innocent?

Pence, for the defense, talking with Dickerson:

This is a -- this is an enormously important moment in  - in the life of our - our nation on the world stage because we now have a president who is re-engaging a world from which America has been stepping back over the last eight years...

Dickerson challenged again.

When you re-engage the world, you have to do it with a moral voice...I will quote from Bret Stephens who is on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, who tweeted "President Trump puts the United States on moral par with Putin's Russia. Never in history as a president slandered his country like this."   A president speaks with a moral voice when he is re-engaging the country. He suggested America was on the equivalent par with somebody who was a killer.

Pence:

I simply don't accept that there was any moral equivalency in the president's comments. Look, President Trump throughout his life, his campaign and this administration has never hesitated to be critical of government policies by the United States in the past. But there was no moral equivalency...What I can tell you is there was no moral equivalency in what the president was saying....but we recognize, we recognize the extraordinary superiority of the ideals of the American people and the implementation of those ideals. But...

Dickerson asked, at least twice, whether America was morally superior to Russia. The first time, Pence reiterated Trump's re-engaging the world blather. The second time, when Dickerson applied a yes or no to the end of the question, Pence answered

I believe that the ideals that America has stood for throughout our history represent the highest ideals of humankind.

Dickerson tried one last time, wondering if we shouldn't be able to just say yes to the question, that America is morally superior to Russia. Pence, one last time, failed to just give that simple answer

I think it is without question...That American ideals are -- are superior to countries all across the world. But again, what the president is determined to do, as someone who has spent a lifetime looking for deals, is to see if we can have a new relationship with Russia and other countries that advances the interests of America first and the peace and security of the world

And my patriotism is questioned?

Finally, on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace chatted with California Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Dem on the Senate Judiciary Committee, about the nomination of Neil Gorsuch as Trump's first SCOTUS pick. Feinstein is one of the senators still in office who approved Gorsuch's appointment to the federal appeals court bench by a unanimous voice vote back in 2006. Wallace asked if Gorsuch was a mainstream pick. Feinstein's answer?

Well, at this stage, I can't comment. Let me tell you where we are at this stage. Friday evening, the questions went out from the committee to the nominee. I view the minority party's challenge to do a full and fair hearing, and to have the time to garner the facts to really understand the history of this nominee. And we will do that. And I believe the chairman has given us the tine to do this, and also believes that the hearing should be full and fair.

If it's a product of this hearing, we make the decision that he is not in the mainstream of judicial thought, that there are some positions he holds which are, in fact, egregious - I do not know that at this time - then it's a different story. But I want the Democratic side to start out from a neutral base and really do the proper exploratory work and then be able to hold full and fair hearings.  And we will do that. 

Hear, hear.

And with that, the classroom lights are off until next Sunday.

Sunday School 1/8/17

I'm reviving another post theme from a few years ago, called Sunday School. 

In these posts, we'll stroll through the Sunday morning talk shows, our classrooms, looking to see how the principals, teachers, and students are handling current events. 

This week, there was a lot of talk about the Russian interference into our elections.  For clarification, this interference did not include efforts to tamper with voting machines, which apparently means to the Trump team that nothing happened. Our collective intelligence community, a pretty good hunk of both Democratic and Republican members of Congress, multiple news agencies and others believe there was interference, even if they disagree on whether it contributed to Hillary Clinton's loss in November. 

On Fox News Sunday, Reince Priebus talked about President-elect Donald Trump's reaction to his "intelligence" briefing.  Here's an excerpt from that conversation. 

Wallace: Simple question: does the president-elect accept the findings and the evidence of the intelligence community?

Priebus: Well, I think he accepts the findings, Chris. But here's the thing that I think everyone needs to understand -- when this whole thing started It started from the Russians 50 years ago. In other words, this is something that's been going on in our elections for many, many years, both the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians. It happens every election period.

Without asking for any evidence of the bad acts that have occurred over the years, Wallace noted

But on Friday, hours before he had the briefing, Donald Trump said that this was, "a political witch hunt." So I just want to be very clear on two political points Does he now accept...Does he accept that the Russians were behind this hacking campaign? Yes or no?

Priebus: Well, sure. I mean, he's not denying that entities in Russia were behind this particular campaign. But let me just -- can you -- let me respond to your point though. You say we have never had such a massive -- yes, but here's what we have - we have the DNC as a sitting duck.  

So, the Dems have less cyber acuity than, say, Barron Trump, but is that the issue, or is the bad actor the issue?

Wallace: Who do you blame more for this, Reince? Do you blame Putin and the Kremlin? Or do you blame the DNC? Who is the primary actor here?

Priebus: Well, listen, the primary actor is the foreign entity that's perpetrating the crime to begin with, no doubt about it.

Wallace: Which was? Which was?

Priebus:  I'm not denying that.

Wallace: Which was?

Priebus: I'm not denying that. I'm not denying that.

Wallace:  And what was that foreign entity.

Priebus: The thing is -- Russia. 

Lord, that was painful. Kellyanne Conway didn't really make it any less so when she talked with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union. 

Tapper: Now that president-elect Trump has been formally briefed, has he been persuaded that Russia did carry out a comprehensive cyber-campaign against Hillary Clinton? And what is he prepared to do about it?

Conway: Jake, if you read his entire statement that followed the briefing on Friday, he makes very clear that Russia, China and others have attempted to attack different government institutions and businesses and individual and organizations over a series of time... I don't want any of your viewers to be misled into thinking that somehow the Kremlin and the Republican Party or...somehow that anybody who allegedly attempted to influence our elections actually did.

Beyond that, Conway noted,

With all due respect to Hillary Clinton, we didn't need WikiLeaks to convince the American people that they didn't like her, didn't trust her, didn't find her to be honest.

She did that all on her own. She got this party started by setting up an illegal server and opening it to hacks, for -- for -- for intelligence and security information that's much more serious than what a political party would have on its server. So, she started it. 

So, let's be clear, Kellyanne - all na-na-na-boo-boos aside -- there is NO evidence that Clinton's ill-advised decision to have a private server led to any hacks of intelligence and security information. But who cares about the truth, when you can be a schoolyard bully?

Why -- you know, if this is so important to our intelligence and our security, then why wasn't a bigger deal made about it, why wasn't a big portion of the $1.2 billion Hillary Clinton wasted on her campaign invested in this messaging? 

On Meet the Press, Chuck Todd talked with Republicans Lindsey Graham and John McCain.  Here's Graham's take on things:

So Mr. President-elect, it is very important that you show leadership here. Let me say this: if after having been briefed by our intelligence leaders, Donald Trump is still unsure as to what the Russians did, that would be incredibly unnerving to me because the evidence is overwhelming.

McCain wants an in-depth investigation, about which, of course, PPOD Mitch McConnell cares little.

I would like to see a select committee.  Apparently that is not in agreement by our leadership. So we will move forward with the Armed Services Committee and I'm sure Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committee will as well. But it is possible if enough information comes out, that decision could be reversed. I still think it's the best way to attack the issue.

In contrast to the Trump team, which seems much more concerned with the content of the emails that were released, or with rubbing people's nose in their "historic" victory, or trying to figure out how news organizations got word of what was in the intelligence report before Trump did, it would be nice if Graham and McCain could get some traction in Congress.

Wondering, on Wednesday (v44)

I watched with interest President Obama's State of the Union (SOTU) address last night; I was curious about what he was going to say in his lame duck address, especially since there had been news in the days leading up to last night's speech that he was going to be 'unconventional' or 'nontraditional' this time around. And to an extent, that was true.

Gone were the call outs to Americans sitting in the guest boxes, veterans or teachers or plumbers or the like, folks who lived a story that touched on an issue close to the President's heart (or that of his speechwriters). The people were still there, of course. Even less-than-special guests, like Kim Davis, the government employee who refuses to do her job down in Kentucky. Seems she was 'invited' by a representative from Ohio who, until he was tracked down by someone today, was not even aware he had invited her. I wonder, this Wednesday, if he would have asked her to come along on purpose, instead of donating a ticket to a foundation that ended up in her hands?

Gone, too, from this SOTU, was any pretense of trying to get any major work done this year; Obama opened the speech noting that

Tonight marks the eighth year I've come here to report on the State of the Union. And for this final one, I'm going to try and make it shorter. I know some of you are antsy to get back to Iowa.  I know -- I've been there.

I also understand that, because it's an election season, expectations for what we'll achieve this year are low...I want to go easy on the traditional list of proposals for the year ahead. 

Generally, he kept to his legislative-light approach, and focused more on our country and our American ideals.  He made many references tor our past and how we need to somehow regain what we used to be, if we are to be successful in the future.

America has been through big changes before - wars and depression, the influx of immigrants, workers fighting for a fair deal, and movements to expand civil rights. Each time, there have been those who told us to fear the future, who claimed we could slam the brakes on change, promising to restore past glory if we just got some group or idea that was threatening America under control. And each time, we overcame those fears. We did not in the words of Lincoln, adhere to the "dogmas of the quiet past." Instead we thought anew, and acted anew. We made change work for us... and because we did - because we saw opportunity where others saw only peril - we emerged stronger and better than before.

 A bit later, as a preface to four questions he wanted to get us thinking about, he posed this question:

Will we respond to the changes of our time with fear, turning inward as a nation, and turning against each other as a people? Or will we face the future with confidence in who we are, what we stand for, and the incredible things we can do together?

Here's the gist of his four questions:

1. How do we give everyone a fair shot at opportunity and security?
2. How do we make technology work for us and not against us?
3. How do we keep America safe, without becoming the world's policeman?
4. How can we make our politics reflect what's best in us, and not what's worst?

The last question is by far the one I'm most interested in. The first three can be filtered down into ideological issues - small government vs. big government, trickle down vs. bubble up, and so on, but the last one? That one can cross, even obliterate, party lines.

Regular readers know I often find myself wondering how the heck we got into such a pickle with our political process, with more money than all of the Supreme Beings from all the world's religions have between them corrupting the process, with corporations being equal to living, breathing people with individual rights, with efforts to restrict voting, and sham political districts, and politicians openly supporting those who bald-face disregard our laws, such as the aforementioned Kim Davis, and the Bundys, and people who refuse service to people who are not like them... I could go on and on.

President Obama hit on those topics last night. And then, he challenged us, people from both major parties and all of the other official parties, the almost parties, the special caucuses and even the loosely affiliated. He challenged us one and all.

The future we want - opportunity and security for our families; a rising standard of living and a sustainable, peaceful planet for our kids - all that is within our reach. But it will only happen if we work together It will only happen if we can have rational, constructive debates.

It will only happen if we fix our politics.

I wondered, as he wove his way through this part of his speech, looking out an an audience unburdened by term limits, many of them beneficiaries of the very practices he was describing, if he really thought the people in the room would go home thinking even a tiny bit differently about how they personally are perceived, or how what they do is perceived?

Changes in our political process - in not just who gets elected but how they get elected - that will only happen when the American people demand it. It will depend on you. That's what's meant by a government of, by, and for the people.

What I'm asking for is hard. It's easier to be cynical; to accept that change isn't possible, and politics is hopeless, and to believe our voices and actions don't matter. But if we give up now, we forsake a better future.  

I wondered, would people believe him when he said it basically didn't matter whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, the only thing that matters is that you participate?

And so, my fellow Americans, whatever you may believe, whether you prefer one party or no party, our collective future depends on your willingness to uphold your obligations as a citizen. To vote. To speak out. To stand up for others, especially the weak, especially the vulnerable, knowing that each of us is only here because somebody, somewhere, stood up for us. To stay active in our public life so it reflects the goodness and decency and optimism that I see in the American people every single day. 

Because, ultimately, it doesn't matter what your beliefs are. What matters is that your participate.

Will we answer the call, I wonder?