Sidebar: VP Harris and Equity

In this week's Sunday School, remarks made by Vice President Kamala Harris were brought up by Florida's Sen. Rick Scott. 

When asked by Margaret Brennan to respond to comments made by former president Donald Trump, Scott replied that people need to come together, and then he added, 

I'd also say that what Vice President Harris said yesterday that, or the day before yesterday that, you know if you, if you have a different skin color, you're going to get relief.   

Brennan said that wasn't what Harris said; Scott argued with her. I promised I'd have some details on it, once I was able to figure out what was going on.

Let's start with how the NY Post covered it.

Vice President Harris came in for a torrent of criticism after telling an audience that “communities of color” would be first in line for relief in the  devastating aftermath of Hurricane Ian.

“We have to address this in a way that is about giving resources based on equity, understanding that we fight for equality, but we also need to fight for equity,” she said during a discussion with Priyanka Chopra at the Democratic National Committee’s Women’s Leadership Forum on Friday.

“If we want people to be in an equal place, sometimes we need to take into account those disparities and do that work,” she added.

And, of course the Post included all the nasty comments, including that Harris was being racist. That type of thing was rife on social media, and in certain media circles, and, I'd add, with Republican officials like Rick Scott who decided to carefully misinterpret and then 'correct' her remarks. 

No, no, no. Wait, wait, Margaret. Margaret, let's make sure. FEMA has to be colorblind. FEMA has to provide support to everybody.

So, what did Harris really say? Let's start with the question she was asked by Priyanka Chopra Jonas, who was invited by the DNC's Women's Leadership Forum to have a 'fireside chat' with the VP. 

Can you talk a little bit about the relief efforts, obviously, of Hurricane Ian and what the administration has been doing to address the climate crisis in the states? 

But — and just a little follow up, because this is important to me: We consider the global implications of emissions, right? The poorest countries are affected the most. They contributed the least and are affected the most. So how should voters in the U.S. feel about the administration’s long-term goals when it comes to being an international influencer on this topic?

And here, in full, is Harris's answer, from the White House transcript. For the TL/DR crowd, I've added emphasis to what she said about Hurricane Ian. 

So, first of all, again, thanks to the leadership in this room, which were part of the propelling force in the 2020 election so that we could actually be in office — because one of the requests — dare I say, “demands” — of this group was, “Do something about the climate crisis.”  And so, we were able to be elected. Thank you, everyone here. 

And then have the — (applause) — but — and have, then, $370 billion in the Inflation Reduction Act dedicated to address the climate crisis — not only because it is a crisis, as it evident — as evidenced, as you have mentioned by Ian, by the wildfires happening in California, the floods, the hurricanes, but also because of America’s leadership and what it should be globally on this issue. And so that has happened, and it will propel a lot of good work.  

The crisis is real, and the clock is ticking. And the urgency with which we must act is without any question. 

And the way that we think of it and the way I think of it is both in terms of the human toll and — I know we are all thinking about the families in Florida, in Puerto Rico with Fiona — and what we need to do to help them in terms of an immediate response and aid, but also what we need to do to help restore communities and build communities back up in a way that they can be resilient — not to mention, adapt — to these extreme weather conditions, which are part of the future.  

No talk about FEMA money going to black folks and not to white folks? Nope - no mention of FEMA at all, in fact. 

Now, here's what she had to say about disparities, in response to the part of the question about climate change.

On the point that you made about disparities: You know, when I was — back when I was District Attorney of San Francisco — I was elected in 2003 — I started one of the first environmental justice units of any DA’s office in the country focused on this issue. And in particular on the disparities, as you have described rightly, which is that it is our lowest income communities and our communities of color that are most impacted by these extreme conditions and impacted by issues that are not of their own making. And so, when — 

Chopra Jonas interrupted here to say "and women." 

Absolutely. And so, we have to address this in a way that is about giving resources based on equity, understanding that we fight for equality, but we also need to fight for equity; understanding that not everyone starts out at the same place. And if we want people to be in an equal place, sometimes we have to take into account those disparities and do that work. (Applause.) 

But also, I will say, as a former prosecutor, part of this issue also has to be about enforcement and, where appropriate, making sure that the bad actors pay a price for what they do that is directly harming communities in terms of their health and wellbeing. 

So, when we think about policy then, there are many aspects to it, including something that the President and our administration and I are very excited about, which is the opportunity that moving towards a clean energy environment and industry — what it will do in terms of job creation and building up our economy.  It’s tremendous. (Applause.) 

So, there are many benefits to this work. 

And to your point about the global piece: Among the leaders that I have been meeting and convening — just recently, in fact — and now this was, I think, the third time — I convened the presidents and prime ministers of the Caribbean countries; there’s an organization called CARICOM. And I convened them just a couple weeks ago. And the consistent discussion we are having is exactly your point, which is: We are one of the greatest emitters in the world and the Caribbean countries, for example, are paying the biggest price. They are some of the lowest emitters, yet the erosion that they are experiencing to their island nations is profound. 

And when you combine that with the fact that nations like that — their biggest source for their GDP is tourism, and what the climate crisis and extreme weather conditions do in terms of then plummeting their incoming resources, not to mention what we are expecting all good nations to do to contribute to mitigation and adaptation.

So, there is still a lot of work to be done to recognize the equities. And I will say, for us, as the United States, to own responsibility for what we rightly — (applause) — should do to recognize these disparities and contribute in a way that is fair with the goal of equitable priorities.

Is Harris the only one who's been victimized by a soundbite? Of course not; it would be silly to think so. She won't be the last either. Heck, she probably won't be the last one this week.

The thing that's so frustrating? No one will be pushing back on folks like Rick Scott, or the NY Post, or anyone else for saying something that wasn't true - but there'll be more than enough people willing to 'report' on the fact that they said it. 

In Case You Missed It (v98)

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

The week kicked off with Part Two of our Future Tale, with our storyteller making her way down the alley she entered at the end of Part One. Here's a bit of what happened there.

I slowly picked my way forward, letting my eyes adjust to the uncharacteristic mid-day darkness, trying not to slide on the slippery cobbles under my feet. I walked for what felt like several minutes, dodging the spindly sumacs and scrub maples that popped up randomly, as if testing my mettle. “Does she have what it takes? Can she handle the truth?” I felt the questions, and I resolved to stick it out.

Eventually, I could see faint spots of light up ahead, not way high on the buildings, but at a more human level. I stopped, and after my eyes adjusted, I recognized that I was seeing deeply shaded lights above doorways or recesses in the alley, and I understood that I was nearing what I had been called here, by someone, somehow, to see. 

Tentatively, I walked up to the first light. In the recess, there was a chair, with a dingy hand-lettered sign resting on it: safe abortions performed inside. I paused, startled by the seeming contradiction between the sign's messiness and its promise... 

 There was a lot more confusion to come. 

The Sunday School classroom spotlight turned to Face the Nation this week; Robert Costa hosted Vice President Kamala Harris via a taped interview. I was a little frustrated with her interview; we don't see all that much of her and I had hoped she'd take advantage of the opportunity. 

Here's some of their chat, touching on abortion and what some people, including prominent Dems, think has been a failure by their party. He noted anger in the party about the SCOTUS decision, 

and he played a clip of Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) asking

Where is the Democratic Party? Where's the party? Why aren't we calling this out? This is a concerted, coordinated effort. And, yes, they're winning.

He asked Harris if Newsom is right, and again we got half an answer. She said "all of us share a deep sense of outrage" about the Supreme Court taking a recognized right away from women. And, she said,

You don't have to agree that you want to or would advocate that you or a loved one would have an abortion to agree that the government should not be making that decision for any individual woman.

Costa followed up, asking "Did Democrats fail, past Democratic presidents, congressional leaders, to not codify Roe v. Wade over the past five decades?"

See how she answered this one, and Costa's other questions. Did she meet your expectations?

Speaking of expectations, for your Extra Credit we had more from the Face the Nation classroom. Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin - a rising star in the GOP - sat with Costa for a lengthy set of "Ignore What I'm Asking and Just Say What You Want."  Here's a bit of the interview.

• Asked if he'd codify same-sex marriage in Virginia, he said the Dobbs decision protecting the rights of lawmakers to legislate is "consistent with what we know the Constitution stands for." When pressed, he said "we actually do protect same-sex marriage... that's the law in Virginia." However, it's only protected if Obergefell stands; the state struck down a ban on same-sex marriage in 2020, but did not codify a right to have one. 

• He had "really great fun" visiting Nebraska, which had literally nothing to do with what he was asked: whether Donald Trump should stop saying the 2020 election was stolen. Nor did his "this is not a 'or' moment but an 'and' moment..." ramble. Nor did his "this is the Republicans who - that can win." Nor did his talk about 5,000 volunteers at elections. I'm sighing bigly, here, I am.

When it was time for Wondering on Wednesday, I was more than ready with thoughts on the January 6th Committee hearing on Tuesday. I missed some of the details (multi-tasking) but I got caught up. And, 

After watching replays today, I can't help wondering how much worse things would have been on January 6th if there hadn't have been any adults in the room on December 18th. 

Another thing I can't stop wondering about is if the Committee's going to do anything about the comments from Rep. Debbie Lasko (R- I Didn't Mean to Say I'd Kill My Grandkids). I don't think it was fully explained how the Committee got hold of the tape, but here's what Lasko said "on the eve of January 6th." 

I also asked leadership to come up with a safety plan for members. I'm actually very concerned about this because we have who knows how many hundreds of thousands of people coming here. We have Antifa. We also have, quite honestly, Trump supporters who actually believe that we are going to overturn the election. And when that doesn't happen, most likely will not happen, they are going to go nuts.

There was more wondering, of course. There always is.

As I've been watching political ads here in New York, where we have a second primary coming up next month, I got to thinking about an old post I had done on the collision between soundbites and facts. I nosed around in the blog's history and found what I was looking for, which became a Throwback Thursday post. 

The post compared what the pols are saying with the reported facts, which they are ignoring, in furtherance of their (fear) campaigns. The post highlighted my retiring congressman attacking my resigned-in-disgrace Sonofa Gov on crime in New York. 

The difference between then and now? Other than the passing of time and the names of the politicians, not a whole lot. The issue, and the distance between the soundbites and the facts,- are the same. And we all suffer for it.

Turning to your TGIF good week/bad week list-making, I'm now sitting quietly by while men in the GOP make fools of themselves, and do their best to criminalize people who provide reproductive health care, and scare women and children from getting it. 

I mentioned a few in my Wondering on Wednesday post, including Rep. Jim Jordan, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, and Ohio AG David Yost. 

In the post, I added an anti-abortion advocate (seriously, this guy's beyond the pale), the state of Texas, and the Indiana AG. On the good week side of this issue? A couple of lawyers and the Biden administration. Also earning mentions, on other issues? Members of the Secret Service, Congress (specifically House Dems), and Sen. Joe Manchin. 

Yep, you read that right; I put Dems on the bad week side of the ledger, too. Regular readers will not be surprised by that - they know I'm an equal opportunity list-maker.

Coming up? Part Three of our Future Tale; Sunday School, and more.

Sidebar: Could We Be Like the Ukrainians?

In my Sunday School Extra Credit post, I struggled with a story told by Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN), who had an encounter with an American one of her visits to Ukraine. Here's what he told her. 

You know, Victoria, these Ukrainians, they're actually more Americans than I thought. They really remind me of Americans, and they really inspire all of us.

I'm still struggling with his comment. There's no doubt Americans, and people all over the world, are finding inspiration in the resolve of the Ukrainian people, but I don't see them as being particularly "American." Honestly? I find them particularly not American - at least, particularly not today's American.

And this morning, as I waited for my first cup of coffee, I envisioned a crisis, an honest-to-goodness existential threat to the United States, not one of the many manufactured threats we're told almost daily we need to fear. Would we be able to pull together to defend each other and our republic (if we can keep it), the way Ukrainians are defending theirs?

Here's what fell out of my head.

• Red state governors would immediately call emergency sessions, or ditch their scheduled legislative agenda of book banning and enhanced cancel culture, and pass laws declaring that teachers, librarians, LGBTQ people, and abortion providers would all be conscripted into the military first, regardless of age, to get them the hell out of the way, so when the crisis was over, "we" would be safe from "them" and their agendas.

• If the Republicans hold Congressional majorities when my crisis occurs, expect the same to come at the federal level. But, on the chance that any of their relatives re teachers or librarians, they would be excluded from military service. They would still be outcasts in their families, but they wouldn't have to go to war. 

• Fortunately, there'll be no need to worry about trans people being in wrong-gendered foxholes; after all, real women won't be sent to fight. They shouldn't have to do that, except in places like Denmark, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, France, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Eritrea, Israel, and North Korea. But those countries are different. There's not like us. 

• The Rs in states along the southern border would race directly into the Rio Grande to pull immigrants from the water. Unaccompanied minors and other children would be sent to temporary detainment facilities to sew MAGA flags and make other mission-critical supplies, while adults, including parents, rapists, murderers, drug dealers and the other 'not the best people' will be sent with their COVID and fentanyl to the trenches. Promises of speedy citizenship would be dangled, of course, with no intention of anyone ever making good on them.

• The Ds would do their best to ensure that no one got sent to battle unless the government first wiped out their student loans, and guaranteed that, no matter what, they can't be evicted from their home for the duration of their service, including any time served as a POW or in any other state of confinement.

• The most progressive of the Ds would vote against any Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), unless we first ensured that all of our weaponry was carbon neutral, and that none of the bombs would hit the ground, preventing any environmental damage. The bombs would need to be of the 'bursting in air' kind, and would have to leave no trace. They'd vote no, even if 70% of our 'militaria' met the thresholds they demanded, because everyone knows getting nothing is better than getting a lot of what you want.

• Further, nothing could be fired by drone, because having pilots fire missiles and whatever else these things can fire, without being able to see the whites of the eyes of our opponent, is wrong.

• Meanwhile, back on the home front, people from dueling Charles Koch- and George Soros- supported think tanks would be thinking, fast and furiously, how they could make money from the war, and how many additional elected officials and unelected bureaucrats they would need to purchase in order to achieve their goals. And how to finance the purchases, too; I think they might ask Russia for help on that. Or the Saudi Crown Prince. 

• And, the Heritage Foundation would be building a list of potential candidates to replace anyone they like who got sent into battle (after the first wave of undesirables was conscripted). I think that process is called Indeed? Indeed, but I could be wrong.

 And when I had coffee in hand, my viewpoint didn't change all that much. 

• Hunter Biden painted a picture of someone who might be wife of the mayor of an enemy city's brother-in-law's niece's boyfriend's sister's daughter's illegitimate son's cousin, who may or may not have thought about giving someone named Biden some money to be used for something: drugs, paying for sex, buying gouache and canvas, or, maybe, bribing an elected official. The jury's still out on that, and we can't tell on social media. Or, maybe they thought about giving Biden the Golden some treats, I don't know. I can't be sure, because the fact-checkers aren't allowed to fact-check any of this.

• Separately, some young Rs in Congress freaked out about the groomer  thing, not realizing that groomers are necessary; sometimes, they even help people wear a coat and tie in the House. And we all know, without groomers, Shih Tzus would look like... you get the drift.

• Not only that, but they're also afraid someone's going to tell them that all of their friends and colleagues and R teammates around the country who've been arrested for things related to the kind of grooming the Rs are now freaking out about are, well, the kind of groomers the Rs are now freaking out about. The call is coming from inside the house, so to speak. 

• On the other hand, if they keep talking about groomers, no one will know they voted against the AUMF, too - not because of any policy idea, but because they're just trying to make sure President Biden and his agenda are stopped - so they'll probably continue pretending their colleagues aren't groomers.

• Democratic leaders in the House and Senate - with a combined age of 1234 years, 5 months, 6 days, 7 hours, 8 minutes, and 9 seconds as I write this - will be huddled in a corner of the Speaker's balcony, trying to figure out how to 'message' the existential threat, who should deliver the message, and how many focus groups will be needed to test it out. Separately, the 57 caucuses - the same number of states President Obama said he visited - all prepared self- serving, unresponsive responses to the official message, to be ready in case the leadership every issued one. The Rs prepared a response, too, for what's it's worth.

• Meanwhile, in the trenches, folks learned to sit around and wait for something to happen. Some people brought books - banned books, can you believe that? - with them to pass the time and that created almost more of an existential threat than the threat they were there to fight. Books don't belong in foxholes, it was argued. Foxhole is a dirty word and shouldn't be allowed, someone said. Others wanted to ban a book someone was reading, which led to hand-to-hand combat.

• And then there were cries for hand sanitizer, to prevent the spread of immigrant COVID germs, but no one thought to bring any. The issue was resolved when the germaphobes agreed to eat dirt, a man said he had eaten dirt as a child and hadn't gotten the Wuhan flu. QED. 

• Back home, people who had family breadwinners deployed, or who lost their jobs when the trouble started, or who were displaced, were looking for safe places to go. But some people wanted the safe places to be safe from conflicting ideas, including disagreement on the existence of the existential threat, and so the churches and schools that had opened their doors had to close, and the government had to step in to solve the problem. And we all know how that'll work out, right? 

This is an admittedly dark take on things, and yet, it presents Americans the way we currently present ourselves to the world, and to each other. I'm sure, if push came to shove, much of what's written above wouldn't happen. We could rise to the occasion, I'm sure. We pulled together after 9/11, for a while, and we could to it again. 

The hard part, for me, is that it seems we're willing to wait until another 9/11, or some other horrific event, for us to try and talk about where we agree, rather than where we disagree... about how we can make our country successful, rather than how we can make an administration fail...  about what's worth fighting for, and how we can go about it...

Wouldn't that be inspiring?

Wondering on Wednesday 3/9/22

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

It's been a while since we've wondered together on a Wednesday; ready to give it a whirl?

Let's start with something silly - laughter is the best medicine, right? It seems that former Trump immigration guru Stephen Miller has had his phone records subpoenaed by the January 6th Committee. Miller has sued to block their release; among other things, he says private family conversations would be exposed. Now, if someone subpoenaed my phone records, they'd find that I cover my elderly mom and my husband on my family plan. But here's the thing with Miller - he's covered under his parents' plan. I guess that's better than it would be if, you know, he still lived in their basement. But here's what I'm wondering: does he even appreciate the irony of this? The king of family separation has his phone bill covered by Mom & Dad? 

You may have heard about discussions on how friendly European countries could get their Russian-made fighter jets into Ukrainian hands. There was some talk that the US would try and 'backfill' American-made jets to our allies who gave their jets to Ukraine. All of this is fraught with risk, including the risk of an all-out war across Europe. So, it was kind of surprising to learn today that Poland had offered to deliver MiG fighter jets to the US base in Ramstein, Germany, for deployment to Ukraine. Surprising, that is, because it's been reported that the Poles hadn't discussed this with us first. And I'm wondering, how on earth could that be true?

This one's from the "I wonder, will these people ever learn?" file: Wisconsin's Sen. Ron Johnson wants to obstruct the president's agenda until the Rs take control in the midterms, and then when they take back the White House in 2024,  he wants to see the GOP repeal the Affordable Care Act.  You know, the same thing they tried to stop from getting passed in the first place, threatened repeatedly to repeal and replace, and failed, repeatedly - even when they had the majority the Senate, the House, and the Oval Office? I also wonder, how many people wish that Johnson had kept his promise not to run again? 

Turning to wonder-full things in my neck of the woods, my state senator Rachel May somehow managed to have her picture taken with climate activists holding a banner that pretty much everyone thinks is highly offensive - see for yourself. 

She's apologized for the "unacceptable" image, and said she had her picture taking with lots of people and didn't see the what the banner said.

So, what's the wondering on this one? These people have staff - they have aides, and assistants, and interns, and who knows how many hangers-on who follow them throughout the day. Is there not a single person on her team who could have pulled her away from this? Do any of your elected officials get caught up in stuff like this? I can't imagine it's just a New York thing...

And finally, tonight, we turn to my county's District Attorney for life William Fitzpatrick. Fitz is in the middle of a high-profile murder trial - the second one for the defendant, a local physician who's accused of murdering his wife. The doc was found guilty in the first trial, but the verdict was tossed due to juror misconduct; a juror had received numerous texts from her father about the trial, during the trial. Keep that in mind... and follow along with today's events. 

Fitz is a big Syracuse University basketball fan; the team was playing in the ACC tournament today, with a noon start. Fitz talks with the judge and the doc's defense team just before 11:30AM, which leads the judge to pose a question to the jury: do you want to continue testimony, or watch the basketball game? The jurors decided to continue with the trial - so I'm not wondering about them. I am wondering about Fitz, though - he actually thought it was appropriate to ask the jury if they wanted to watch a basketball game in the middle of the day's testimony? 

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

Dear Democrats: Can We Talk?

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

You will officially, completely screw things up 

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

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

 and start paying attention. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks. 

Sunday School 2/28/21: Extra Credit

In yesterday's Sunday School, I gave you excerpts from five of the seven senators who were in the classrooms. There was nothing surprising in any of those interviews, and I suspect the other two - Rick Scott (R-FL) and Mark Warner (D-VA) - were equally unsurprising. You can check out their interviews on Fox News Sunday. 

Today, I want to focus on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's chat with Chuck Todd on MTP. President Biden and Trudeau had a virtual meeting last week, in which Trudeau spoke highly of the state of things in the world, according to this article in The Guardian. 

Among other things, he said that "US leadership has been sorely missed over the past years," and added, "And I have to say a we were preparing the joint rollout of the communique on this, it's nice when the Americans are not pulling out all the references to climate change and instead adding them in." 

Chuck asked Trudeau about the 'leadership vacuum' he alluded to, and the PM said the issues the two countries are facing are things that "we naturally have to work together on," and he sees there being an active engagement between our two countries - and he's happy to see us re-engaging.

I think certainly there were things that were more challenging under the previous administration in terms of moving the dial in the right direction on the international stage. But, at the same time, you know, we all have democracies that go in different directions from time to time. And the, the sweep of the work that we need to do together as, as allied nations in the G7 and elsewhere, continues to be really important.

Chuck wanted specifics on global policy initiatives that Biden can help move forward. Trudeau pointed to COVID, saying the Biden approach is more in line with the Canadian approach - science, and protecting the people "as the best way to protect the economy," and supporting people as we move through it. Other things he mentioned? the US rejoining COVAX, rejoining the fight to address climate change, and on "the tremendous economic opportunities" linked to clean energy and clean jobs, and how those will help the middle class "and those working hard to join it."

Trudeau was asked about what's behind the low number of Canadians being vaccinated, compared to our equally unimpressive numbers.

Obviously, it's not going as fast as, as everyone would want. We all want this pandemic to be over yesterday and to vaccinate everyone as quickly as possible. But we're confident that in the coming weeks, hundreds of thousands of vaccines every week, millions into the coming months. We are going to have everyone vaccinated probably by the end of the summer. And that is something that we're, we’re very positive and excited about.

He also said they have contracts with multiple vaccine makers, with three now approved in Canada (Pfizer, Moderna, and now Astra-Zeneca) and hopes to approve more of them in the coming weeks. In the meantime, he said, they must "just keep hanging on" like everyone else is doing. 

Where we've got a slightly less warm and fuzzy relationship is on the Keystone XL pipeline, which was shut down by Executive Order on January 21st. Chuck asked Trudeau to make the environmentalist case for the pipeline, to help those of us who are against it. He said we probably haven't noticed how much Canada has done in fighting climate change, even as they recognize that "the world still relies on fossil fuels right now." But it's about balance, and transforming the energy mix to reduce carbon emissions as much as possible. So, while he KXL decision was disappointing, there's a lot than can be done.

So, Chuck asked, does this mean it's now a done, and done dead, deal? Trudeau said they're more interested in making sure we're moving forward "in ways that are good for both of our countries."

I think there's so much we can do together that I don't spend too much time worrying about the tension points. It'll always come up in our relationship, but we'll work through them, particularly given the alignment on so many things that we're able to bring with this new administration.

Two last questions, the first of which was about Trudeau's reaction to seeing the Capitol riot back in January. 

Dismay. A reminder of the fact that democracy is something we need to keep working at. A reminder that none of us are immune from polarization and anger and frustration. Certainly, there is -- there was a real sense that we all need to be careful about what we say and how we, how we lead as a way of trying to bring people together and unify people. But that was a, that was a scene that Canadians watched with consternation and horror and, and real concern.

As did I, and almost everyone I know. I say almost everyone, because some people have made no comments at all about it - and I'd hate to assume that they were fine with it, as were a very limited few to admit that. I don't want to project that on anyone. 

And the final question: What's the metric for reopening the border? 

 I think there's an awful lot of different metrics we need to look at on, on border and on keeping Canadians safe from Covid-19. Obviously, case counts, presence of variants, hospitalizations -- all these things factor into the expert analysis. Our public health experts telling us what the right measures are and how concerned we have to be about, about variants. Obviously as vaccinations increase, we’re all hoping for good news and to get through this. But we'll continue to engage with the, with the White House and with the administration on the best times to start releasing border measures. But, for now, we all need to keep safe, and that means keeping them in place.

I can't wait for them to be safely relaxed - it'll mean both countries are in a better place with the pandemic, and with vaccines, - and it'll mean that we can make trips across the border for photography and other adventures. 

Masks up - and I'll see you around campus.

The VP Debate: Questions and Answers

Another post started with a confession - shame on me.

I did not watch the entire debate. I lasted about half an hour, and then I switched over to watch North Woods Law, a show about conservation officers in New Hampshire and how they deal with people, and animals, on a daily basis. 

Their work entails listening to what people say, and what they don't say; setting aside their own beliefs and impressions to cut to the chase and take care of an issue; and acting with empathy and compassion towards people (and animals) when they are not at their best. 

As I listened to as much of the debate as I did, I tried to act like a North Woods officer, and really listen to the questions that were being asked, and the answers that were given. When the lies and honestly, the "let me get my talking points in here before time runs out, or even after time runs out, because that's what I'm here for, really" stuff, I gave up and promised myself and others that I'd watch it today and that I would read the transcript. 

I kept my promise, I did.

Below is my take on the actual questions, sometimes hidden in a lot of moderator talk, and the portion of any response that directly addressed the question that was asked. 

HQ is a question asked of Senator Kamala Harris; PQ is a question asked of VP Mike Pence. If the answer provided was not directly responsive to the question, you'll see a blank space where the answer should be. 

Here is the debate, in a nutshell.

HQ. What would a Biden administration do in January and February that a Trump administration wouldn’t do? Would you impose new lockdowns for businesses and schools and hotspots, a federal mandate to wear masks?

A. And our plan is about what we need to do around a national strategy for contact tracing, for testing, for administration of the vaccine, and making sure that it will be free for all.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. Why is the US death toll, as a percentage of our population, higher than that of almost every other wealthy country?

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. How can you expect Americans to follow the administration’s safety guidelines to protect themselves from COVID when you at the White House have not been doing so?

A. The difference here is President Trump and I trust the American people to make choices in the best interest of their health

*****     *****     *****

HQ. If the Trump administration approves a vaccine before or after the election, should Americans take it, and would you take it?

A. If the public health professionals, if Dr. Fauci, if the doctors tell us that we should take it, I’ll be the first in line to take it, absolutely. But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I’m not taking it.

*****     *****     ***** 

PQ. Vice President Pence, have you had a conversation or reached an agreement with President Trump about safeguards or procedures when it comes to the issue of presidential disability? And if not, do you think you should?

A.

*****     *****     *****

HQ.  have you had a conversation or reached an agreement with Vice President Biden about safeguards or procedures when it comes to the issue of presidential disability? And if not, and if you win the election next month, do you think you should? 

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. Neither President Trump, nor Vice President Biden has released a sort of detailed health information that had become the modern norm until the 2016 election. And in recent days, President Trump’s doctors have given misleading answers, or refused to answer basic questions about his health. And my question to each of you in turn is, is this information voters deserve to know?

A. And the transparency that they practiced all along the way will continue. The American people have a right to know about the health and well-being of their president, and we’ll continue to do that. 

*****     *****     *****

HQ. Do voters have a right to know more detailed health information about presidential candidates and especially about presidents, especially when they’re facing some kind of challenge?

A. Absolutely. And that’s why Joe Biden has been so incredibly transparent. And certainly, by contrast that the President has not, both in terms of health records…I’m glad you asked about transparency because it has to be across the board. Joe has been incredibly transparent over many, many years. The one thing we all know about Joe, he puts it all out there. He is honest, he is forthright…

*****     *****     *****

HQ. And you would pay for that new spending by raising four trillion dollars in taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations. Some economists warn that could curb entrepreneurial ventures that fuel growth and create jobs. Would raising taxes put the recovery at risk? 

A.

*****     *****    *****

PQ. Should Americans be braced for an economic comeback that is going to take not months, but a year or more?

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. Do you believe as the scientific community has concluded, that man-made climate change has made wildfires bigger, hotter, and more deadly and have made hurricanes wetter, slower and more damaging?

A. And with regard to hurricanes, the National Oceanic Administration tells us that actually as difficult as they are, there are no more hurricanes today than there were 100 years ago.

*****     *****     ***** 

HQ. What exactly would be the stance of a Biden-Harris administration toward the Green New Deal?

A. I will repeat and the American people know that Joe Biden will not ban fracking…And part of those jobs that will be created by Joe Biden are going to be about clean energy and renewable energy…And so Joe believes, again, in science…Joe is about saying we’re going to invest that in renewable energy, which is going to be about the creation of millions of jobs. We will achieve net zero emissions by 2050, carbon neutral by 2035…We will also reenter the Climate Agreement with pride.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. Vice President Pence, do you believe that climate change poses an existential threat?

A. As I said, Susan, the climate is changing.

*****     *****     ***** 

PQ. How would you describe our fundamental relationship with China? Competitors? Adversaries? Enemies?

A.

QH. How would you describe our fundamental relationship with China? Are we competitors? Adversaries? Enemies?

A.

*****     *****     ***** 

HQ. What is your definition of the role of American leadership in 2020? 

A. Just think about it as relationships. So we know this in our personal and professional relationships, you got to keep your word to your friends. Got to be loyal to your friends. People who’ve stood with, you got to stand with them. You got to know who your adversaries are and keep them in check… it’s about relationships. And the thing that has always been part of the strength of our nation in addition to our great military has been that we keep our word…

*****     *****     *****

PQ. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, what would you want Indiana to do? Would you want your home state to ban all abortions?

A.

*****     *****     *****

HQ. If Roe V Wade is overturned, what would you want California to do? Would you want your home state to enact no restrictions on access to abortion? 

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. Tell us specifically, how would your administration protect Americans with preexisting conditions to have access to affordable insurance if the Affordable Care Act is struck down? 

A.

****     *****     ***** 

HQ. In the case of Breonna Taylor was justice done? 

A. I don’t believe so…And her life was taken unjustifiably and tragically and violently.

*****     *****     ***** 

PQ. In the case of Breonna Taylor, was justice done?

A. I trust our justice system, a grand jury that reviews the evidence.

*****     *****     *****

HQ. If your ticket wins and president Trump refuses to accept a peaceful transfer of power, what steps would you and vice president Biden then take? What would happen next?  

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. If vice president Biden is declared the winner and president Trump refuses to accept a peaceful transfer of power, what would be your role and responsibility as vice president? What would you personally do?

A.

*****     *****     *****

PQ. If our leaders can’t get along, how are the citizens supposed to get along? 

A. I want to tell you that we’re going to work every day to have government as good as our people, and the American people each and every day. Love a good debate. We love a good argument. But we always come together and are always there for one another in times of need. And we’ve especially learned that through the difficulties of this year.

*****     *****     *****

HQ. If our leaders can’t get along, how are the citizens supposed to get along?

A. Joe has a longstanding reputation of working across the aisle, and working in a bipartisan way. And that’s what he’s going to do as president… I do believe the future is bright. And it will be because of your leadership, and it will be because we fight for each person’s voice through their vote.

And blissfully, that was the end of it. 

Now, you may think that all the other stuff that was said during the 90 minutes or so of the debate was necessary, or helpful, but to me, it wasn't. It was just talking points, it was trying to get the soundbite in, it was looking for a zinger... and even those fell pretty flat.

You can see that, if we scheduled the debates for 30 minutes, there'd be more than enough time for the actual questions and answers. And if the Commission on Presidential Debates wants to allow an hour of random chatter after the actual question part, that's up to them. 

I've been watching debates since 1968, when I followed the election with my Dad, a history teacher, who was trying to get his high school juniors and seniors engaged in our process for choosing a president. That was also the first year I 'voted,' going into the booth with him, pulling the curtain back, and pushing the lever for his choices. With that foundation, I've been engaged in this stuff ever since, but my distaste for the debate process has increased as my interest in actually sitting through them while they are happening has waned.

How about you? Did you think anyone answered questions that were actually asked? Did I miss anything that was responsive to the specific question posed by Susan Page? What did you think of the debate as a whole?

Email of the Week 10/1/20

Not unexpectedly, most of the political emails I received this week were all about the Benjamins - after all, yesterday was September 30th, and the end of the all important third-quarter fundraising period. 

A couple of the emails weren't just straight-out asks for donations. For example, Papa Joe spoke about the debate a little, as a preface for a $25 donation request, to "make this fund-raising hour huge"  and, of course, to meet the quarterly fund-raising goal. 

Here are Biden's quick thoughts on the debate:

Sue, I just stepped off the debate stage.

It was a real battle out there, but I hope I made you proud by calling out Donald Trump's lies and failures, and by letting the American people know what I - and everyone who is a part of this campaign - stand for.

And it goes on to talk about a 'debate night contest.' I must have missed that email, so I wasn't disappointed that I didn't get a phone call from Biden himself, which was the prize. There was also mention of the great fundraising that the debate inspired, and

...Sue, I'm serious. We're in this thing to win - together. 

And we're in it to win because American can't afford four more years of Donald Trump. It's time to build back better than we were before. 

I can't afford to give $25, but I'll still keep reading the emails. 

The other, more compelling debate-related email was from Tom Steyer, the billionaire activist who dropped out of the Democratic primary race on Sadie Hawkins Day. Take a look.

Susan,

 Last night's presidential debate was chaotic. Mr. Trump refused to follow the rules of a moderated discussion. He then spewed lie after lie - resulting in 90 minutes of desperate, incomprehensible bluster.

I was proud to watch Vice President Biden's thoughtful responses and detailed answers in spite of the mayhem all around him. He reminded us all of the very clear choice this election, between  a wannabe despot and a compassionate statesman.  

Thanks to you and the thousands of people who demanded climate coverage, we had the first direct question on climate change from a moderator in 20 years and the first sustained debate on climate ever. You did that.

And it couldn't be more important. While Trump strung together 17 lies about the climate crisis and continued his dangerous denial, Biden laid out his urgent, bold climate plan not only to deal with the crises we're facing right now, but to also address environmental justice and create millions of well-paying union jobs.

If you took anything away from last night's debate, let it be this: We must do everything in our power to elect Joe Biden.  Please sign up to volunteer with NextGen America today and help us build turnout for a Biden-Harris victory. 

Mr. Trump's dangerous comments were not limited to climate change. In addition to refusing to accept the election results, he refused to denounce white supremacists and gave orders to domestic terrorists to "stand by." These comments are not to be taken lightly.  

 If you took anything away from last night's debate, let it be this: We must do everything in our power to elect Joe Biden.  Please sign up to volunteer with NextGen America today and help us build turnout for a Biden-Harris victory. 

Thank yo for being in this fight. 

Tom 

For not asking me for money, for asking me to volunteer (even though I'm not a young person, which is the demographic NextGen America speaks to), for not taking his eyes off the prize - beating Donald Trump - and for staying true to his passion, dealing with climate change,  Steyer earns the coveted Email of the Week.

What's in your inbox?

Sunday School 8/23/20: Extra Credit

As promised in our Sunday School post, here are highlights of the interviews with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, done by ABC's David Muir and Robin Roberts. 

We'll tackle Muir's part first, and right off the bat he asked Biden how it felt to finally be the nominee. Biden mentioned his "overwhelming sense of obligation to get this right" because there's so much at stake.   That led to several questions on the COVID-19 pandemic, summarized below. . 

• Biden blames Trump for "walking away and not dealing with the solutions" and for not listening to the scientists. Biden will - including shutting down the country again if that's what they recommend. 
• Harris said that "communities most in need" should get the vaccine first, when we have one, and they both say we need a plan for getting the vaccine out, and need to be working on that plan now, not later.
• Biden's not concerned about a vaccine being announced before the election; he said, "I would hope that they’d be able to have the vaccine" and while he's been told it's unlikely, "if, God willing, it happened, it’d be wonderful." Picture Trump saying that... 
• He said that when we do get a vaccine, we need transparency to that people will know it's scientists driving it, not politics,  so that people can trust that it's safe. 

Here're a few more responses; I want to leave room for the other half of the interview.

• They'll raise taxes on people making over $400K, and on corporations, because it's time they paid their fare share, that it's  not about "punishing anybody." 
• It is fair to ask a person over 70 if they're fit and ready for the office, he said, and had this message for Trump: "watch me, Mr. president. Watch me."
• Harris was comfortable signing on as  VP choice, pointing to a number of policies that are "about translating the pain we collectively should feel as a country" and turning that pain into action on multiple fronts, including the Green New Deal - and that setting goals and timelines would be priorities there, along with a million new jobs.

There was  more, but the last question was how Biden would bring people together. In a nutshell? Telling the truth, taking responsibility, and actually inviting the opposition to come and settle problems together.