Wondering on Wednesday 3/27/24

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

I'd be hard-pressed to tell anyone what my favorite book is, and I'd be hard-pressed to think of a book that I'd want to own 'many' copies of.  I wonder how many of you are in the same boat? And I wonder how many people really believe that the Bible is Donald 'Orange Jesus' Trump's favorite book and that he has 'many' copies of it, even if you count the individual copies in each of his residences. The fact that, for his infamous upside-down Bible photo shoot, he had to borrow someone else's leads me to believe he's not being truthful. 

I also wonder who it was who declared Lee Greenwood's 'God Bless the USA' America's most recognized patriotic anthem? Aren't the folks trying to sell us on this idea the same people who were apoplectic about folks not being respectful in the right way when the actual most recognized patriotic anthem - the National Anthem - was played? And I wonder, aren't they the same people who think we don't need no stinkin' Black National Anthem - but somehow, we need this country anthem put above the real thing? 

I also can't help wondering how big a licensing deal this is... how many pieces of silver does the OJ earn per book sold? And is Lee Greenwood fairly compensated for the use of his song?

I noticed on the God Bless The USA Bible website that you can also purchase a 'Make America Pray Again' hat, and I wonder if the OJ will pretend he originated that phrase. That's what he said with 'Make America Great Again,' even in the face of overwhelming evidence that he was wrong.

Of course, the GBTUSA Bible is not just a Bible - it also includes the Pledge of Allegiance, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and even the Declaration of Independence. I wonder what the founders would think of the OJ packaging those documents together, or him saying "We have to bring Christianity back into our lives and back into what will be again a great nation."

In other head-scratching news, I'm having a hard time keeping track of how many reporters have asked city of Baltimore officials, state of Maryland officials, and Biden administration officials how long it will take to rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which collapsed after being struck by a cargo barge around 1:30 AM on Tuesday.  I wonder if they were all instructed to ask that?

And I wonder, I do, whether the folks asking the question have bets on the answers? Who'll get the answer first, who'll get the shortest or longest timeframe, maybe even which of their guesses will come closest to the official answer. In the first 36 hours after the accident, I'd be a bit skeptical of anyone who thinks they have the answer.

And speaking of having the answer, I wonder how many more weird explanations we're going to hear for the bridge collapse? It was the risks posed by our open border - or wait, it was DEI hiring policies - or wait, it was Israel attacking the US, No, wait - it was the US attacking itself -  or maybe it's the beginning of World War III. 

That's my favorite theory, so far anyway. I wonder, will anyone top it?

What's on your wondering mind tonight?

TGIF 10/7/22

Here are your good week/bad week honorees for the week.

I've been a fan of the Boston Red Sox since I was a kid. There's a picture of Ted Williams and Carl Yastrzemski in our foyer - my husband's favorite player of all time, and mine. This wasn't a good year for us, but it was a good year for a couple of players

• Aaron Judge, of the hated New York Yankees, became the first player in the American League to hit 62 home runs in a single season. He beat fellow Yankee Roger Maris's record of 61, which lasted that many years. 
• And, over the National League, Albert Pujols of the St. Louis Cardinals, joined the 700-home run club, and finished the season with 704 in his career, fourth on the all-time list. Before the season started, Pujols said this would be his last year. As he got closer to the milestone, reporters pestered him on whether he'd really retire if he didn't make it. I'm glad he didn't need to worry about it at the end. 

Major news was breaking in my neck of the woods this week, as Micron announced intentions to build not one, not two, not three, but four chip fab plants in Onondaga County, in Central New York. (Yes, there are places in New York more specific than 'upstate'.) The 20-year, potentially $100B with a B project is the result of a local, regional, state, and federal collaboration, and has the opportunity to be transformative not just for us, but for the state and for the country.

President Biden made news this week when he announced pardons for people convicted of federal crimes for simple marijuana possession, and he's encouraging governors to do the same for folks convicted in their states. In addition, and perhaps more important that the pardons, he's directing his team to review how pot is classified under the law. Right now, it's in the same bucket as heroin, which is (and always has been) ridiculous.

Speaking of President Biden, his administration's getting a lot of letters asking for infrastructure money from House and Senate Republicans, including some who were big critics of the bills that include the funds. Notably, none of the letters mention the authors' criticism of the bills, or their votes against them.

None cite “socialism” or “radical spending.” No one included a paragraph about House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy calling the law “rushed and irresponsible,” or Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene calling the Republicans who voted for it “traitors.” Often, the letters signed by members of the House and Senate appeal using the same terms that they derided Democrats for using, from “economic growth” to “sustainability” benefits.

This is not uncommon, but it's fun - especially since some of these folks are running against the very spending they're so willing to bring home to their district.

And finally, let's close out the list with the abject failure of the IRS to monitor applications of charities for tax-exempt status. How bad is it? One man, a convicted criminal, got approval for 76 charities himself, often using the name of well-known organizations such as the United Way and the American Cancer Society. It's mind-boggling. 

All of this was made possible by stripping down processes a few years ago, at a time of budget and staffing cuts. Which makes all the political handwringing about the Biden administration's funding additional IRS staff to backfill vacancies, provide customer service to taxpayers, and yes, to do the vetting that would prevent this kind of things all the more absurd. 

How was your week? Got any nominations for either of the lists? Drop a comment.

Sunday School 9/25/22: Extra Credit

Part of what Sen. Joe Manchin was trying to get across to Fox News Sunday host Shannon Bream in yesterday's Sunday School was that people - and the country - are more important than the politics of the day.  It's a message sure to fall on deaf ears, on both sides of the aisle and across the airways and the interwebs, but he's right.

Down the hall in the CNN State of the Union classroom, Jake Tapper had a conversation with two former governors of Tennessee: Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, and Bill Haslam, a Republican. They host a new podcast, You Might Be Right.

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

Haslam dodged the meat of the question, the part about the lack of commitment to democracy, by saying that 

most Americans aren't out there watching -- wondering about this or engaging in an argument this way or another. They're living their lives. But they do want to understand it better. What we're trying to do is take difficult issues, show both sides of the problem, so that people can understand, the other side might have a point.

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

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

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

And, Bredesen said, when you look at both sides you get to better answers than you do if you "just stick to the catechism of one party or the other..."

Haslam was asked about white evangelicals and what role they play in "both the extremism in the Republican party today and also the potential solutions" he and Bredesen discuss. Tapper asked about this because Haslam's been vocal about "how far off-track the church has gone." Haslam said in his experience in office,

believers act just like everyone else when it comes to the political sphere, instead of being different and saying, one of the reasons that you serve in offices like Phil and I did is to actually solve a problem, to make a difference, to -- it's not about making a point. It's about making a difference. And I'm trying to encourage people of faith to say, how can you actually make a difference? Make a difference means actually trying to solve a problem, instead of just yelling at the other side about how horrible they are.

Bredesen added that their backgrounds help other folks understand the importance of actually solving problems and getting things done.

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

Tapper asked Bredesen to talk about the root of the cultural canyon he sees between "the so-called cultural elite and folks who know somebody who drives a Ford F-150."  From Bredesen's perspective,

I think we're living in an America which is obviously divided, although my perception is, it's not as divided as you would think by listening to the Congress or listening -- listening to the media. If I walk into the grocery store and see people, probably, I'm sure, on both sides of a lot of these issues, I mean, they're largely the same -- the same people with the same desires in life and the same intentions as to what they do.

He thinks, more than anything, it's an urban-rural divide, one that "may be inevitable" given how the country has moved away from rural areas into cities. 

But I think it's possible to bring it back together again. We were very divided in the '30s, and World War II fixed it. I'm not suggesting that we want another war or something, but there will be some challenge that comes up to the country at some time that I think will help to pull us back together and find our common roots.

And Haslam noted, "we're pretty evenly divided as a country," noting the 50/50 Senate, a handful of votes separating the House, and the fact that we've not had a president elected by a double-digit margin in years.

But the problem is, we have become kind of segregated by our beliefs. And so we think everybody thinks the way we do, and we can't believe anybody would think differently. Part of what we're doing with this podcast... is modeling former Senator Howard Baker saying "always remember, the other person might be right." And that's what's lost in this -- in the discussions we're having today, is this idea of, the goal is to get to the right answer, not to get to my answer. And so we're trying to take hard topics, present people that have two very different perspectives, and then present some potential solutions.

I'm going to check out the podcast, to see how they approach the topics that wish our politicians would talk about, instead of focusing on getting the perfect soundbite. 

Checking back with Manchin, here's how he ended his chat with Bream.

And I sure do put the country first and America. It's all about America, not about Democrats or Republicans.

Tonight, Manchin pulled his permitting reform bill from the funding plan the Senate is considering. In a statement, he said

It is unfortunate that members of the United States Senate are allowing politics to put the energy security of our nation at risk. The last several months, we have seen firsthand the destruction that is possible as Vladimir Putin continues to weaponize energy. A failed vote on something as critical as comprehensive permitting reform only serves to embolden leaders like Putin who wish to see America fail. For that reason and my firmly held belief that we should never come to the brink of a government shutdown over politics, I have asked Majority Leader Schumer to remove the permitting language from the Continuing Resolution we will vote on this evening.

Over the last several weeks there has been broad consensus on the urgent need to address our nation’s flawed permitting system. I stand ready to work with my colleagues to move forward on this critical legislation to meet the challenges of delivering affordable reliable energy Americans desperately need. We should never depend on other countries to supply the energy we need when we can produce it here at home. Accelerating the construction of energy infrastructure is critical to delivering that energy to the American people and our allies around the world. Inaction is not a strategy for energy independence and security.

Is it critical enough to actually do something? Only time will tell...

See you around campus - and be prepared to discuss issues as if "the other person may be right."

Sunday School 9/25/22

I decided to spend some time in the Fox News Sunday classroom, to check in on new host Shannon Bream, who was tapped to fill the seat held by Chris Wallace for nearly two decades. 

One of her guests was Sen. Joe Manchin (D-They're ALL My Friends); it was his 'yes' vote that led to the passage of the dangerously named Inflation Reduction Act way back in August. Here's Bream's into to her chat with Manchin. 

She introduced him by noting the bargain he struck with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that would "reform the tedious federal permitting process for new energy projects," something Schumer's trying to find a way to go in order to "avoid a potential government shutdown." And, she quoted a Wall Street Journal comment about Manchin having "had political leverage but the bill shows he traded his voted on the cheap." Did you, she asked?

Nope - he didn't, he said, and he's got a response being published today in the WSJ; he said it answers "every one of the things which they basically have evaluated wrongly." And, he said,

But this is a chance in a lifetime for us to have energy independence, Shannon. For us to have security in this nation, which we need, and making sure that we can take care of the American people with low energy prices, producing more oil, producing more gas. But we have to have permitting reform if you're going to deliver it. You have no way of infrastructure to deliver it. So, everyone knows that. My Republican friends know that.

Much of the conversation centered around Republicans who are mad at Manchin because he struck a deal and the IRA passed. It seems most of them thought that he would be a no, and the Rs could hit the Biden administration with a loss just a few months before the midterms. 

For example, Bream brought up an amendment to the IRA from his fellow WV Senator Shelley Moore Capito that Manchin voted against ("hers is a messaging bill"), and ("she's totally supportive of my approach basically as it incorporated many of the things she and 46 other Republican senators had endorsed").

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

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

Manchin handled it all as well as can be expected, starting by saying "this is not about me." He spoke of the twelve years he's worked with the Rs on their top priority - permitting reform. 

We can't build anything in America. It takes five to 10 years. The developed world takes one to three years. And why should we so behind the developed world bringing products to market, to be able to have the infrastructure to move energy around? And we're asking people around the world to do things for us, we won't do for ourselves? My Republican friends know exactly where we are. This is not about the previous legislation. This is something, a high priority that we have for our country.

His point? It's bigger than partisan stuff or hurt feelings  - it's about time, and history. 

If we don't, Shannon, take advantage of this and come together as Americans, we're going to look back five or 10 years from now and wonder why we're not able to meet demands, why are we allowing Putin to kind of control, dictate our energy policies, and what we are trying to respond to and not able to do it in a timely fashion because we can't move the energy in America -- whether it's going to be new transmission lines for renewables or basically for fossils and oil and gas that moves the products we need today. That's what this is about. And we need to come together as Americans.

Bream brought up a letter from a group of senators asking Schumer to separate the permitting reform piece from the federal spending bill. The senators - including Booker, Warren, Duckworth, and That Guy from Vermont - are concerned Manchin's bill will make the climate worse, and that it "would actually disproportionately hurt low-income Americans and communities of color if it does get passed."

Manchin's not surprised that TGFV and the others are against his plan - they've never been for it, and "that's why we've never had it." Even with the folks behind the letter, Manchin said "overwhelmingly, Democrats in both the House and the Senate are supporting" the bill, and he hopes that's enough to swing the Rs

We have a golden opportunity and we have a majority, overwhelming majority of Democrats supporting it. And they're doing it because this is the right time and the right thing to do for our country. But, also, it's a time we basically can bring Democrats and Republicans together as we've done with the bipartisan infrastructure bill... with the CHIPS bill. And we continue to do things when we need to do something for our country. 

He echoed the same line of thinking when Bream asked him if, as Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) said, he didn't have all his ducks in a row when he went along with Schumer on the IRA. The Rs have had a ton of input on his bill, because he's been working on it with them for over a decade. 

... they have tremendous amount of input in this. But the process has come down to party line vote which is unfortunate, but it is what we're dealing with in a toxic political atmosphere. But I can assure you, everybody, we try to take everyone's input on this and my Republican friends' input is in this piece of legislation. So, I'm just hoping that and I'm very optimistic that we have the opportunity, they realize this opportunity and they'll never pass again in our lifetime.

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

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

After sharing some gloom and doom from Carl Icahn, who, Bream said, compares U.S. inflation to the fall of the Roman Empire, she asked Manchin "what regrets do you have at this point in voting for the Inflation Reduction Act...?"

He doesn't appear to have any regrets. He said the bill "puts more energy back into the markets" - and cleaner energy, too. Similarly, when you allow Medicare to reduce the price of drugs, that's helping inflation, and he said 300,000 of his constituents rely on Medicare.

The bottom line, for the folks who say the IRA will have little impact on inflation, in his view? They might not see a reduction in inflation right now, but they'll definitely see it.

because this does nothing but gives us a chance to reduce inflation... I have worked very hard to make sure we had an opportunity to be energy-independent and secure and fight Putin's war. 

And, in closing, he said "And I sure do put the country first and America. It's all about America, not about Democrats or Republicans," to which Bream replied, "That's what Americans are hoping for."  

Yes, it is. 

See you around campus.

Sunday School 9/4/22: Extra Credit

For your Extra Credit, we're turning to CNN's State of the Union classroom, where Dana Bash talked with FEMA Director Deanne Criswell, who was on to talk about the muddy waters in Jackson, MS. She had just returned from a trip to Jackson with Mitch Landrieu, the White House infrastructure director.

She said that FEMA was focused on supporting the state's Emergency Management Agency

...with bringing in safe drinking water, bottled water, supporting their operations, but, more importantly, bringing in our federal partners that can really understand what it's going to take to bring this plant back to full operational capacity.

Bash wondered when they'll have clean drinking water, and Criswell said it was "still too early to tell." EPA was there, and the Army Corps of Engineers; there'll be assessments done and what not, and work is "going to happen in phases." In the near term, in addition to getting bottled water out to folks, 

we're providing temporary measures to help increase the water pressure, so people can at least flush their toilets and use the faucets. The longer term and the midterm about how long it's going to take to actually make it safe to drink, I think that we have a lot more to learn about what it's going to take to get that plant up and running.

Bash said what I've been thinking all along.

It's just I'm listening to you, and I'm sure our viewers are listening and thinking, this is 2022. This is a state capital in the United States of America...a city of more than 150,000 people, without running water for nearly a week. And now, as you're saying, not only are they without safe drinking water, you don't have a timeline for when they're going to have that restored. Americans are lining up for hours in the heat just to get the bottles of water you're talking about. Who's to blame for this?

How does this happen, in America? 

Bash didn't mention, and Criswell didn't talk about all the longstanding water problems - and, if you ask residents, the racism that exacerbates them - in Jackson, which are getting national attention as a result of the current crisis. Here are a few articles touching on those.

From NPR: 

The rituals of boiling water, and the luxury of a bath 

Lifelong resident Halima Olufemi, 45, remembers her great-grandmother and grandmother boiling water. "So much so that we would buy extra jugs and they would always pour the water in," she says. "It was a way of life." 

She's now an activist with the People's Advocacy Institute and has been helping distribute water in this emergency.

So has Danyelle Holmes, with the Mississippi Poor People's Campaign. Thirty years ago, she moved here from Greenwood in the Mississippi Delta to go to college and was told not to drink the water. 

"I've never drank tap water since I've been here in the city of Jackson," Holmes says. "Never."

The city's aging water lines can leak, leading to low pressure and contamination. There have also been broken water and sewage lines. And in 2016 the state's health department warned that it had found lead in the water supply.

And there's this, from the international organization Human Rights Watch:

Some reporting has focused on how extreme flooding, exacerbated by the climate crisis, has overwhelmed Jackson’s water system. While climate emergencies will certainly intensify in years to come, Jackson’s  crisis is a human rights failure decades in the making. State officials warned last week: “The consistent delays in timely maintenance have hampered [the water facility’s] ability to properly respond to the demands placed upon it.” But resource constraints have plagued the city and its water and wastewater system, which had a weeks-long service disruption in 2021 and multiple US Environmental Protection Agency citations for dumping millions of gallons of raw sewage into source water. The water and wastewater system requires more money to repair and operate than the city can fund. 

One organizer told Human Rights Watch: “The conservative white power structure in Mississippi has deliberately disinvested in the capitol city of Jackson.” It’s understandable that they would feel that way. Mississippi state has not only failed to fund infrastructure assistance to Jackson, but recently enacted a $524 million income-tax break that has constrained the state budget, including for infrastructure funds. Mississippi is already dependent on federal funds for many government functions and is likely to require much more. Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba estimates the cost to repair the systems is nearly $2 billion, while new federal infrastructure dollars to the state total $75 million.

 From the Washington Post: 

Robert Luckett, a Jackson State university history professor, noted that the contrast was stark this past week in places like County Line Road, which separates Jackson from neighboring Ridgeland. One side of the street had water while on the other, homes, hotels and other businesses made do without, setting up portable bathrooms outside. 

“It’s crazy how you can go one block and you go from a town that has none of the issues we have to a town with no water,” Luckett said. 

“This is all rooted in a politics that is based around racial attitudes and a racist history that continues to impact the city and a White leadership of the state who benefits from their suffering,” he said. “They didn’t think it was fair for the city of Jackson to get these resources when their own constituents didn’t have access to the same pot of money.” 

Roger Wicker, one of the state's two Republican US Senators, has been in office since 2007. A search of his press releases shows he's long been a supporter, and often a leader, in getting funding for rural and small community water systems, as well as for bills dealing with fisheries and commercial fishing, Mississippi River dredging and water management, flood control, and trade and commerce-related water infrastructure. I didn't find anything specific to issues with Jackson's sewage spills or lead in the water.

Wicker discussed the current situation in Jackson in a September 1st interview with another CNN anchor, Jim Sciutto. Here's a statement from his press release, 

“This is an emergency. And the American people are seeing this, they’re being very responsive, and we’re going to need additional federal help to salvage the lives, homes, and futures of our major city,” Wicker said. “I have six grandchildren that live inside the city limits in Jackson. This is personal to me, and it’s my capital city.” 

It's personal to everyone, it seems; hopefully, personal enough for something to be done to address all the issues that have plagued Jackson for decades. And if it isn't personal enough,, there's a multi-billion-dollar federal lawsuit over the lead issue to up the interest. 

See you around campus.

Sunday School 11/21/21

For this week's Sunday School, we'll start with Dana Bash and her State of the Union chat with Gov. Chris Sununu (R-NH), and then check in with Margaret Brennan for her conversations with Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Ted Cruz (R-Cancun) on Face the Nation.

Sununu agrees that "everyone likes" the kind of things that are in the Build Back Better bill (BBB) passed by the House - clean energy, climate incentives, universal pre-K, and so on. That's good, but the "immense amount of money" is an issue. He thinks 

fiscal responsibility has left the window out of Washington, DC, and I think that's a frustration for all Americans. 

Inflation "is the worst tax you can put on low- and middle-income families, he added; the answer is finding the middle - and that takes more than cutting the size of the spending.

You do it by looking at what happens at a local level. How do you make sure these programs can get implemented? Remember, the Senate supports a policy. They support funding. And then they go on to the next thing. It's governors and the citizens in local communities that have to implement these programs and that feel the real cost of them. 

He also mentioned, without any detail and without follow up from Bash, that in February, the feds are putting in regulations that will bring "further barriers to getting a CDL license, just getting someone a trucking license." According to the NYS DMV website, the new federal "barriers" include ensuring that new drivers are, you know, trained to be drivers. Oh, the horror.

Sununu turned down a Senate run, saying "as a governor, you can actually play defense and protect the interests of your citizens" from what happens in Washington. And that includes his belief that "politics in its entirety on both sides of the aisle in Washington is screwed up. I mean, it really is," mostly due to them focusing on the wrong priorities.

I agree with a lot of what he said about Washington; how about you?

For her part, Sen. Gillibrand said Sen. Joe Manchin "has come a long way" on paid family leave, and he's "come forward with a lot of really smart questions" in the past few weeks. They both want it to be "an earned benefit" and she's "optimistic" they can come up with something that's bipartisan. The problem is, other Rs who are interested in paid leave aren't interested in what Manchin's looking for. 

Specifically on Manchin's desire to strengthen the "social safety net," Gillibrand says that's what paid family leave will do. 

We know if it's parental leave, parents, mothers are 40% more likely to get back to work if they have paid leave, which goes to Sen. Manchin's concerned that he wants to strengthen our social safety nets. He wants to strengthen Social Security. That's what paid leave does. It gets people back to work. 

They talked about the increase in the SALT deduction cap, which the House bumped up from $10K to $80K, which she hopes will make it through the Senate. Brennan failed to ask Gillibrand what she was doing back home to get NY to reduce taxes, instead of putting this massive benefit to the wealthy in the BBB. While she says the increase will help the middle class, it would give about 40% of the overall benefit to folks making between $366K and $866K, according to the Tax Policy Center. 

Gillibrand also said she thinks Dems are getting the message out now that voters should stick with them in the midterms. And, they'll be doing that even more once the darn thing is signed, when they'll be in their districts talking about how the bill helps families and how that helps the economy.

Brennan wondered if Senator Cruz he agreed with fellow potential 2024 candidates Nikki Haley and Tom Cotton that we should fully boycott the Beijing Olympics. He thinks the Olympics should have been moved to another location, but not with a full boycott.

You know, Jimmy Carter tried that in the 1970s. All it did was punish a generation of athletes. We've got young men and young women, Americans, who spent their whole lives practicing for this moment. I don't want to punish those young athletes.

He agrees with the administration (without agreeing with Brennan that he agrees), on a "so-called diplomatic boycott," in which we "try to minimize the attention" by not sending any high-ranking government officials. But wait - there's more.

Number one, that we actually show the courage the Women's Tennis Association is showing to call out the murder, the genocide, the torture, the lies, the complicity in COVID-19 of the Chinese communist government to speak the truth. And then number two, I really hope our young men and women, that they go over there and kick their commie asses. We need to win in the Olympics.

He'd also like to see corporations "show a tiny bit of courage" and not do any Olympic-related advertising; he thinks that would make sense.

And finally, is Cruz running for president? He said he has "no idea what's going to happen in 2024" and that the Former Guy has a decision to make - is he running, or is he not. Aside from that, 

I can tell you that- that when I ran in 2016, we came incredibly close. I came in second. There's a long history of runner-ups becoming the next nominee, and it was the most fun I've ever had in my life. But there's a lot of time between now and 2024.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 10/17/21

I spent all my Sunday School time in CNN's State of the Union classroom, where Jake Tapper was in the host chair. 

First up? Mayor Pete, er, I mean, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who was asked, re: the current supply chain issues, if "Americans need to prepare ourselves for it to get worse before it gets better?"  He said that "a lot of" the challenges from this year "will continue into next year," but said that it's not just supply issues, it's demand issues, too.

Demand is off the charts. Retail sales are through the roof. And if you think about those images of ships, for example, waiting at anchor on the West Coast, you know, every one of those ships is full of record amounts of goods that Americans are buying, because demand is up, because income is up, because the president has successfully guided this economy out of the teeth of a terrifying recession.

The ports are handling record volume, he added, but the supply chain - mostly private business interests - can't keep up. He said the administration's role now is "to be an honest broker," and bring everyone together, get commitments and "get solutions that are going to make it easier."

Tapper asked if President Biden would consider lifting the Trump-era tariffs on China, saying it's not a panacea but it would help alleviate some of the supply-side pressures. Secretary Pete said that "every idea is being taken seriously," but the focus now is on the operations side of things, including getting commitments to keep the ports of L.A. and Long Beach open 24/7. 

But, he acknowledged, that's only a part of what's needed. We also have to get the containers out of the port, onto trucks, and off to where we need them. He said the Transportation Department is working with states on getting CDL licenses issued faster, "so we can get more qualified, safe truckers on the road." Passing the infrastructure bill would help, too.

Tapper pointed to the delay on that, and wondered if Buttigieg was "frustrated" by the delay, and if the progressives erred demanding the human infrastructure bill needed to be passed first. He said "the reality is" we need both bills, 

not only to make sure that we have the right kind of infrastructure, but to make sure that life gets better in this country for people trying to raise children and for people trying to participate in the work force. 

And on whether it would make sense for Americans to do their holiday shopping early, or if that would make things worse, Buttigieg was rah-rah about things - including that the holidays will be better this year than last.

... a year ago, millions of Americans were sliding into poverty who now have jobs. And a year ago, a lot of us were gathering with loved ones over a screen. It's going to be different this year because of the president's leadership, because of being able to get more and more Americans vaccinated and make that available free to every American. 

Finally, on the exceedingly rude comments made by Tucker Carlson about Buttigieg taking paternity leave, he said he wasn't apologizing to Carlson (or anyone else), and that all Americans deserve the same opportunity. He also said it was unnecessary to name an acting secretary while he was on leave, in part because he was available to them the whole time.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger was next. As one of the two Rs on the House January 6th committee, he's a guy everyone loves to hate, right?  

The Journal of Unpopular Opinions (Chapter 1)

No one in the leadership of the Democratic Party has what it takes to fight the battles the party is facing, much less win those battles. 

No one else in the Democratic Party is standing up to fight those battles.

No one in the Democratic Party will stand up to fight those battles. They're afraid of something, or of someone, or of the several someones in the part leadership. 

Face it: while Nancy Pelosi is considered by many to be a strong Speaker in terms of how she manages her caucus (although, that seems to be open to question these days), she is a horrible advocate for the Democratic Party and its priorities. 

I've shared my, shall we say, 'lack of enthusiasm' for Pelosi in the past, such as here, when she was re-elected Minority Leader in 2016. She lost 63 votes to Ohio's Rep. Tim Ryan, who expressed then the same frustrations as I have today. I suspect Ryan still has them, too.

...my level of frustration came from the idea that we're going to have, for two more years, the same conversation as we've been having since 2010 (when the Dems lost 63 seats and the House majority in the mid-term election).

And I think the level of frustration in our caucus is as great as I've ever seen it. And it's time to do something about it, not just talk about it. Because now we're not even the national party. We're a coastal party. And we've got to move forward. If we're not going to get voters in Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, go back down south. When I first got in Congress, we had members from Tennessee. We've got to go back there and campaign and get those folks back in the fold.

Ryan also talked about how the Dems don't unify the demographics, but "talk about them and treat them as individual groups" and emphasized that they've

... got to get the message right. We've got to have the right messenger. And we've got to have someone who can not just go on MSNBC, but go on Fox and Fox Business and CNBC, and go into union halls and fish frys and churches all over the country and start a brush fire about what a new Democratic Party looks like.

Ryan is now running for the US Senate; he faces a progressive challenger in the primary. Of course, he does - because one thing Dems are good at is fighting each other.

And don't get me started on Chuck Schumer. I've long not been a fan. Here's just one illustration of why: having the Judiciary Committee Dems pull a stupid stunt instead of voting against advancing the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett out of committee. Schumer thought that not showing up was the best way to "not lend a single ounce of legitimacy" to the process. My take? 

Rather than skipping out on the meeting, the adult thing to do would have been to show up, explain one more time for the record why it was the wrong thing for the Judiciary Committee to do, respond to whatever statements the Rs made (instead of just reading their remarkably similar prepared remarks), and then vote against moving the nomination forward. 

Instead, they put pictures of people who benefited from the Affordable Care Act in their chairs, hoping their colleagues on the other side of the aisle would look at those, feel bad, and delay the vote.

This is the leader of the Dems in the Senate? Good grief.

The issues facing the country today - and facing the majority Democrats - have not changed over the past many years. The solutions to those problems are still out there, and they're still not being talked about in a way that will bring us to the solutions we desperately need. 

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "Before we start taxing the super-rich, why don't we make sure that the tax code doesn't contain 50,000 ways to avoid paying taxes? If they don't have to pay the taxes on the books now, what good is adding more going to do?"

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "With literally hundreds of bills that may limit voting rights under consideration around the country, some already passed into law, why on earth are seven of ten articles in our voting rights bill not related to voting?"

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "Do we really want to require banks to report $600 transactions to the IRS? Is that really the best way to find tax avoidance by the wealthy?"

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "Why aren't we doing everything we possibly can to ensure that existing programs for student loan relief and repayment are accessible and working as intended, instead of pushing to eliminate all student debt?"

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "What the hell are we doing, holding up nearly $2 trillion in infrastructure spending? Why aren't we pushing the bipartisan Senate bill through, getting it signed, and putting that to good use right now?"

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "I don't care how we get it done, but we will have a plan - well before December - on the debt ceiling. Period."

Who is the Democrat who will stand up and say, "Where are the problem solvers? They don't have to be Problem Solvers, but we need to solve some problems, and fast."

I desperately want *That* Democrat to exist. The one who knows that getting something is better than getting nothing, the one who knows that trying to get Santa to give you everything you've ever wanted since you were three years old, all at once, is insane. I don't know if he or she even exists, but if *That* Democrat is out there, now is the time to stand up and be heard. Now is the time to read your caucus the riot act. Now is the time to get something done.

What they're doing now is not sustainable, and if they think the shellacking they took in 2010 was bad, wait until they see what happens next year.

Sunday School 10/10/21

Right up front, I apologize for not getting your Sunday School posted timely. There was a baseball game, you know, and it took 13 innings for the Good Guys to put away the bad guys, after all. 

That said, let's head right and visit the Fox News Sunday classroom where Chris Wallace attempted to get House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-n't You Glad I'm Still Here -LA) to answer questions. 

For example, Wallace asked him if blocking President Biden's agenda was more important than helping the people of his state - there's $6B for infrastructure in it for them.  

Look, we put together over $450 billion in infrastructure, with roads, ports, waterways, all the things you're talking about. That's not where they want to go. And, oh, by the way, in this package, they have language that tells the Corps of Engineers they can't do projects if it benefits the oil and gas industry. 

That seems to be the opposite of what the bill does, according to Reuters, but I digress. Whatever language Scalise says is in the bill, yes, blocking the Biden agenda is more important than $6B in aid for his constituents. 

The last question? "Do you think the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump?" It came with a follow-up concerning states that are continuing to make that claim: "Do you think that hurts, undermines American democracy?" The answer to those questions was not forthcoming. Oh, sure, he talked about states that "didn't follow their state-passed laws that govern" presidential elections, and "that is what the United States Constitution says," but there was no answer to the simple question at hand. And Wallace tried a couple more times, to no avail.

And after all of that, Wallace closed the interview with a pile of fluff (with some emphasis on top).

Always good to talk with you, and I appreciate the way you step up and answer questions and the way you choose to. Thank you, sir. 

Good grief. 

Moving down the hall to the This Week classroom, George Stephanopoulos talked with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellin. He started the conversation on the debt ceiling, and quoted part of the Grim Reaper's message to Biden:

I will not be a party to any future effort to mitigate the consequences of Democratic mismanagement. Your lieutenants on Capitol Hill now have the time they claimed they lacked to address the debt ceiling through stand-alone reconciliation and all the tools to do it." What are the consequences if he keeps his word?

Yellen stated the obvious: it's necessary that we pay the debts we have run up; it would be disastrous - at home and abroad - if we defaulted; our credit rating would tank; US treasuries are "the world's safest possible asset" and that'd be at risk; there'd likely be a recession and/or a financial crisis.  

That said, George wondered if she'd convinced Biden yet that we should eliminate the debt ceiling, something she personally supports, but "it's really up to Congress and the administration" t0 pay the bills that come from their spending and tax plans. 

And that means we have had deficits for most of the post-war period. And that means raising the debt ceiling. It is a housekeeping chore. There is really -- we should be debating the government's fiscal policy when we decide on those expenditures and taxes...  not when the credit card bill from -- comes due.

They also talked about the 'trillion-dollar coin' which Yellen thinks is a gimmick that "jeopardizes the independence of the Federal Reserve." 

You would be asking to essentially print money to cover the deficit. This is a responsibility. It’s a shared bipartisan responsibility. It’s been raised almost 70 times since 1965, almost always on a bipartisan basis. And no one party is responsible for the need to do this. I believe it should be a shared responsibility, not the responsibility of any one party.

George asked about invoking the 14th Amendment, which states "the validity of the public debt of the United States should not be questioned." Again, Yellen pointed to the Congressional responsibility to pay the bills.

We shouldn't be in a position where we need to consider whether or not the 14th Amendment applies. That's a disastrous situation that the country shouldn't be in. I wouldn't want to see the president or myself faced with the decision about what to do if Congress refuses to let us pay the government's bills. You know what should you pay first? That's not a -- we have to reassure the world that the United States is fiscally responsible, and that they can count on us to pay our bills. And that's Congress' job to do that on a bipartisan basis.

George pushed, suggesting we'll be in the same place in December, and wonders if the 14th should be on the table. Yellen said she can't imagine we'll be at that point, and that she's got confidence in Speaker Pelosi and Leader Schumer, that they'll "be able to manage this so that we don't face this situation."

It would be completely irresponsible and a self-inflicted wound that would affect businesses and households and the global economy and the status of the U.S. in the world. We shouldn't ever be in that position.

Damn straight, Skippy. 

Good for her for pinning the tail on the donkey - and the elephant. If only the talking heads would focus on that, and the failure of both parties, rather than on their sound-bite generating grandstanding...

See you around campus, if you're vaccinated.

Sunday School 10/3/21: Extra Credit

In yesterday's Sunday School, we heard from a couple of progressives. Today, for your Extra Credit, we've got Sen. John Barrasso (R-Why), who chatted with Chris Wallace in the Fox News Sunday classroom.

Barrasso said that "what we're seeing is like watching an episode of the twilight zone," and he said that President Biden "surrendered to the radical wing of his party" instead of getting bipartisan agreement on his Build Back Better plan. 

And now you have this big government-socialism-reckless spending bill being basically used to hold hostage the thing that the American people want... 

He noted that the 'traditional infrastructure' bill passed the Senate with 19 Republican votes, and that "in any kind of a normal world, that would've been signed into law by the president" months ago when it passed. Biden is "weak" and the folks like the two who were highlighted in yesterday's post "are driving the bus and Joe Biden is just along for the ride."

Wallace noted that Barrasso wasn't one of the 19 Rs who voted for the stuff that Americans want, and not only that, he and "all of the Republicans are refusing the normal course, bipartisan passage of raising the debt limit." Considering that, Wallace asked whether Barrasso and the rest of them were "viewing these issues on the merits or are you just playing partisan politics?" 

In his defense, the senator said he "had some concerns with some of the gimmicks that were used to fund it" and that it spent too much money, among other things. But on the current $3.5T human infrastructure bill, the Rs are united.

We're a party at that wants to grow the economy. The Democrats are a party that wants to grow the government. And you heard it right there, they're continuing to try to mislead the public by saying it is free. It is not free. They said, oh, inflation -- Cedric said, oh, inflation will go down. Inflation -- people are feeling the bite of inflation right now when they buy groceries, when they buy gas, all of those things. And they think if this stuff passes, this massive spending and tax bill, that inflation is going to get much worse. 

Wallace pressed him on things like the child tax credit, noting that Barrasso voted to double the child tax credit, which was part of the Trump tax plan. Dems want to expand that further, and noted that "Wyoming is one of the states that benefits most from the increase in the child tax credit." Why would he oppose the change? 

Barrasso muttered and sputtered about "a $3.5T massive bill," and Wallace pointed out he's talking about something specific that would benefit Barrasso's constituents. Well, because "it's part of the bigger bill" and all. Plus, the Dems are trying to talk with the Rs about these things.

I mean Bernie Sanders, the other day, said 48 people ought to be able to overrule two, but there are actually 100 members of the Senate. It's 52 against a number of things that the Democrats are proposing here. And the content of this bill matters almost as much if not more than the cost. I've gotten more letters in the last two weeks on one component of this, which is the issue of giving a whole new army of IRS agents to rifle through your checking account, to look at any check that you either deposit or write for over $600. This is an invasion of privacy. Every senator's is hearing about this. That's included as well. So, when you take a look at the entire bill, which is why, you know, Joe Manchin said, it's time for a strategic pause. Well, it looks like there may be a long pause on both the real infrastructure bill and this big spending blowout bill.

OK - Wallace gave him the chance to talk about what he doesn't like, but then he asked Barrasso about universal pre-K, and noted that "less than a quarter" of the kids who'd be covered in the Dem plan are enrolled in pre-school. Again, the question was, wouldn't this help a lot of his constituents?

Again, Barrasso ignored the point. 

There are a number of things that will help the people of Wyoming. Overall, Joe Biden's policies have been hurting the people of Wyoming. And I believe that there should be (means) tested. You just don't give things universally to everybody. I think there should be work requirements involved. The Democrats are trying to separate work requirements from just free government checks and programs. You heard the congressman from the Progressive Caucus say, everybody ought to get free community college, everybody ought to get free daycare, Pre-K, all of those things, and that's not the way that our country has been founded and how we work together. 

Notably, he didn't say that he's reached out to any of the Dems to say, "hey, let's work on getting some means testing in here, so we don't give handouts to people who don't deserve them." And that leads me to believe that it's more important for the Rs to be united against stuff they'd actually support, stuff that would help their constituents, than it is to try and do things "the way that our country has bene founded and how we work together." But maybe that's just me. 

Last question? Are the Rs "thoroughly enjoying" the Dems and their infighting? Such a disappointing question, after all the work Wallace did to try and get Barrasso to act like an adult.

Well, I'll tell you, you know, the thing is, Joe Biden ran as a centrist and as competent. And what we're seeing is that he is neither. And people across the country are feeling less safe with Joe Biden as president. Their paychecks are less safe because of the inflation. When you look at hundreds of thousands of people illegally coming to the country every month, they feel less safe. When the generals testify, as they did, that we are less safe to terrorism, Joe Biden has now walked the plank for the socialist Bernie Sanders budget. He's man overboard and he cannot swim. He is sinking and he's sunk. 

You'll earn your extra credit if you can convince me there's a single R who will break ranks and try to get something accomplished on behalf of their constituents.

See you around campus. 

Sunday School 10/3/21

I'm taking one for the team today, and spending time with Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-on't Need to Worry about a Number-WA) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-'ve Named a Lot of Post Offices-VT). We'll take them in that order.

Jayapal stopped by the CNN State of the Union classroom, where Dana Bash was serving up the questions, the first of which was "What do you think this week says about the progressive wing of the Democratic Party?"

Jayapal suggested that "progressives have helped push back onto the table, back onto the agenda President Biden's agenda." Biden laid out this big plan months ago, she said, that included infrastructure, sure, but also 85% of it

was around these other important programs, child care, universal child care, paid family leave for 12 weeks for everybody, making sure we're taking on the climate crisis, expanding health care, and, of course, taking on the challenge of giving a path to citizenship for immigrants. All of that ended up in something called the Build Back Better Act.

And now, even though "we thought we made clear three-and-a-half months ago that the two had to move together, because we don't want to pit roads and bridges against child care," but

suddenly, a small group of people, 4% of the entire House Democratic Caucus and the Senate Democratic Caucus, said, 'we only want the bipartisan infrastructure bill to go'... And that's after five months of negotiating. We had to stand up and get the whole thing back together. And that's what I think has happened now. We have put the bills back together, as was the original agreement, and we are going to deliver both bills, the infrastructure bill, which is important. And the Build Back Better Act.

Bash asked about the "scathing statements" released by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-on't Know Why I'm a Democrat), the former accusing the progressives of using "Freedom Caucus tactics," and the latter accusing the progressives of further eroding trust. Jayapal said that was unfortunate, and pointed out that it wasn't "just a few people. We had over 60 votes" and that's growing, she said, because of "people who were desperately committed to the idea that we're not leaving anybody behind."

The conversation turned to dollars, and that's where Jayapal wasn't playing; she refused to give a number, much to Bash's dismay.

Well, what we have said from the beginning is, it's never been about the price tag. It's about what we want to deliver. The price tag comes out of that... And so, we are now going back to make sure, what is the way that we can get all of the critical programs that we had identified, those things I talked to you about, child care, paid leave plan... how do we get all of those things in, but -- and -- but perhaps for a shorter period of time, and be able to get then to the number from that? The critical thing is, let's get our priorities in, and then we will figure out what it actually costs.

She said even President Biden said "don't start with the number. Start with what you're for." And no matter how hard Bash pushed, that's where the stood.

I don't feel the need to give a number, because I gave my number. It was 3.5. So, if you're in a negotiation, you need to have a counteroffer before you bid against yourself... 

She said now they have to figure out how to get all of their priorities funded, maybe for "a little bit of a shorter time," and to look at some of the smaller items and decide if they're mandatory. Those should "cut out a decent amount," she said. And on means testing, while I am a strong supporter of means testing for government programs) Jayapal feels differently.

Well, all of the research shows means testing actually doesn't target it more, but it does create a lot of administrative burden and a lot more cost...So, it's not - it's not what I want to do. 

All I can say is, what a mess. And that's before we hear from That Guy from Vermont, who was in the Meet the Press classroom, with Chuck Todd asking, first, whether TGFV has "accepted the fact" that the Build Back Better plan won't be $3.5T. That's not what he heard, he said, and besides, even if he did,

what the president also said, and what all of us are saying, is that maybe the time is now for us to stand up to powerful special interests who are currently spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to prevent us from doing what the American people want. We want to lower, substantially, prescription drug costs in this country so we're not paying ten times more for certain drugs than Canada and other countries. And the pharmaceutical industry has 1,400 lobbyists on Capitol Hill right now trying to stop us. We want to deal with the existential threat of climate change. We want to deal with child care. We want to expand Medicare so elderly people can chew their food, can have hearing aids, can have eyeglasses. And we can pay for this by demanding that the wealthiest people and largest corporations finally start paying their fair share of taxes. That's what this struggle is about. Do we do what the American people want? Do we fulfill what democracy is supposed to be about? Or do we bow down to powerful special interests?

Was that the answer to a question, or a campaign speech? I couldn't tell.

Todd made the mistake of talking about there being a "large wish list" and wondering if there's a sense that they should get as much done as possible, and tackle some of the smaller stuff later. TGFV's response? Another campaign speech. 

Climate change and cutting carbon emissions has everything to do with whether or not we leave this planet to future generations that is healthy and is habitable. Scientists tell us we got a few years. You want more workers out in the workforce, we need to reform child care so that a million women can come back to work and not have to pay, as a family, 20% or 30% of their income for child care. You have to have a skilled workforce. We can't have a skilled workforce and do the good jobs that are out there unless we train young people. That's why we want to make community colleges' tuition free. So, this is not a wish list. This is what the working families of this country want and what the economy needs. The real question is -- will Congress -- the Republicans, of course, are owned by the pharmaceutical industry and the fossil fuel industry. We don't expect them to do anything. But the question now is whether the Democrats can come together, and I think that we can, to finally do what working families in this country desperately want us to do.

Todd also wondered if TGFV was just learning about his colleague Joe Manchin's $1.5T figure, suggesting that Chuck Schumer had known about it for months. Sanders pointed out that Manchin has been public about what he wants - a smaller number and a paid-for bill. Sanders wants those things, too. 

As you well know, Chuck, there's a given year when Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the wealthiest people in this country, don't pay a nickel in federal income taxes. Large corporations don't pay a nickel. We address that, you could pay for $3.5 trillion. You could pay for a $6 trillion bill and pay for it completely.

They've been negotiating, "literally, for months now," TGFV said, but now, the progressives (I'd say the Dems, but he's not one) have a new job, to "rally the American people to continue the negotiations," and he thinks they'll get both bills done. He also disagrees that it's a "dysfunctional message" they're sending by having both bills go together. They have to, he said, 

because there is a strong feeling on the part of many of us that if you just pass the infrastructure bill, which is a good bill, I voted for it, then we will not get to the bill that working families really want, that finally demands that the wealthiest people of this country start paying their fair share of taxes. So, what we said is, "Look, we all want the infrastructure bill. Great. But we also have got to do the reconciliation bill which addresses the long-neglected needs of working families and the elderly." Expanding Medicare to cover dental, hearing aids, and eyeglasses, doing child care, doing community colleges, enormously important for working families.

He said lots of people are working with Sen. Sinema (she of the 'dysfunctional message' comment), and he thinks her constituents are starting to pressure her to get on board.

This is a long and complicated process which is dealing with the most consequential piece of legislation probably since the New Deal in the Great Depression. It's a big deal. And it's not going to happen overnight. And the president is absolutely right. It doesn't matter whether it's next week or three weeks from now. What matters is that we finally address the problems facing working families. That's what matters.

And in the end?

What matters is that we do it and we do it well. And when we do both of these pieces of legislation, I think the American people are going to say, "Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Democrats in the Congress. And by the way, where the hell were the Republicans in not having the guts to stand up to powerful special interests?"

He's running in 2024. I swear he is.

See you around campus.