Sunday School 7/31/22

CBS won the billion-dollar classroom lottery today, so we'll have highlights from Face the Nation for Sunday School and your Extra Credit. John Dickerson sat in for Margaret Brennan. 

We'll start with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), and then listen in as Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) chimes in. 

Manchin denied that he had "changed his mind" on anything; rather, the Inflation Reduction Act he agreed to with Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer fights inflation, which is what he wanted. And, he said, the bill doesn't raise taxes.

...the corporate tax in America in 2017, before the Republican tax cut, was 35 percent. They cut it to 21 percent, 14 percent reduction. All the people that I know are paying 21 percent or more. All the even larger corporations, but some of the largest corporations of a billion dollars of value or more don't even want to pay the minimum of 15 percent.

He said he "never thought" people (I think he meant corporations) weren't paying at least 21%. Has he had his head in his state's coal dust for the last decade or more? I mean, I did a post on GE not paying any federal income taxes back in 2011, for heaven's sake. And West Virginia's almost heaven, so Manchin clearly should have known about this.

Dickerson explained the "Republican criticism" that closing loopholes increases taxes which hurts supply, and during inflation you need a lot of supply. Manchin, sounding almost like a Democrat, said

In the last two years, there have been massive record profits across the board by these largest corporations, massive record profits. And it's been the lowest capital expenditure in the last two years, so that didn't drive it...

Dickerson said Manchin's GOP colleagues think he and Schumer "did something underhanded" by saying 'no deal' and then making a deal. He quoted Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) who said this was "a declaration of political warfare." Manchin's reaction?

It's such a shame. John Cornyn is a good friend of mine. He's such a good man. And for the politics to be so toxic right now, first of all, I never thought this would come to fruition. I never spoke with anybody about it, any of my colleagues, because they were frustrated that nothing happened for so long on the other. 

And, Dickerson pressed yet another GOP argument.

-- you made certain representations, they would say, to Republicans, then broke your trust... Susan Collins said: "It's a very unfortunate move that destroys the many bipartisan efforts that are under way," in other words, whether it's on election reform or same-sex marriage, that the well has been poisoned.

Manchin said he considers Collins a "very dear friend," but said he "never told anybody" he wasn't going to do something. 

If I had a chance to fix the energy policy of the United States of America, and I didn't do it, shame on me. If I had the chance to reduce the amount of inflation that people in West Virginia and across the country are enduring right now, shame on me... we were able to provide these solutions. Let's not make them political, John." 

Next up? Sen. Toomey, and Dickerson stayed with the Inflation Reduction Act, asking for Toomey's "principal critique."

Well, it's going to make inflation worse, actually. So, they've got a big corporate tax increase that's going to probably make this recession that we're in worse... this spending is unnecessary. It's going to exacerbate inflation. It is not going to reduce the deficit.

He's a big fan of his friend Joe Manchin, but said Manchin "got taken to the cleaners." He agreed to a bunch of bad policy, and in return he was promised "there's going to be some kind of pro-energy infrastructure bill sometime in the future."

Dickerson noted that The Committee for a Responsible Budget, a "fan" of Toomey's, said that this new bill "would be the first time in many years" that reconciliation was used for deficit reduction. Others have said the same thing, but Toomey disagrees.

... they use the same gimmick that Sen. Manchin said he was opposed to in the past. They claim the revenue over a 10-year window from their big tax increase, and their price controls. And then the expenditure that they acknowledge, they pretend is only going to be for three years. That's the Obamacare subsidies for wealthy Americans. That's an obvious political payoff. The last time they had to do this, they said it would only be for two years. It's about to expire. And they can't - - they can't have it expire before an election. So, they're extending it, but only for three years. They have no intention of ever ending the Obamacare subsidies. Over a 10- year window, that wipes out the purported deficit reduction.

Dickerson didn't question the comment about "wealthy Americans" getting the health insurance subsidies, or the fact that many very much not wealthy Americans would lose their insurance without the subsidies; I wish he had.

Toomey said the supporters of the bill aren't "taking into account how much our economy will slow down from this big corporate tax increase that will mostly hurt manufacturing and domestic investment..." And he explained how the GOP tax cut was supposed to work, how allowing businesses to make capital investments (new plants, new equipment, etc.) and deduct the cost in the same year caused a "huge surge in capital expenditure" and the Dems will "raise the cost of investing in a business."

Folks at the Brookings Institution who studied this would disagree with Cornyn, as would the IMF, but I'm sure he has experts that would say he's right.

They moved on to the PACT Act, which would provide health care to veterans who were exposed to dangerous toxins from burn pits. The Senate shot the bill down, even though they voted for it in June. Cornyn said they want an amendment to "change a provision that has nothing to do with veterans' health care," because the Dems added a provision that's "designed to change government accounting rules, so that they can have a $400 billion spending spree."

Toomey said that the Rs are "fully accepting" the deficit will grow due to the PACT Act - "we accept that as a price we have to pay for people who serve the country." He objects to

a budgetary gimmick, a sleight of hand in accounting rules, that will allow totally unrelated spending of $400 billion over the next 10 years. 

There was more discussion, where Toomey accused Dickerson of being "totally incorrect" in his assessment of Toomey's amendment; Dickerson said "it actually caps annual expenditures for the toxic fund. And after 10 years, it goes away."  However, Toomey argued,

What it caps is how the government accounts for these transfers, but there is no cap on the amount of money that goes over. There is no cap on the total program. Look, if -- honest Democrats evaluating this will tell you, if my amendment passes, not a dime change in spending on veterans' programs. What changes is how the government accounts for it.

Dickerson noted Cornyn may be consistent on the deficit, but many of his colleagues aren't, and asked "why is it important to be fastidious when it comes to veterans, but less so when it comes to, say, supporting chip manufacturers?"

Because, John, once again, you're completely mischaracterizing this... most Republicans think we shouldn't loosen up the budget rules so that Democrats can go on a spending spree on things that have nothing to do with veterans' health care.

To which Dickerson responded,

 Of course, Democrats have to be in charge in the future when that spending happens, and they may very well not be. 

See you around campus.

The Update Desk: TGIF 6/4/21

In my TGIF entry for June 4th, I mentioned the Memorial Day celebration in Hudson, OH. 

Hudson is where a decorated veteran's remarks during the town's Memorial Day celebration were partially silenced by event organizers, and I compared the flap over a tweet sent by VP Kamala Harris two days before Memorial Day to what happened in Hudson on Memorial Day.

The same people, plus many others, aren't making a peep about this story, reported by the AP. 

Organizers of a Memorial Day ceremony turned off a speaker's microphone when the former US Army officer began talking about how freed Black slaves had honored fallen soldiers soon after the Civil War. 

That's right - when Lt. Col. Barnard Kemter (Ret.) decided to include that part in his speech, he did so because "he wanted to share the history of how Memorial Day originated." Sadly, the folks who organized the Ohio celebration Kemter spoke at, said "that part of the speech was not relevant to the program's theme of honoring the city's veterans."  Pretty easy to see who the good week guy is, and who they aren't, right? 

A quick review of news at the Update Desk show there has been significant fallout since then. According to Fox 8 News in Cleveland, the local American Legion, which sponsored the remembrance, is being suspended until it's officially closed, and at least two people have resigned.

Suzette Heller, Department Adjutant with the American Legion Department of Ohio, confirmed to the I-Team Friday that the one official involved in the event informed her he was resigning and that the Post is closing.  She added the commander of that Post is also resigning.

The resignations come less than 24 hours after the officials with the American Legion Department of Ohio started investigating Monday’s Memorial Day event.

American Legion of Ohio Commander Roger Friend on Thursday requested the resignation of two officers of Hudson American Legion Post 464 that organized the event. 

Friend also stated in a letter asking for the resignations that a full investigation and the charter of this post are pending with the Department Executive Board. 

The station also reported that the sound engineer refused to lower the volume on the mic, so one of the organizers did it. 

The organizers issued a statement, noting

It appeared that Mr. Kemter was making a distinction between Black soldiers and their families and white soldiers and their families before Memorial Day was created.

I'll note that even calling him 'Mr. Kemter' seems to be a slight, given that he's a retired Lt. Colonel, but maybe that's just me.

Not being sure of what racially charged comments the speaker might make, the volume was reduced on the microphone. The microphone volume was restored when he returned to the issue of remembering the men & women who have given their lives in defense of our great country. It was an attempt to avoid racial speech in a ceremony planned to honor our town’s fallen heroes. The speaker was not asked to stop. He gave his entire speech. While we acknowledge that the contributions of Black men and women in the military are often overlooked, the purpose of the 2021 Memorial Day Ceremony was to remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice and not to bring race into the discussion. We recognize the sacrifice of all men and women, regardless of the color of their skin.

It's interesting that the organizers suggest they didn't know what Kemter was going to say; after all, early reporting on the incident noted his speech was reviewed in advance and, while edits were suggested, Kemter didn't see the request in time to make changes.

You can read Lt. Col. Kemter's entire speech here. I've copied the renegade portion below. 

Today is Memorial Day. This is the day that we pay homage to all those who served in the military and didn’t come home. This is not Veterans Day, it’s not a celebration, it is a day of solemn contemplation over the cost of our freedom.  

Memorial Day was born out of necessity. After the American Civil War, a battered United States was faced with the task of burying and honoring the 600,000 to 800,000 Union and Confederate soldiers who had died in the single bloodiest military conflict in American history. The first national commemoration of Memorial Day was held in Arlington National Cemetery on May 30, 1868, where both Union and Confederate soldiers were buried.

Several towns and cities across America claim to have observed their own earlier versions of Memorial Day or “Decoration Day” as early as 1866. (The earlier name is derived from the fact that decorating graves was and remains a central activity of Memorial Day.) But it wasn’t until a remarkable discovery in a dusty Harvard University archive the late 1990s that historians learned about a Memorial Day commemoration organized by a group of freed black slaves less than a month after the Confederacy surrendered in 1865.

But in recent years the origins of how and where Decoration Day began has sparked lively debate among historians, with some, including Yale historian David Blight, asserting the holiday is rooted in a moving ceremony held by freed slaves on May 1, 1865, at the tattered remnants of a Confederate prison camp at Charleston’s Washington Race Course and Jockey Club – today known as Hampton Park. The ceremony is believed to have included a parade of as many as 10,000 people, including 3,000 black schoolchildren singing the Union marching song “John Brown’s Body” while carrying armfuls of flowers to decorate the graves.

More importantly than whether Charleston’s Decoration Day was the first, is the attention Charleston’s black community paid to the nearly 260 Union troops who died at the site. For two weeks prior to the ceremony, former slaves and black workmen exhumed the soldiers’ remains from a hastily dug mass grave behind the race track’s grandstand and gave each soldier a proper burial. They also constructed a fence to protect the site with an archway at the entrance that read “Martyrs of the Race Course.”

The dead prisoners of war at the race track must have seemed especially worthy of honor to the former slaves. Just as the former slaves had, the dead prisoners had suffered imprisonment and mistreatment while held captive by white southerners.

Not surprisingly, many white southerners who had supported the Confederacy, including a large swath of white Charlestonians, did not feel compelled to spend a day decorating the graves of their former enemies. It was often the African American southerners who perpetuated the holiday in the years immediately following the Civil War.

African Americans across the South clearly helped shape the ceremony in its early years. Without African Americans the ceremonies would have had far fewer in attendance in many areas, thus making the holiday less significant.

My generation grew up listening to the famous radio personality Paul Harvey. Paul would say at the end of his broadcast, “And now you know the rest of the story." And now, you know the rest of the story about the origin of Memorial Day.

After the offending segment, Lt. Col. Kemter spoke about taking the oath when he joined the military; he called for recognition of Hudson's fallen, many of whom he knew; and he recited a poem about soldiers. All in all, it seems his remarks were more than appropriate, and more than worth telling.

It's unfortunate that people - worse, that American Legion members, for Pete's sake -decided to muzzle him in the first place.

Sunday School 9/6/20: Extra Credit

For this week's Extra Credit, I went looking for folks talking about the allegations that the president referred to US military veterans as "suckers" and "losers."

I hit the mother lode with the This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom, where Martha Raddatz was hosting the conversations. She's been on a multi-state tour, and noted that shortly after she arrived in Denver, the article in the Atlantic about Trump's comment hit. She asked voters for their reactions; here are a few of them.

It broke my heart. 

We're not losers. We're not suckers. He's - the government sent us over there (Vietnam). We didn't say, 'send me, send me to war. The government sent us to go fight for this country.

My immediate reaction was what is this? This doesn't make a lot of sense. And each allegation was supported by anonymous sources.  (This man said he absolutely doesn't believe the article).

He tweets a lot, he says a lot and gets all about going after (a) certain voting bloc. It's not what he really feels. And so, when you take it back to national security, I'm really worried that he's going to put men and women needlessly in harm's way.

It didn't surprise me. You can see what he said about Senator McCain from the very start. I think that (he's) someone who respects the military vote but that's not the same thing as respecting the military. 

And, she talked with former Secretary of Defense (and former Republican Senator) Chuck Hagel, asking him for his reaction.

...if these comments are real (and I'll address that in a second) but if they're real, it's beneath the dignity of any commander in chief, truly they're despicable. Now, one of the points that one of the veterans made which was a good point, these are anonymous sources. But let's go back to the words from Trump himself, coming out of his own mouth, starting in 2016 about - what he said about John McCain and what he continued to say about McCain. 

How he degraded the service of Generals Mattis and McMaster, and just recently, General Kelly, the history of this president over the last three, four years is pretty clear. The 2018 experience when he did not go to the American military cemetery in France, to recognize and honor the World War I Marines, every other leader went, every other leader drove, leaders of Germany, France, Canada. And you can go through a litany of past things that he said from his mouth, actions that he's taken, and it corroborates really the Goldberg article in "The Atlantic”.

Hagel also said he thinks this will resonate with servicemen and women,

because what I’ve just said, he's on the record with saying things himself over the past few years. And that -- that makes the credibility of this article and those anonymous comments more and more credible. Now, I said before, if you want to make an anonymous comment and if you feel so strongly about that that you make that comment to an established, well-respected reporter and a magazine, then you ought to have the courage to go out and use your name, too. I’ve always believed that. I think it’s important now. If these guys who said it or allegedly said it, think it’s that important for the future of this country, then they should show some courage and step forward as well.

Interestingly, Raddatz asked one of the doubting veterans she talked to about this if he'd believe it if "someone appeared who had provided information in that article and said it on the record in front of a camera" and the gentleman was still unsure about believing it. Hagel noted that some folks will never believe it, "no matter what is said, no matter who says it," noting

...and that's just the reality of politics and freedom of expression, and we have a great country where you can believe what you want to believe. But facts are facts, Martha. And the reality of those facts (is) pretty clear. I think it's a pretty clear indictment of this president's attitude towards our veterans.

He'll use them. Of course, he’s used them in the last three and a half years as props in his actions, in his statements. No president has ever done that -- use your veterans, use your active military as props. I mean, couple of months ago, he sends an airborne division into Washington, camps them outside of Washington, the mayor didn’t ask for that. The police chief didn't ask for that in Washington, D.C. But it's a continuation of the same actions and words we have seen from this president the last three and a half years.

I have to agree with Hagel. It IS believable that Trump could have said this, given what he's said about and said to veterans, members of a Gold Star family, and his penchant for grasping for the military to get involved in his pet projects (the Wall), the DC stuff that Hagel mentioned, and his repeated claims that he'll "send in the National Guard"- something that's not even his responsibility, for Pete's sake.

The comment by the one veteran, the one who said Trump loves the military voter, not the military? Solid gold.

Also on the show fielding questions on this issue? Ohio's Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who served in the Senate with both Chuck Hagel and John McCain. His reaction?

Well, Martha, I -- I read the article. But, you know, any time I've been with the president, there's ever been any discussion about the military, he has been extremely respectful, what you would expect of the president. So, you know, that's -- that's been my personal experience.

Raddatz talked about the fact that even Fox News had confirmed parts of the article (other news agencies have done the same).  But DeWine agreed with Hagel that "people should come forward, adding that

...you know, anonymous sources are -- are interesting, but, you know, it's never going to have the credibility, I think, for the general public unless someone -- you know, people actually come forward and are willing to do that.

He said that he doesn't agree with Trump's comments about McCain, whom DeWine called "a dear, dear personal friend."

Raddatz wondered about the over 19 million veterans in the country, who accounted for 13% of 2016 voters (per exit polling). Then, 60% of them voted for Trump, 34% for Hillary Clinton, and asked if DeWine thought this could make a difference in this year's election. He said he really didn't know.

...you know, we're into the campaign. You know, a lot of things come out in a campaign. And I think sometimes people, when -- when they only come out during a campaign, you know, people are somewhat skeptical about them. This is -- you know, we're into the 60 days. And so I don't know what, you know, impact that's going to have. I think, you know, what the president has done in regard to the economy before we hit the -- the virus, you know, I think people in Ohio generally very happy with that. You know, the president made commitments in regard to the Supreme Court and -- and federal courts. We're very happy with what he's done there. So, you know, it's going to -- look, it's going to be a close race in Ohio. I think the president will win Ohio. But Ohio's always going to be a -- a battleground state. And, you know, no -- neither side can ever take Ohio for granted.

You know? On that last part, he's right: neither side can ever take Ohio for granted. And he's right on the part before that, too, I suspect: there are probably lots of single-issue voters, like the ones who focus on Supreme Court justices. Those people cannot be discounted, in this or any election.

See you around the virtual campus. And if you're not wearing your mask, you're doing it wrong.

The Irony Board: I Hereby Proclaim

There are many things Donald Trump is without: ethics... compassion... empathy... kindness... humility... courtesy... and irony - don't forget irony.

We've long celebrated November as Native American Heritage Month, under President George W. Bush, President Obama and even president Trump.

This year, in addition to celebrating our Native American heritage, we are celebrating several other things, including National Veterans and Military Families Month, with a proclamation noting that

Each warrior who fights for our Nation, along with their families, has earned our eternal gratitude, and I ask that all Americans thank and support them.  Together, we remain committed to fostering a national community of support for these brave heroes and their families.

This president signed this proclamation? This president, the guy who mocked a Gold Star family for speaking out against him; who assaulted the life and memory of John McCain; who deports  immigrant veterans despite the promise of citizenship for their patriotic service or the immigrant families of our veterans and soldiers; and who most recently has turned his "eternal gratitude" on Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman? This is the guy who proclaims

I encourage all communities, all sectors of society, and all Americans to acknowledge and honor the service, sacrifices, and contributions of veterans and military families for what they have done and for what they do every day to support our great Nation.

I can't even.

We're also celebrating, for the first time, National American History and Founders Month, a time for us all to remember that

...the United States will always remain steadfast in our dedication to promoting liberty and justice over the evil forces of oppression and indignity.  This same truth fuels us in our efforts to confront the challenges that face our citizens here at home, including protecting precious religious liberties, securing our Nation’s borders, and combating the opioid crisis.

Unless, of course, you're a Muslim, a person legitimately seeking asylum, a thoroughly vetted refugee, LGBTQ, a person with Temporary Protected Status, a political opponent born in the US or a naturalized citizen, and so on.

But let's include the opioid crisis as an "evil force of oppression and indignity," while we try to strip health insurance away from millions...  Also,

This month, we acknowledge the tremendous strides we have made as a people and recognize that our democracy’s survival is dependent upon a well-informed electorate.  To ensure the success of our future generations, we pledge to continue to build a more educated citizenry. We heed the warning of President Ronald Reagan that “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

This is laughable, really, coming from a guy who lies in press conferences, lies in rallies, lies in Cabinet meetings, lies in tweets -- who lies about everything! All of his minions also lie, constantly, boldly, like clockwork, in lockstep with him, as if hearing themselves repeat something false will miraculously make it true. And knowing that if they are hearing themselves repeat something false, the president is hearing them, too, and that is good. For them. Not so much for us, but very good for them. And his supporters? Some of them believe the lies, all the lies, lie the lies right along with him, and call others liars for not agreeing with the lies. And no, 13,435 false and misleading statements do not a truth make... But,

To continue safeguarding our freedom, we must develop a deeper understanding of our American story.  Studying our country’s founding documents and exploring our unique history — both the achievements and challenges — is indispensable to the future success of our great Nation.  For more than two centuries, the American experiment in self-government has been the antithesis to tyranny, and our Constitution has secured the blessings of liberty.

This president doesn't give two hoots about the Constitution - it's just another thing about which he can uneducate the citizenry. His actions fly in the face of our founding documents, except the parts that serve his purpose-of-the-day, and he pretends the parts that don't serve him don't exist - you know, like the oversight stuff, or the Congress appropriates the money stuff, and more.

He proudly and officially compliments dictators, wishing that he had what they have -- an obedient press, subservient women, obscene military parades, and threatening people who don't agree with him. And he's got that last part, in spades.

Emoluments...government spending at Trump properties... promoting his children's personal financial interests... members of his administration doing the same...

As we sit today, he's obstructing Congress in an impeachment inquiry, he has his lawyers on a path of obstruction in ways the likes of which have never been seen before, even to the point of arguing that Trump could in fact kill someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and not even be investigated, much less indicted, while he's in office. (The president just loves that "the likes of which have never been seen before" stuff, so I thought I'd give it a whirl.)

Trump has got this American History and Founders stuff nailed, don't you think?

And the irony part? Yeah, well, that's going to have to wait for another day.

Sunday School 11/18/18 (pt 4)

In the final part of the president's interview with Chris Wallace, we learn about his toughest decision, his relationship with the military, and how he ranks his own performance, which I'm saving for last.    The first three parts of the interview are available here, here and here.

Wallace asked Trump about term limits. The question is a piece of work:

Can you envision a situation - you talk about six more years. Can you envision a situation well into your second term where you think you're so good for the country and so essential to the progress of the country that you would try and amend the Constitution so you could serve a third time?

Fortunately, Trump didn't take the bait.

No, no. .. Just won't happen, it's not -- I think the eight-year limit is a good thing, not a bad thing.

On the Veterans Day weekend debacles, including Trump's insistence that it was the Secret Service that prevented him from going to the first cemetery, not the weather, which came up previously in the interview as well.

Wallace did not ask why Trump did not join his fellow world leaders for the trip to the Arc de Triomphe; he and Putin both arrived separately. It reminded me of the time Trump rode behind as the other leaders walked, together, at the G7 summit in Italy. He did ask why Trump failed to go to Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day.

I should have done that, I was extremely busy on calls for the country. We did a lot of calling as you know...I probably - you know, in retrospect, I should have and I did last year and I will virtually every year.

He did not do it last year either - he was out of the country, but what's another lie?

But we had come in very late at night and I had just left, literally, the American Cemetery in Paris and I probably assumed that was fine and I was extremely busy because of affairs of state - doing other things. But I would have - I would have done it. 

OK, sure. Calls and affairs of state and other things.  Notably, there are no readouts of any Veterans Day calls on the White House website, for what it's worth.

On why he hasn't visited our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Well, I think you will see that happen. There are things that are being planned. We don't want to talk about it because of - obviously because of security reasons and everything else. But there are things that are being planned. As you know I was very much opposed to the war in Iraq. I think it was a tremendous mistake, should have never happened. 

I don't think anybody's been more with the military than I have, as a president. In terms of funding, in terms of all of the things I've been able to get them, including the vets. I don't think anybody's done more than me. 

I've had an unbelievably busy schedule and I will be doing it. On top of which you have these phony witch hunts. On top of which - I mean, we've just been very busy. But I will be doing that. '

What an incredibly insensitive thing for the Commander-in-Chief to say, don't you think? Especially when one looks at his unbelievably busy schedule aligned with his own words to us before he was elected.

• I'm going to be working for you. I'm not going to have time to play golf. (Trump statement, August 2016) 
• Trump Has Spent 150 Days, or 25% of His Presidency at Trump Golf Clubs (August 2018 Newsweek headline)
• Trump has visited a Trump property or held a rally on more than half of the days in the past three months (September 2018 Washington Post article)

Why I would have loved for a follow up question - you know a, "what, do you think I'm stupid?" or something, but instead Wallace switched gears, telling Trump that Republicans who like what he's doing but dislike that he's so divisive.

I think if I was a, you know, more modified, more moderate in that sense, I don't think I would have done half of the things that I was able to get completed. With that being said, other than you have to have a certain ability to fight back and as you know, people have - you know, they take strong stance on me both ways, you know, love and hate. I'd like to see it a little bit, maybe, right down the middle.

But tone is something that is important to me. But a lot of times you can't practice tone because you have people coming at you so hard that if you don't fight back in a somewhat vigorous way, you're not going to win. And we have to win. This country has to win.

We have a lot of victories coming and I think if I - if I go too low-key, we're not going to have those victories.

Now, mind you, Wallace posed his question after talking about Trump's negative comments about Mia Love, April Ryan, Yamiche Alcindor and Abby Phillip. I wasn't sure that being victorious over a Republican Senator and three reporters, all women of color, was so important to our country, were you?

Wallace also asked Trump about his toughest decision as president; Trump said North Korea, and that he's got a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un, even though, Wallace asked, that they might still be working on nukes?

Yes, Maybe they are. Maybe they're not. I don't believe that, I don't. And you know, could. And which is - if it  - if that's the way it goes, that's the way it goes. You know, I go with the way we have to go. But so far, it's been good. We have a good relationship. We made, I think, some great decisions for the - for the people of this country.

And I do, you know, I put America first and other countries should put themselves first. It's not like we're  - we should put - and everybody else should be second to us. No, other countries are proud of their countries and their leaders should put their countries first. But we were putting our country in many cases last. We were more worried about the world that we were worried about the United States. That's not going to happen with me. 

Note again his disregard for the United States intelligence community: maybe it was Russia, maybe it was somebody else. Maybe they are testing nukes, maybe they aren't. Maybe it was the Crown Prince, maybe it wasn't.

Maybe he believes the experts, maybe he doesn't.

Maybe he understands that disagreeing with the sum total of our best and brightest intelligence folks shows us as untrustworthy to our allies, maybe he doesn't.

The final exchange we'll look at between the two of them is this one:

CW: Where do you rank yourself in the pantheon of great Presidents? There is Lincoln and Washington, there's FDR and Reagan. Do you make the top 10? 

Trump: I think I'm doing a great job. We have the best economy we've ever had.

CW: So, where do you rank yourself?

Trump: ... I would give myself, I would - look I hate to do it but I will do it. I would give myself an A+ - is that enough? Can I go higher than that? 

See you around campus, where we grade on a more realistic curve. 

TGIF 11/16/18

How was your week?

Better than the president's maybe?  He failed to go to Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day, with no explanation offered. Until today, that is, when an explanation materialized: he was busy doing the country's work, making lots of phone calls and other stuff, and besides, he just visited a cemetery in another country (after not visiting one as scheduled), and doesn't that count?

And then there was the Mueller tweet storm, and how Trump's "easily" finished his written questions, without the help of his lawyers, we're told, even as Rudy Giuliani,one of those lawyers, is expressing concern that there could be 'traps' in the questions. With no timetable from Mueller, it's hard to know when we'll find out if in fact traps were laid and bait taken, or whatever the appropriate metaphor would be.

And finally, there was the order by one of his own judges that people's enemy #1, CNN's Jim Acosta, must have his White House access restored temporarily pending further discussions (or dismissal of the whole thing).  Trump said it was no big deal, while at the same time suggesting that he'll implement rules and regulations for press conferences. Oh, the irony of the anti-regulation president needing to have protective regulations to talk with the press..

You probably had a better week than Britain's PM Theresa May, too. Her Brexit deal gives everyone something to hate, caused bombshell resignations and was reported as chaotic uncertainty. Not bad for someone trying to do something that's almost impossible.

Who actually had a good week?  Brian Kemp, the vote-suppressing former Georgia Secretary of State who will be the state's next governor, now that Stacy Abrams has determined she cannot win.

But to watch an elected official who claims to represent the people in the state baldly pin his hopes for election on suppression of the people's democratic right to vote has been truly appalling.

This is not a speech of concession. Because concessions means to acknowledge an action is right, true or proper. As a woman of conscience and faith, I cannot concede that.

So did the First Lady; she who rules the East Wing got a key West Wing person fired.

And so did Elvis Presley, who along with Babe Ruth, Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, Dallas Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach, Minnesota Vikings star Alan Page and others, was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by president Trump.  The president noted Presley's military service, movie career, award nominations and wins, and "record breaking" crowds.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday (v153)

I wondering, right off the bat, how anyone could have been unmoved by the president's press conference today, in which he mocked Republicans who didn't win their races, took credit for 'resigning' Jeff Flake, attacked the press, refused to answer questions he was asked, answered questions he wasn't asked, pretended that he was concerned about the environment, suggested that he would work in a bipartisan fashion with Nancy Pelosi, threatened to retaliate against any investigations initiated by the House, lied about why he still is not releasing his tax returns, and more. Transcript is here; video is here.

And I'm wondering how many people watched Nancy Pelosi's presser? For her part, she suggested they'd not investigate the president unless there was a reason, offered to work with the Rs, and so on - - what you would expect her to say. She also said she was the best person to be House Speaker.  And it seems she'll keep her leadership role. In addition to Pelosi, who's 78, Steny Hoyer, who's 79, and Jim Clyburn, also 78, want to remain in the top leadership roles. To which I can only sigh.

Pelosi can probably only sigh as well, as there's no question she was kicked out of the news cycle by the forced resignation of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III. That saddens me, the Sessions ouster. He managed to hold on for so long. At least he wasn't dragged out of town to be fired, a la Reince Priebus. I wonder if the first thing he's going to do is go to Disneyland?

I'm also wondering about Chris Collins out in Western NY (or, as Brian Williams allegedly said, the northern tier of upstate NY).  You remember Collins, right? Multiple ethics investigations: a federal indictment for insider trading: tried to get off the ballot, couldn't, and yes - he won.  Well, I should say, he's projected to be the winner. He's up by around 2800 votes, so we'll have to see if there'll be a fight from his opponent. If he wins, does he show up to work with his former colleagues? Or does he fake a pulled muscle or something, I wonder?

And then there's the dead brothel owner who was elected to the State Assembly in Nevada. Dennis Hof, who was a Trump-ish candidate, won with around 68% of the vote. You can wonder away on this one all you want.

Here in New York, our Sonofa Gov won re-election handily; polls in the final days of the campaign showed Andrew Cuomo had only a 13% lead over Marc Molinaro, but in the end he won by over 20%. Three other candidates were also in the race, and in total got under 240K votes - but each had enough to keep their party on the ballot for the next four years.  I wonder what it will take for NYers to boldly go towards a different party, the Libertarians or Greens, or even the new one that just popped up on our radar this year, the Serve America Movement?

Not surprisingly, folks have looked at the electoral map for NY, which shows Cuomo won the cities - Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and NYC - plus Tompkins County (home of Ithaca, one of the most liberal cities in the country), Ulster County, and Long Island. Some are calling for  a new system, so that Cuomo wouldn't be the winner because he didn't win a majority of the counties...  For some, the fact that Cuomo has more than 1.3 million votes than Molinaro apparently is not enough - he has to win the geographical victory as well? I have to wonder about that logic.

How to wrap this all up?  Well, let's go with this: it's expected that by the time is all said and done, over 113 million people will have voted in the midterms. That's 49% of all eligibles. The obvious thing we can wonder is, will these folks stay engaged for the duration?  Will we continue to see women including women veterans and women of color, elected, or is this a one-and-done?  Will Dems leverage their victories from Tuesday into something that's sustainable?

We'll be wondering that at least through the 2020 election cycle, which starts now.

Shaming the VA on Memorial Day

At the end of last month, congressional Republicans released a video commemorating Memorial Day, honoring those who made the ultimate sacrifice -  and, in one case, blasting the VA. Because that's how they roll, I guess.

Here's Rep. Jeff Denham of California, an Air Force vet, speaking in the video:

This is a day of remembrance and honoring those who paid the ultimate sacrifice. But for the last several years, far too often, we're spending time talking about the inadequacies of the VA. 

Sure -  in between solemn ceremonies of remembrance, and collective breath-holding as high school buglers play Taps in cemeteries or at veterans' memorials, and 21-gun salutes at parades in just about every small town in America, and thinking about friends and family members who were lost, we bitch about the VA.

Or, maybe, we do that when we're test-driving mattresses, I don't know.

New VA Secretary David Shulkin, an MD who was appointed as undersecretary by President Obama in 2015, has been making concerted efforts - and progress - since then, well before he was nominated by president Trump to head the agency earlier this year.

In a White House briefing on May 31st, Shulkin vowed

to turn the VA into the organization veterans and families deserve and one that Americans ca take pride in. 

 He mentioned several priorities, such as reducing the backlog of vets waiting for care; the high suicide rate; quality improvements;and faster disability claim processing, and noted

Though we are taking immediate and decisive steps, we are still in critical condition and require intensive care. 

And, he made clear, there was no question he had support from the West Wing, including both Trump and Mike Pence.

Shulkin, the first non-veteran to head the agency, was confirmed unanimously by the Senate to lead the VA. He's also got a long track record of innovating in the healthcare world, usually successfully but sometimes not - which is OK, because the only thing worse than failing is not even trying, right?

In this NY Times story, we learn a lot more about Shulkin and his plans for the VA. For example, Shulkin regularly sees patients, in person and remotely via telemedicine. And he was more than a handful down Trump's list to lead the agency, having been in the VA leadership during the time candidate Trump regularly trashed the agency. 

He's already had the VA facilities post wait times and quality information, and this month the VA will start offering mental health services to vets with less-than-honorable discharges, a group full of folks living with PTSD. He's also working on changing employment practices to allow for quicker hiring and firing; he wants more vets to see private physicians; about a third do now, but he wants to increase that number. And, things like hearing aids and eyeglasses (the latter, Shulkin notes, you can get in an hour in any mall) should be handled outside the system so that more time and resources can be put into treating vets who have been wounded. 

That kind of thinking is consistent with how he handled himself in his previous VA role; it was as under-secretary that he challenged suicide prevention leaders to do more. After being told it would take a "summit meeting" and "10 months" Shulkin gave them one month - by showing them that some 6,000 vets would kill themselves while the VA studied things. They ended up getting it done in a month.  Remembering that meeting with the leadership, Shulkin said

For me, it was a very important day. It taught our people you can act with urgency, and you can resist the temptation to say we work in a system that you can't get to move faster. I think they learned that you can. 

So why does all this matter?

I was looking through old posts, and it was on May 31, 2014 -- three years to the day before Shulkin's briefing -- that I posted about Congress ignoring repeated reports, going back more than a decade at that time, from the VA about the scheduling issues, and how Congress responded to the resignation of General Eric Shinseki, Obama's VA secretary.

From my 2014 post:

Since 2005, the VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued 18 reports that identified, at both the national and local levels, deficiencies in scheduling resulting in lengthy wait times and the negative impact on patient care...

Apparently these "well documented and systemic issues" which the VA OIG has been complaining about for years, were not important enough for Miller's committee to jump on, like they jumped on VA travel expenses, for example. Spending taxpayer dollars on conferences is one thing, but years worth of information on poor treatment of veterans, well that's something else entirely. 

I ended the post quoting former House Speaker John Boehner, and noted that while Shinseki fell on his sword, as usual, Congress pointed theirs at someone else.

General Shinseki has dedicated his life to our country, and we thank him for his service. His resignation, though, does not absolve the president of his responsibility to make things right for our veterans.  Business as usual cannot continue...One personnel change cannot be used as an excuse to paper over a systemic problem. Our veterans deserve better, we'll hold the President accountable until he makes things right.

Fast forward to this year, and we learn that Denham has sponsored or cosponsored bipartisan bills to help move things along at the VA. In essence, he's doing exactly what he should be doing.

Which leaves me to think that everyone would be better served - those we have lost, whom the Memorial Day video was intended to honor, and vets who are still with us and in need of quality services of all kinds - if he just continued to work to make improvements, instead of slamming the agency that is finally, with Congress's help, at least moving in the right direction.

Who Knew This Could Be So Confusing?

Darn it all, just when I think I have this health care stuff figured out, those pesky Republicans go and confuse the HDHP out of me.

Take access to care, for example. Some people believe that TrumpCare, or RyanCare, or the American Health Care Act-- actually, I think I will refer to it as WeDontCare - will take away access for people who are covered under plans paid for with Medicaid.  And according to the bill summary  published on GovTrack, if you are on Medicaid

• The ACA expanded Medicaid eligibility in 32 states that opted into it. (WeDontCare) would reverse the eligibility expansion beginning in 2020 (anyone enrolled by then would remain enrolled) and it would reduce federal support for Medicaid with caps on coverage. And, if you have a gap in coverage for more than one month after the end of December 2019, you won't be able to re-enroll unless you live in a state that wants to pick up the cost. 
• The ACA expanded required benefits under Medicaid, such as mental health and addiction services, which would not longer be required. 

You should recall the president promised - he PROMISED! - he would not cut Medicaid, so it's a little confusing why WeDontCare was estimated by the Congressional Budget Office (well, the early versions of the bill - we don't have an estimate on the one that passed) - to drop some $880B from Medicaid. 

And, to the second bullet above, the president promised - he PROMISED! - to end the opioid epidemic. 

Our terrible drug epidemic will slow down, and ultimately stop.

Not only that, but he announced this plan when he was a candidate which, in addition to building The Big, Beautiful, Busty, Bodacious Border Wall and closing shipping loopholes, would

• Fix the misguided rules and regulations that have made this problem worse: Speed up the approval and availability of abuse-deterring drugs; lift the cap on the number of patients that doctors can treat with recovery medications, provided they follow safe prescribing practices and proper treatment supervision; and reduce the amount of Schedule II opioids (drugs like oxycodone, methadone and fentanyl) that can be made and sold in the US, and 

• Get people struggling with addiction the help they need: Support the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act; expand incentives to use drug courts and mandated treatment; expand access to treatment slots and end Medicaid policies that obstruct inpatient treatment; and distribute widely naloxone/narcan (opioid antidote to treat OD) to first responders and caregivers.

So it seems a bit surprising that he would so strongly support (and celebrate the passage of) a bill that chops a limb or three off Medicaid, and allows coverage for substance abuse treatment under Medicaid to be eliminated, doesn't it? Or is it just me?

And we learned, a long time ago, that people were appalled with conditions at the Veterans Administration, when people were dying waiting for care. You remember that, right?

• Trump says 300,000 veterans died waiting VA care
• Hundreds of veterans died waiting for care at Phoenix VA hospital, watchdog report finds
• Paul Ryan Slams VA Secretary, But Stops Short of Calling for Resignation
• Veterans Are Dying While They're Waiting Months to Get Healthcare From the Government

Those are just a few of the headlines letting us know that people do die waiting for healthcare, and it's a horrible situation, whether it's a veteran or anyone else. It's a situation we all should be concerned about - folks like you and me, and politicians too. Really concerned, not fake concerned or politically expediently concerned. 

So then, what's wrong with this guy, Idaho Congressman Raul Labrador, that he doesn't understand this? When an attendee at Labrador's town hall mentioned her concern that the cuts in Medicare benefits might result in people dying, Labrador disagreed.

That line is do indefensible. Nobody dies because they don't have access to health care.

Well, I guess someone should tell that to all those veterans the Republicans told us about?

No wonder I'm so confused. Am I supposed to believe the Republicans, or the Republicans? Do I believe the promises of the president, and his indignation or do I just throw that all aside?

Of course, for clarity, there's always this interpretation of things.

It is hardly indefensible to say that people don't die from lack of access to healthcare. It is, rather, a basic fact of life. So perhaps Raul should just be honest and say "Sure, some people are going to die, but look at all the money we'd save rich people who don't like paying taxes? Isn't that worth it? They should be proud of their sacrifice! This country would hardly exist were it not for the poor nobly sacrificing their lives to that rich people can be slightly more rich than they would be otherwise!"

Yeah, that seems to help.

My Middle-aged White Lady Perspective: Who Should Leave?

I think I've seen the Tomi Lahren video telling Colin Kaepernick he should leave America if he doesn't like it here, and oh by the way, that he sucks, come across my Facebook feed over 100 times. And tons of memes, and other angry posts echoing that sentiment. And every time I see the video, and the memes and the other angry posts I want to tell them the same thing: why don't YOU leave, if you don't like it here?

Here in America, where corporations deserve protected freedom of speech rights, athletes don't have the right to stay if they want to complain about their perceptions and beliefs about the treatment their fellow Americans receive?  And where a person who hasn't 'directly experienced' what they're protesting, or who 'has money' doesn't deserve to live here if they choose to protest?

People who are angry with the anthem protesters are quick to point out that America's soldiers fought for the flag, and for our country, and that it denigrates and belittles and makes a mockery of their sacrifice to protest the flag or the anthem. And while it is undeniable that nearly three million Americans have been killed or wounded, counted as military casualties of war, were those sacrifices made so that people who dare protest on a very visible and national stage should be told to get out of the country? Is that really the American ideal our soldiers took to battle?

Some will say the sacrifices were made by order not by choice, because many of those injured and lost were drafted; that they fought for their own lives as much as they did for our country. Others maintain that the majority of the battles we've fought since our founding were not so much defending our freedoms but instead, trying to give our freedoms to others around the world. And whether or not you believe either of those theories, can you deny that the people who fought the hardest for our freedoms were those who outlined them in our Bill of Rights and the Constitution?

Even many veterans say that, while they may disagree with the nature of the protest, the right to do it belongs to all Americans, including those who are dissatisfied with the government, or aspects of our culture, or with the police, or with institutionalized racism, or any of the many things about which we protest.

Further, I maintain that if we were to ask them, our veterans would more likely say they fought for the rights of Colin Kaepernick than those of Hobby Lobby and other corporations, would you agree?

The people who want anthem protesters to leave America, or who feel this is just one more insult and abomination of the Obama Administration might want to look at our history, and a couple of Supreme Court decisions  that contained language relevant to what we're looking at today. The cases were highlighted in this article on The New Yorker's web page last week.

The cases both involved children of Jehovah's Witness families who refused to salute the flag or pledge allegiance to it, those activities being incongruous with their faith. In both cases, the children were kicked out of school for their actions.

In the first case, 1940's Minersville vs. Board of Education,the family sued because they had to pay to educate their children at private schools, after they were expelled and because their First Amendment rights were infringed.The court ruled 8-1 that kicking the kids out of school for not pledging and saluting did not violate their freedoms of religion and speech. Writing the opinion, Justice Felix Frankfurter noted, among other things,

Conscientious scruples have not, in the course of the long struggle for religious toleration, relieved the individual from obedience to a general law not aimed at the promotion of restriction of religious beliefs... National unity is the basis of national security... The influences which help toward a common feeling for the common country are manifold. Some may seem harsh, and others no doubt are foolish. Surely, however, the end is legitimate.

Bottom line: your deeply held beliefs notwithstanding, all children must pledge their allegiance, or else. Sort of sounds like Tomi and The Memes, doesn't it?

The second case, West Virginia Board of Education vs. Barnette, was decided only three years later, in the build up to World War II. The decision this time? Six to three in support of the Barnette sisters that their expulsion was wrong. From the majority opinion, written by Justice Robert Jackson, we learn this (emphasis added):

To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous, instead of a compulsory routine, is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds.

What (slaps head as if in a V8 commercial)? How simple is that concept, that patriotism will not come to an end simply because Colin Kaepernick doesn't stand for the national anthem?

We can have intellectual individualism and the rich cultural diversities that we owe to exceptional minds only at the price of occasional eccentricity and abnormal attitudes. When they are so harmless to others or to the State as those we deal with here, the price is not too great.

Sitting or kneeling, raising a fist or linking arms during the National Anthem? Are those harmful acts, to others or to the State? Of course not. They're not harmful when done in the NFL, or in Major League Soccer, or in one of my local high schools.

They are acts that jeopardize nothing, other than perhaps some sponsorship dollars, maybe some beer sales if people actually get mad enough to stay at home instead of going to an NFL game. Staying at home, mind you, where no one will ever know whether they're patriotically standing for the anthem in their living room.

But freedom to differ is not limited to things that do not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.  

The 'existing order' is that everyone stand, regardless of the fervor of their patriotism, or how much they truly value our freedoms, or the extent to which they believe those freedoms extend to all Americans. We have no idea, looking around, who really believes what, or who loves our country - except Colin Kaepernick and those who protest with him.

The substance of freedom is not kicking out those who would publicly protest the symbols of our country, rather than hiding in a corner somewhere out of sight, out of mind and airing their grievances to no one. No - that is the shadow of freedom Justice Jackson told us about in 1943.

From my middle aged white lady perspective, perhaps it's the people who cannot differentiate between the shadow and the substance who are the ones who should leave.

Restoring Honor?

Entertainer Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor rally in Washington last Saturday was billed as a non-political event – no signs, no rallying cries, none of the Tea Party trappings we’ve come to expect when Beck gets together with his friends. Of course, folks were asked specifically NOT to bring their signs, so I guess it’s a testament to Beck’s command of his forces that they listened to him. Saturday being August 28th, note there was a callout in the closing prayer (delivered by a war veteran, natch) to Romans 8:28. Here’s the reference: “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.”

Beck’s keynote address was not specifically political, it was more a revival speech, complete with his trademark on-the-verge-of-tears moments, such as when he talked about ‘looking for the next George Washington’ in the audience. The speech seemed to be nothing more than an hour’s worth of motivation on a nice day in the nation’s capital, complete with flags, historical references, revered monuments, and even a guy in a tri-cornered hat popping up on the big screen every now and then.

So if it wasn’t political, what was the rally all about? I’ve listened to his keynote address a couple of times, my first heavy indoctrination of Beck-speak. Given that 8/28 is already a special day in our history, the anniversary of Martin Luther King 's I Have a Dream speech, there were some doubters about the supposed ‘divine intervention’ that led him to have his rally, where he had it, when he had it. Not surprisingly, Beck echoed several of King’s themes, especially as the self-professed reclaimer of the civil rights movement. Here’re a few examples:

• King: We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy.
• Beck: This day is a day that we can start the heart of America again… We have a choice today… We can either look at our scars, look at the scars of our nation… we have a choice today to either let those scars crush us, or redeem us… We are gathered here today, in a hallowed spot. 
• King: But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.
• Beck: There is growing hatred in the country – we must be better than what we have allowed ourselves to become. We must get the poison of hatred out of us – no matter what anyone may say or do, no matter what anyone smears or lies or throws our way, or any American’s way…we must look to God and look to love, we must defend those we disagree with, but are honest and have integrity.
• King: And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back.
• Beck: It matters not where we are, it matters not where we have been, it matters what we are doing today that makes a difference.

He spoke of Washington, and Lincoln, and sounded like a Kennedy or two:

• Ted Kennedy: For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.
• Beck: It does not end here, it shall not end now, not in my generation or your generation, it is up to us…
• John Kennedy: Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.
• Beck: Look forward, look west, look to the heavens, look to God… Make your choice… We as individuals must be good so America can be great… One man can change the world… That man or woman is you – you make the difference… Do not look to someone else, look to yourself... Pick up your stick and stand!

Beck also quoted several of our "American scriptures" - The Gettysburg Address, Lincoln’s second inaugural, the Constitution among them - which he indicted were "living scriptures as are all scriptures." These included ‘all men are created equal’ and ‘government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth.”  He spoke of  “the American Experiment, the idea that man can rule himself, rather than being ruled by someone” as the reason for which Lincoln, and Washington, and WWII vets and Korean War vets and Vietnam War veterans gave their lives; he reminded us to teach someone to fish, rather than simply giving them fish to eat. 

He also reminded attendees or visitors to his website to donate to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, to help the families of veterans. While he was happy to report that $5.5 million was raised for the Foundation, note this generous disclaimer on the rally website: 

The purchase of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is not a donation to SOWF, but all net proceeds from the sale of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is being donated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. All contributions made to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (SOWF) will first be applied to the costs of the Restoring Honor Rally taking place on August 28, 2010. All contributions in excess of these costs will then be retained by the SOWF.

He also told us that “there’s a lot we can disagree on, but our values and our principles can unite us” and that we must discover them again.  Pretty benign stuff, right?

But does his public persona live up to the standards he’s asking us to take forward from the rally? Some would say no, based on the information found here, just one of several places where Beck’s statements are debunked or exposed. He’s on occasion a racist, revisionist, elitist, anti-woman, anti-poor, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, communist exposer… oh, and on the political side, a Constitutionalist, big-government-hating gun-rights-supporting conservative.

At the same time he urges us to return to the America we were right after 9/11 – “politics didn’t matter, color didn’t matter, didn’t matter if we were poor or rich, we were Americans standing together”, he encourages us via his 9/12 project to ask ourselves a few questions:

• Do you watch the direction that America is being taken in and feel powerless to stop it?
• Do you believe that your voice isn’t loud enough to be heard above the noise anymore?
• Do you read the headlines everyday and feel an empty pit in your stomach… as if you’re completely alone?

If you’ve answered YES, then you’ve fallen for the Wizard of Oz lie. While the voices you hear in the distance may sound intimidating, as if they surround us from all sides—the reality is very different. Once you pull back the curtain, you realize that there are only a few people pressing the buttons, and their voices are weak. The truth is that they don’t surround us at all. We surround them.

Yep. Turn to God. All men are created equal. Government of the people, by the people, for the people. Our principles will unite us. I only hope that folks who buy into the 8/28 speech – particularly the uninitiated - are aware of this other side of Beck, the real side, and find the right path to take as they travel with their stick.