4.18.21: The Transition is Us in the Midst of Multiple Crises

Princeton University professor, Eddie Glaude, Jr. described the state of police reform as in an interregum, which is normally defined as when the usual state of government functioning is suspended in the face of a crisis. A transition period, if you will. Applied to policing, we may be in that state in terms of thinking about policing in this country, but in the practical sense, sadly, it's business as usual. Police using excessive force continues unabated.

Today's panel weighed in with a multitude of reasons, but there's one aspect that hasn't been clearly stated as to why we are continually seeing videos of police using excessive force and that is perhaps because they are afraid and uncertain, uncertain that the person they're encountering has a gun. 

And it's directly related to mass shootings - 147 since the beginning of the year - defined as 4 or more people shot. It's entirely too easy to get a gun in the United States and if an individual is determined to get one, ultimately it will not be difficult to attain so everyone and anyone can have a gun on them at any given time.  400 million guns in circulation for a population of 332 million... Someone's going to get shot.

Echoing our column from a few weeks ago, until we think about gun safety as a public health issue as Dr. Anthony Fauci described it, these crises of police shooting people and mass shootings will continue with more frequency. And one more thing about the Second Amendment in particular: There is the widely held belief in the United States that owning a gun is a fundamental right of Americans, like free speech, but that simply is not true. One could be in jail and still exercise free speech, but you can not own a gun in jail. That's a simplistic example, but suitable.

And speaking of Dr. Fauci and public health, how is wearing a mask controversial even when you have been vaccinated when it's explained so easily by Dr. Fauci. Paraphrasing, if you're vaccinated you still may contract Covid-19 but not have any symptoms because you're vaccinated. However, if you're not wearing a mask you may give the virus to someone who is not vaccinated and or still susceptible to contracting it. Basically, look out for your neighbor, something not in vogue at the moment it seems, especially on the part of 43% of Republicans who said they will not get vaccinated.  Easily explained in two sentences.

As for the pause of the Johnson & Johnson single shot vaccine, it is concerning that a few individuals have died and suffer from blood clots from getting the shot. This side effect is, frankly, a major concern make no mistake and yes, officials including Dr. Fauci are going to be very cautious in how they discuss this, as he was today because of the possibility of blood clots forming, then traveling quickly to the brain, which kills you. But before you go off the deep end with that notion, keep in mind that this is eight people among 7 million who have received the shot. Would this column take that shot? Yes, if as Dr. Fauci described that they can identify preexisting conditions that complicate the effect on the body and if doctors therefore know how to treat it.

Dr. Fauci said that you're at low risk of contracting the virus when flying if you have been vaccinated and said that it is the risk that you're comfortable with. We would suggest thinking in those same terms when considering getting the J&J vaccine.

As for the spike in cases and increased hospitalizations in Michigan, it's recommended by the CDC (scientists) that parts of the state should shut down. Enter Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D), who Chuck Todd pressed her on previous statements of following science and now not so much. Governor Whitmer explained that she now has fewer tools at her disposal for shutdowns because her Republican-controlled state house sued her over this authority, which the Michigan Supreme Court upheld. Oh, and there also that little thing of a kidnapping and execution plot against the governor over such restrictions. Seems to this column that she is trying to do the right thing in the face of so much wrong. As former Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH) said of Mr. Todd, he can be a 'shit.' 

And speaking of shit, this brings us to the newly-formed America First Caucus made up of House Republicans. Contained within their platform are the following:

Seriously?

"Common Respect for uniquely Anglo-Saxon political traditions?" What the eff does that mean? Infrastructure that reflect European architecture, like buildings... Does that include statues as well? Not to mention that some of those European designs, though beautiful, probably aren't the most environmentally sound, but whatever. Lastly, in decreasing the capital to labor ratio for post-1965 immigrants, which would disproportionately effect the Asian-American community who has predominated in business since 1965 and this statement limits their ability to raise capital even though they are Americans so the effect of this would be putting a group of individuals at t a disadvantage simply based on race. These excerpts can be colloquially explained  inasmuch as in the U.S. White political traditions should dominate, the buildings throughout the country should reflect white America and White America should have an advantage when it comes to wealth. To quote Mr. Boehner once more, "this is the nuttiest thing I've ever seen."

Punchbowl News' Anna Palmer, who broke this story explained that the problem is that this isn't just one individual but a group and it will be difficult for Republican leadership to distance itself from such a caucus. The insight comes from David French who explained that these nativist ideas predominate in Republican-controlled state houses around the country and if national representative from such states denounce the craziness, they are censured, ostracized, and primaried. Maybe this isn't becoming the mainstream, like Mr. Todd suggested, but it's certainly a vocal presence that Republican leadership now has to deal with. We'll just say that the Republican party writ large is in an interregum. 

The question remains that with all these crises going on at once, is the country is a series of interregums or just one giant one? This transition is us in the midst of multiple crises.

Panel: Kristen Welker, NBC News; Eddie Glaude, Jr., Princeton University; Anna Palmer, Punchbowl News; David French, The Dispatch

4.11.21: The Pulse of U.S. Foreign Policy is Finally Responsive

It's been overdue that the focus of this column and the media in the U.S. started to turn its attention to foreign policy, especially since for the last four years, we've been focused an incompetent boob in the White House who had no foreign policy, to which to speak.

With a decimated internal bureaucracy and a demoralized State Department, not to mention navigating the Covid environment domestically and with no transition, the Administration leadership has been behind in proactively responding internationally. Leading the rebuilding of the State Department - enter the professionals finally - is Secretary of State Anthony Blinken. The foreign policy pulse of the U.S. is once again responsive.

As America's top diplomat you can imagine his answers in today's interview were firm but light on specifics and more like intention signaling, hence diplomatic. One area in particular where the U.S. is now in a diplomatic full-court press is in Afghanistan, otherwise known as America's longest war where without a diplomatic solution there's no getting out. 

In terms of vaccinations, the Administration's strategy has been sound in so much as it's been rolling out the vaccines in the United States and ensuring enough stock domestically. However, Secretary Blinken also explained that taking a lead in vaccinating the world and helping other countries, it will help us here at home. The ancillary benefit of helping other countries is that it will build good will while serving the United States' own interests. The restoring of trust in U.S. leadership is not to be downplayed.

This is especially true when it comes to Russia and China policy. Before we dive into that there was one subject there wasn't time for which was on the restart of nuclear talks with Iran. The outcome of these initial talks are of course in grave doubt because of distrust on both sides. And let's be frank, if you're the Iranian regime and you negotiate a halt to nuclear weapons production with one administration and the next one withdraws from the agreement, how can you be sure it's not going to happen again? With that question out there, it's better to be at the table talking than to stay standing behind blinding ideological curtains. 

The panel largely agreed that the Biden Administration's policy toward Russia is essentially the same as the prior two administrations, with Pentagon Reporter for The New York Times, Helene Cooper, explaining that the thinking really hasn't changed. Secretary Blinken could only say that the Administration is maintaining its stance on Crimea and that they're watching what's going at the Russian-Ukraine border and troop buildups. PBS's Amna Nawaz noted that since Ukraine is not a NATO member that the United States isn't obligated to defend the country, which is the case but if the Putin regime decides to move into Ukraine then the United States should respond. In a more colloquial way of explaining, the United States, being sick and tired of Russia hacks, influence campaigns, human plants and disinformation, needs to flex its cyber muscle in response. Undoubtedly, some strong Western allies would be on board with a coordinated strategy. 

Putin's iron grip on the Russia people is ever slipping and it's two-fold - the more repression of his own people because of poor domestic performance - personified by opposition leader Alexny Navalny - will erode his power. This is in addition to the flawed thinking that territorial expansion of influence militarily will boost prospects at home.

And speaking of repression, that brings us to China, which when it's diplomats sat down with Secretary Blinken and other top U.S. officials in Alaska earlier this year they were indignant when the U.S. called them out on their treatment of the Uighors population because of the United States own treatment of Native Americans, African Americans and immigrants at its border. Well, there's a tit for tat for you...

But here's the rub... in the United States there is recognition of its dark chapters and the open dialogue with the hope of one day of reconciling with that darkness. Conversely, Uighurs in China have no voice and are treated inhumanely in a governmental systematic way that U.S. Secretary of State Blinken described as genocide. 

Diplomatically, that's very strong language, tough talk if you will and that's how Ms. Cooper described the Pentagon and State Department's talk on China with regard to its increased military naval activity off the coast of Taiwan. But it's just that, only that.. tough talk.

However, in today's interview Secretary Blinken said (and reiterated) that China changing the status quo with regard to Taiwan militarily would be a "serious mistake." He wouldn't go so far as to say that the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily, but he response left little room for any other interpretation. 

Maybe right now, the United States is only talking tough with China and not really doing anything. However, Secretary Blinken certainly indicated a willingness to also take action to back up those words with regard to Taiwan because we can not help but remember the last administration and its despicably impotent (non-existent) response to China and its repression of Hong Kong. 

Progress is small steps and the U.S. is starting to affirm its footing.

Panel: Helene Cooper, The New York Times; Ashley Parker, The Washington Post; Amna Nawaz, PBS News Hour; Peter Alexander, NBC News

3.28.21: So Much Death, Violence and Acrimony Over A Single Sentence

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This is exactly how it is written in the Constitution - punctuation, capital letters and all. One sentence.

When you think about, it's kind of crazy that so much death, violence and acrimony has occurred in this country over one sentence. 

Scholars and Constitutional lawyers and politicians and everyone in between have made arguments to how exactly apply that one sentence into law. Meanwhile... Shootings... Masses of them... Masses of mass shootings. What could we possibly contribute here?

Well, we look at from a grammatical point of view. Those two clauses within the commas? Because they're separated out by commas was the intent that the two were conditions that could change. Those two clauses could be removed and the one sentence would still make sense. A well regulated Militia shall not be infringed. But what does that even mean? Every definition of 'militia' contains some form of the word 'citizen.' If you were to change the word 'militia' to say, 'citizenry' then things would be more applicable to the 21st century. But the big however here, is that we still have the words well regulated. 

No matter how you hash up that sentence the words 'well regulated' are intended to be essential to the sentence, and well regulated we certainly are not. The subtle bit of 'Frank Luntz-like' strategy of reframing the debate terminology is genuinely helpful - from gun control to gun safety. We definitely need more gun safety because things are out of control. And nowhere in that sentence, especially given the 'well regulated' language, does it give the citizenry the civil right to own a gun.

Judging from their respective interviews, Senators Chris Murphy (D-CT) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), incremental steps are the only way forward on gun safety measures, starting with background checks that 90 percent of Americans support. Other reasonable measures could be instituted such as a waiting period (if only for 2 days) and a permit. How modest is that? Republican strategist Al Cardenas later in the panel discussion called for an even stricter measure on assault rifles. However, any measure that mentions restrictions on assault rifles is DOA for Senate Republicans and Joe Manchin. With incremental measures, Mr. Murphy feels that there are 60 votes in the Senate. We'll see...

Mr. Murphy also feels that this could be an opportunity to quell the outcry for the end of the filibuster as passing gun safety legislation could get 60 votes. You would think that modest proposals could get say 70 votes, but even 60 seems like one is setting an unreasonable goal. It's also worth noting here that Mr. Toomey has it wrong when it comes to the filibuster and race. While the filibuster in and of itself isn't racist, it has been a tool throughout its existence for racist and suppressive purposes. You really can't get around that. But even more disappointing was Mr. Toomey's defense of restrictive voting laws that are designed to make it more difficult for minorities to vote.

More difficult to vote, get a driver's license, a fishing license or marriage license than it is to buy a gun. The least we can do is to require similar in terms of guns. We still wouldn't be well regulated but at least better. 

NBC's Vicky Nguyen gave us the easily digestible, but hard to swallow, fact that while Americans make up 4 percent of the population, we own 44 percent of the worlds guns. When Senator Toomey says we do not have too many guns in circulation - over 400 million at this point - one has to wonder how many is too much for him? A buy back program would also be a reasonable step - get guns off the street and put money in people's pockets. Hmmm...

Even after twenty first graders and 17 high school students were gunned down, followed by 61 people people in Las Vegas followed by another 23 in El Paso all the way up to last week in Atlanta and Boulder, we still can not agree on the meaning of one sentence.

Panel: Vicky Nguyen, NBC News; Heather McGhee, Color of Change; Peter Baker, The New York Times; Al Cardenas, Republican Strategist 

 

 

3.21.21: Through Lines Through the U.S.

When you have Princeton professor of distinction like Eddie Glaude Jr., the head of African Studies, the theme for a column easily comes into focus, and that is of 'through lines.' Mr. Glaude explained that the through line of the hour of this week's "Meet The Press" was the anxiety of the loss of whiteness" in the country. From immigration to the surge in domestic terror threats to voting rights to attacks on Asian Americans, white grievance seems to be fueling this domestic unrest and it's not a stretch to make that conclusion. Interestingly, The Nevada Independent's Jon Rolston (dean of Nevada political reporting) said that his through line was that 'words matter,' a more tempered response to accommodate white viewers.

While Mr. Glaude's explanation may be uncomfortable for some to hear, it's necessary because just as Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan explained, if there is a particular community of people saying that they feel under assault or intimidation then you should stop and listen to them. 

This brings us to the last topic first, the shooting in the Atlanta area that left 8 people dead, six of whom were of Asian descent. The reports, including from the shooter's roommate, say that this 21-year old man had a sex addiction and because of his strict religious upbringing, his guilt was so overwhelming that he went on a murderous spree to eliminate people that temped him. There are so many things in just that sentence that speak of societal ills that it's too much for even a series of columns, however, some have opined in the news media that this was not racially motivated, necessarily. 

Consider perhaps why this young man went to Asian spas... Because he fetishized Asian women and saw them as a means to his personal ends, not as people essentially dehumanizing them. When taking that into account, race certainly plays a role in these killings.

Then there's the elephant in the room of this tragedy, which Senator Rafael Warnock (D-GA) summed up best, that an individual can buy a gun and hours later use it to kill eight people but citizens cannot register and vote on the same day. There's definitely something wrong.

The Senator from Georgia makes a powerful case that there should be a cut-out in the filibuster rule for voting rights because of its fundamental nature to our democracy. It shouldn't even be a partisan issue but it is because of a Republican party that has embraced white grievance politics, embedded deep by the previous president. Voting rights restrictions are being put in place because the Republican party writ large is running out of ideas and isn't bringing more voters to its side so they're going back to trying to disenfranchising minority voters, especially in Georgia. African-Americans have seen their voting rights under attack since the country's inception. We should listen to Senator Warnock.

As for retiring Senator Roy Blount (R-MO), he comes from a tradition that no longer exists and votes like reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act, once a no-brainer for a 'yes' vote, is now a cloture vote. He wants to make that 'yes' because he knows it's coming and but he's also smart enough to know that his unblemished election streak (that he indeed referenced) would come to and end for that vote, among others. Nor does he want to have a primary challenger. 

When asked by Chuck Todd if he agreed more with Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) or fmr. president George W. Bush on whether the attack on the Capitol was by 'people who love their county' or by 'hostile forces' as the fmr. president described it, Mr. Blount agreed with the former president. His other conundrum is on immigration in which he also agreed with President Bush that it has been over-politicized and a complicated issue. 

Ms. Noonan explained that Congress has found a way every time immigration reform comes up in the last 20 years - more actually - it has found a way to screw it up and hence nothing gets done. And contrary to pundits' discussions about the rhetoric and the messaging from the Biden Administration, the surge at the border was coming from the day the former president wasn't reelected. 

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas explained that the previous administration dismantled many of the policies concerning the border and immigration as a whole. We're willing to give the new administration a little time, but not much. More time is needed because unlike other issues, there is a distinct human factor of course with immigration. The secretary explained that the border is closed and they are expelling single adults and have FEMA working on the crisis of unaccompanied children. What gets no more time is essentially this media blackout. As NBC's Julia Ainsley accurately assessed, this isn't the issue the Administration wants to talk about, but it's the one they're confronted with. 

So if there's a through line for us during today's "Meet The Press" it would be that we have to stop dehumanizing people and give more embrace to the ideal of the melting pot. Idealistic, but that's what you get on the second day of spring.

Panel: Julia Ainsley, NBC News; Peggy Noonan, The Wall Street Journal; Eddie Glaude, Jr., Princeton University; Jon Ralston, The Nevada Independent

3.14.21: All Republicans Have Left Is 'No'

"It makes absolutely no sense to me that people aren't getting vaccinated because of political reasons," to cite Dr. Fauci today. And yet, eighty-one percent of Republicans who voted for Trump said in a poll that they would not get vaccinated. One must admit that that is a pretzel logic that's difficult to digest, but it's the lingering legacy of the last administration.

Instead of mobilizing constituents in the same of public health, Republican-controlled state houses are enacting laws to restrict voting, weighted toward disenfranchising people of color. Two hundred, sixty new voter-restriction laws in 43 states with Georgia at the epicenter, but the state's Lt. Governor, Geoff Duncan, isn't having it. He called the new voter laws proposed by state Republicans a solution in search of a problem. In addition, Mr. Duncan explained that the laws do not remedy the 'problem,' which Republicans are alleging - voter fraud.  

Void of ideas and the ability to govern, it seems like Republicans are emptying their pockets of any political power currency they have left which is their ability to change voting laws to make it more difficult for people of color (who predominantly support Democrats) from voting.

Stacey Abrams, founder of Fair Fight, described these laws as the most repressive since the Jim Crow era and said that Congress, specifically the Senate, needs to do away with the filibuster for voting laws in light of the House passing HR 1. She also explained that her focus is on our democracy, not just voting rights, because she strongly believes that these newly created laws are undemocratic. In a sense she is correct because the goal of all these laws in essence is to have the minority rule the majority.

However, the Senate isn't going to get rid of the filibuster for that, simply not going to happen. The column has long felt that Democrats always want to go big, which isn't an issue, but they go too big and then the load gets dropped on their foot. With that in mind, what if the Democratically controlled House passed a law that made the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November every four years a national holiday? (As it should be.) Instead of the one killer blow, maybe they should try a death-by-1,000-cuts strategy. Make it more difficult for Republicans to say 'no.' And in terms of the filibuster, Senators should be forced to actually do it instead of just threatening. Force them to stand on the Senate floor for 18 hours giving a speech. Some of the octogenarian Senators will think twice.  

To bring it full circle, Dr. Fauci doesn't understand how wearing a mask or taking a vaccine could be political, but for Republicans it has to be all cynical politics - power for the sake of power. With a party bankrupt of ideas as they are, all they is no.

Panel: Hallie Jackson, NBC News; Maria Teresa Kumar, Voto Latino; Lanhee Chen, Hoover Institute; John Heilemann, NBC News

3.7.21: Has Everyone Gone Home A Little Unhappy? Good.

He's a Democrat and he's holding up the bill... How dare he? 

This is where we are that if a Senator, in this case Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), who supports the $1.9 trillion Covid Relief bill sees something added late in the process that he doesn't like and calls it out, parts of people's brains begin to melt sending the neocortex into full retreat. 

Take a breath...

This shouldn't be a problem and it isn't. Yes, there is an urgency to passing this bill because employment benefits for millions are going to run out in a week, but Democrats should appreciate having a check like Senator Manchin in their party. Just as he explained today to Chuck Todd, he may not always heed Republican Senators' advice or counsel but he wants to hear what they have to say, Democrats should do the same with Mr. Manchin. Granted, the senator from West Virginia has incredible leverage to have his voice heard called 'the deciding vote' for the Democratic agenda. 

This is a good example of compromise (at least among Democrats) because the bill was passed in the Senate, but some things had to be left out effectively leaving all interlocutors a little disappointed. 

With that mind, not raising the minimum wage is something in which his column disagrees with Senator Manchin Senate and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ). We get it that they are trying to thread the needle that raising the minimum wage isn't directly related to Covid relief and the parliamentarian gave them an out if they wanted, but this was a political needle so that conservative donors in their respective states don't come after them for it. Take that as you will.

As we've said in the past, raising the minimum wage will not be as hard on businesses as the rhetoric allows, but what it does do is giving a better baseline to reach and negotiate for better opportunity. The way we see it is that Republicans in Congress take the position that there shouldn't even be a minimum wage as most people make more than $15 an hour... Most people that they know.  Democrats on the other hand that there should be a minimum wage and that wage should be enough so that you're not working 40 hours per week and still living in poverty, as opposed to just the minimum that an employer is obligated to pay a worker. When considering that nuance, you're bound to end up with some 'no' votes. [Aside: as for the aforementioned, Senator Sinema and her 'no' vote on the minimum wage increase, appreciable sass but very poorly timed.]

As for the price tag of this Covid Relief bill - $1.9 trillion - it's an eye-opener for sure and at the top of the program Mr. Todd mentioned that we've thrown $6 trillion at the pandemic in a year, which definitely raises more than an eyebrow. When Danielle Pletka brought up this very fact, we were right on the same page. The cold fact is that there is no moving on from the pandemic unless we spend this money, and the question has to be asked of how the previous $4.1 trillion was spend - it wasn't all direct payments.

Also, it's interesting to note that when it comes to spending, Republicans and Democrats spend the same amounts - the big differences are to whom and the duration of time. Republicans when in power will give a $2 trillion tax cut to the richest one percent over the course of ten years whereas Democrats will give the same amount to the middle class and working poor immediately.

This bill is designed to do two things: 1) get the pandemic under control and get the population vaccinated and 2) create an economic 'reset' for all the millions of Americans who have suffered to make them somewhat whole again.

If you don't think that should be the goal of the government, just remember that one day you woke up and heard that Amazon effectively pays zero in federal income tax, a company that could pretty much fund the direct payments with one quarter's revenue. 

Yeah, that's what we thought - spend the money.

Panel: Yamiche Alcindor, PBS News Hour; Danielle Pletka, American Enterprise Institute; Jeh Johnson, fmr. Secretary Homeland Security; Jonathan Allen, NBC News

One more thing...
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo... should resign his office immediately. Even if you're a supporter of the governor think about it - the remainder of his current term will not be centered on the greater good of the state and will only serve to distract from governing. The credibility of these women's stories is unequivocal, but even with that aside, Governor Cuomo should not be getting his due process at the expense of the citizens of New York state. A true leader would understand this, the people of the state are more important than one man's political self preservation. (Seriously, who do you think we are? Senate Republicans?)

.

2.28.21: "Protecting People is Protecting the Economy"

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said that he had spoken with President Biden this week and we wonder if he gave him that very simple, yet effective messaging nugget that he put forth on today's program, which was "Protecting people is protecting the economy." Great messaging if you're trying to pass a $1.9 trillion Covid relief package through Congress. Don't you think?

The two main concerns with regard to the bill are that it will make the total government layout $6 trillion in one calendar year, as Chuck Todd pointed out during the discussion, and the other is the inflation that could be caused by infusing so much liquid into an economy that is beginning to recover as Brett Stephens mentioned.

Both parties have been exploding the national debt over the decades and one can only wonder when that day of reckoning will come when the interest payments become unmanageable. Inflation is a concern but with smart fiscal policy it can be mitigated. Pricing going up while wages stay flat so that you're dollar covers less - inflation - has been going on for some time now (an understatement), but if the concern is Venezuela-type inflation, that worry is overblown.

The economy is starting to recover, but the recovery will certainly be disproportionate in who it benefits without the Covid relief bill passing. The relief package consists of elements that directly address Covid efforts - vaccine distribution, testing, tracing, PPE, et al, but its also designed to make people and state governments whole again. It's this part of the bill that Republicans in Congress object to even though Republican governors and mayors are in favor of its passage because they know they need the help to balance their budgets and prevent layoffs of public employees like firemen and police. Some Texas elected officials have stated that people are on their own as it isn't the job of the government to help, then again their not looking at any hurting individual directly in the eye and saying that.

Conservative concern over fiscal policy as mentioned above does need to be seriously considered, however, Republicans can not claim fiscal responsibility or responsibility for much at all if you consider how a Republican president and Senate sat on their hands for the better part of a year while hundreds of thousands died. If they had taken the pandemic seriously, maybe this relief package wouldn't have been necessary, but given where we are now it is absolutely necessary.

The relief package could be all for not if we do not continue to practice mitigation efforts as Dr. Fauci instructed because as he explained the baseline for cases per day is still way too high. He also explained that with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine coming online, productive and distribution will be ramping up even more. Basically, he's telling us we're in a race to get as many people vaccinated as possible as quickly as possible because let's face it, the American people writ large can not be counted on to do the right thing and continue strict mitigation measures. Will they? Not bloody likely, as the saying goes.

We mentioned earlier that Republican leaders and the local and state level want the relief package to pass and in polls 60% of Republican voters want it as well so why didn't Republicans in the House vote for the bill? Why is it projected that none of the Republicans Senators will vote for it either? For Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT) and a select few others, it is about fiscal issues, but for most all the others it's about not giving President Biden a political win under the guise of fiscal responsibility. If Republicans vote for a bill put forward by the Biden Administration then that says to the base that they are legitimizing the Biden presidency, which is a no-no in Trump world, or at CPAC occurring as we write this. 

Republicans should put their complaints about the Biden Administration not being bipartisan until all of them say aloud that Joe Biden is president. It's clearly apparent that they haven't acknowledged basic civics.

Panel: Carol Lee, NBC News; Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post; Brett Stephens, The New York Times; O. Kay Henderson, Radio Iowa Network

One more thing...
How scary is this? A golden Trump statue at CPAC, a false idol compared to the golden calf. As North Dakota governor Kristi Noem (R) said, they've become what they behold... Sheep.

Not to mention the fact that Donald Trump would never ever be seen in shorts and flip-flops, please.

2.21.21: The Mess We're All In

500,000. Americans. Dead.

(WWII - 406,000 American soldier deaths.) 

"This is historic. We'll be talking about it decades and decades from now," Dr. Anthony Fauci said today of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

This is the state we're in.

One can not emphasize enough that the scale of death from Covid-19 didn't have to be. The history that Dr. Fauci is referring to, through this column's lens, is the utter failure of leadership and the blatant disregard for American life on the part of the 45th president not taking the pandemic seriously. He will be subject to history's harshest light. Unforgivable, not to mention a violation of his oath as president.

With regard to schools reopening, what caught our attention was United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten saying that they now had a roadmap to follow from the CDC, which means that previously there wasn't one. If the CDC guidelines are followed, schools should reopen and the vaccination strategy will catch up. However, as Dr. Fauci noted, you can not give a number or percentage as to how many schools should be open or the ratio of hybrid learning as each community is different and the decision factors for parents and teachers vary, which is natural. In addition to mask-wearing and mitigation, Ms. Weingarten said that teachers are scared because of the health risks to themselves their families, understandably, so facts and education are needed to combat the fear. 

It's a saddeningly, recurrent theme that has permeated American life over the last 5 years and it will take as much collective mental effort as there is money to move past this mindset. That's not to say that one should not be concerned about getting Covid, it just means educating and understanding more as Dr. Fauci and Ms. Weintgarten suggest to be smarter and more compassionate as we move forward. 

Add to the state the mess with Texas.

Fmr. Congressman Will Hurd said that the former president should little or no part all at in the party moving forward, but he is clearly in a small minority within the Republican caucus. However, it's precisely this strictly politically-focused leadership, as opposed to policy-oriented governing, that sees Texas in the mess it's in at this moment. When Chuck Todd asked Mr. Hurd if it was preventable, he said that it was 100% preventable and responsible is a lack of leadership and long term planning. Harsh and direct, but what do you expect when the person answering the question is currently boiling water for his family like millions of other Texans right now. 

Governance under Republican leadership whether in Texas or anywhere else has move off the notion that there only there to attain power and fight culture wars. Former North Carolina governor Pat McCrory said that Republicans will heal themselves by uniting on the issues [read: opposition to any Democratic proposal]. He explained that the Republican party  is going through a process of anger, blaming and disappointment right now just as the Democrats did in 2016. Democratic strategist Cornell Belcher disagreed because a plurality of Democrats weren't considering breaking from the party, which is the case right now with the Republicans.

USA Today's Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page rattled off some disturbing statistics, namely that 58% of Trump supporters think that the January 6th siege on the Capitol was committed by Antifa. This is so absurd that one can hardly speak to this, to say something that would convince one person of the 58% otherwise.

So Mr. McCrory's calculus is off. How do you unify around issues when you can't agree on what the facts on those issues are, starting with the fact that Joe Biden was fairly elected President of the United States.

Unfortunately for all of us, until this cracked fault line is reckoned with, state and federal Republican leaders will only serve to prolong the mess we're in.

 

Panel: Kristen Welker, NBC News; Susan Paige, USA Today; Cornell Belcher, Democratic Strategist; Pat McCrory, fmr. North Carolina Governor

2.14.21: Yes, History will be the judge, but it has already made its ruling

It's often said lately that the Republican party isn't operating on the same set of facts that the rest of us are operating on, an alternative reality if you will. Democrats and their supporters leap into that alternative reality as well in thinking that Republican Senators would ultimately convict the former president in his impeachment trial. 

In the end, everyone was brought back to reality yesterday with a 57-43 vote in the Senate to acquit the former president, not withstanding minority leader Mitch McConnell's much-discussed speech on the floor immediately afterward.

In light of lead impeachment manager Representative Jamie Raskin's (D-MD) that in the court of public opinion and history the managers were successful, it still does come down to actions, votes and the record as described by NPR's Audie Cornish of "All Things Considered," in a less optimistic view of the Republicans moving on from Trumpism.

After the vote, Mr. McConnell denounced Mr. Trump's actions saying that he was directly responsible for what happened on January 6th despite voting to acquit him on 'dubious' constitutional grounds to use Mr. Raskin's words. Former Congressman Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) said that the speech was a clear mark in the start of the fight for the soul of the Republican party. This leaves the question of whether Mr. McConnell along with 7 senators and 11 House members is powerful enough to take that on and get the Republican party back to its roots.

Mr. Curbelo described the eighty-five percent of elected Republican officials as 'willing hostages' to Trumpism, which when he said it sounded a bit strange to this column. It seems like Republicans in the House at least are 'very willing' with 143 of them voting against impeachment so describing them as 'hostages' didn't quite fit. His point is understood that Republicans supported Mr. Trump out of party loyalty and backlash from the base, but are now free to move on. However, that's not the case at all and Ms. Cornish corrected the conversation saying that they are willing supporters, which is indeed the case.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said that with McConnell's vote to acquit, Republican would have never gotten to the required two-thirds of the Senate - Democrats needed McConnell. But as fmr. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) more astutely explained, there would never be enough Republican votes even if Mr. McConnell vote to impeach because it would weaken his position as minority leader, if not wipe out his leadership role. It's all he has left along with the knowledge that the vote to acquit will turn off huge spigots of donor cash. Seven-figure conservative donors and corporations have made it clear that they would cut off the campaign donations for those who voted to acquit, hence Mr. McConnell's speech, as also explained by Mrs. McCaskill. When explained with such clarity from one who has been on the short end of McConnell's political spear, you can see that this is classic Mitch McConnell, at his most shrewd. 

"Time will tell," said Maryland governor Larry Hogan (R) as to whether traditional Republican principles will win over Trumpism in its caucus but his feeling is that the Republican party will be unable to win on a national or statewide level if it continues to embrace the cult of one person. In trying to 'disentangle' themselves (to use another one from Mr. Raskin) from their votes, traditional Republicans may succeed in the short term, but the bottom line is this:

History will only remember that the President of the United States incited a riot upon the Capitol and betrayed his oath of office by do nothing to stop it. Republican Senators still acquitted him of a crime against the United States.

This is the undeniable meteoric conclusion that will have a ripple effect lasting for decades the world over. (This hints toward a foreign policy discussion we're eager to start.) The adage goes that history will be the ultimate judge, but its already made its ruling.

Panel: Kasie Hunt, NBC News; Audie Cornish, NPR; Clair McCaskill, fmr. Senator (D-MO); Carlos Curbelo, fmr. Congressman (R-FL); 

One more thing...
We didn't discuss the pandemic despite the appearance of the CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and as Mr. Todd noted, it had been a long time since the CDC Director was on the program. The short of it is that CDC guidance for schools if you listened is greatly dependent of the severity of the outbreak in each community. Yet, governors are lifting mask mandates, which Ms. Walensky advised against. Why? Because it begs the common sense question for these governors, which is how do you expect to open schools safely if your community spread is out of control? 

And the silver lining... While the impeachment trial moved along and accompanying media coverage dominating the new cycles all this time, the Biden Administration under the radar has gotten a lot done in ramping up the government's response and is off to a great start.