Congress, Inflation, and the Ongoing War in Gaza

TOPICS DISCUSSED

  • Congress: Funding the Government and Throwing Punches

  • Economic Indicators vs. Citizen Feelings

  • War in Gaza

  • Outside of Politics: Naked Attraction

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it without you. To support the show, please subscribe to our Premium content on our Patreon page or Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, or share the word about our work in your circles. Sign up for our newsletter or follow us on Instagram to keep up with everything happening in the Pantsuit Politics world. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

EPISODE RESOURCES

CONGRESSIONAL FIGHTS

WAR IN GAZA

This podcast and every episode of it are wholly owned by Pantsuit Politics LLC, and are protected by US and international copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. We hope you'll listen to it, love it, and share it with other people, but not with large language models or machines and not for commercial purposes. Thanks for keeping it nuanced with us.

TRANSCRIPT

Sarah [00:00:09] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.  

Beth [00:00:10] And this is Beth Silvers. Thank you for joining us for Pantsuit Politics.  

[00:00:14] Music Interlude  

Sarah [00:00:34] Welcome to Pantsuit Politics, where we take a different approach to the news. I am alive and here with you. I hope you notice a mark of difference in my tone and energy level. Today is-- we record on Wednesday, Beth, versus Monday.  

Beth [00:00:47] I'm thrilled that you are alive and energetic and feeling close to normal again.  

Sarah [00:00:51] I was living out the news cycle. I got an email from the Today Show literally in my inbox when I thought I was close to death about how Norovirus is on the rise. So be careful out there, people.  

Beth [00:01:01] I told you that my Astrology of the Week podcast said that Monday would be rude and it was.  

Sarah [00:01:07] More than rude. Okay, we have a lot of news to catch up on today. We're going to talk about Congress doing actual work and also throwing literal temper tantrums. We're going to follow up on our conversation about the economy and the latest numbers on inflation. And we're going to talk about the latest in Gaza as Israel's war with Hamas continues. As always, we'll in the show talking about what's on our mind Outside Politics, which is a little British import called Naked Attraction. Either you gasped because you have seen the show or you're about to really get your mind expanded. So buckle up for that portion of the show.  

Beth [00:01:41] Mature themes in the Outside of Politics section today.  

Sarah [00:01:43] That's accurate. Yes, mature themes. Okay, good point. Good warning.  

Beth [00:01:47] If you are new to Pantsuit Politics and want to learn more about all of the elements of our work, and they are many, a great place to start is our newsletter. We send it out once a week, Fridays only. It includes notes from our team, from listeners, and information about everything that we're up to. There's a link to sign up for it in the show notes. We will never spam you. We will only send you what we think are treasures. So join us on Fridays for our newsletter.  

Sarah [00:02:11] Next up, we're going to talk about Congress.  

[00:02:12] Music Interlude  

[00:02:29] Beth, would you like to begin with the actual work or with the temper tantrums? Do have a preference?  

Beth [00:02:33] I think the work. I think starting with your work is important.  

Sarah [00:02:36] Okay, so you're a good news first kind of girl. I like it. All right. So the House passed a laddered continuing resolution to fund the government. So here's what's going to happen. We're going to fund part of the government, agriculture, transportation, HUD-Veterans Affairs through January 19th. Then we're going to fund the Defense Department and other remaining parts of the government through February 2nd. Now, more Democrats voted for this continuing resolution than Republicans. More Republicans voted against this funding of the government than the last go round. Doesn't portend good things to come, but it is clean. There's no spending cuts. There's no contentious policy, which is why Democrats supported it. It doesn't include any supplemental funding to things like Israel and Ukraine. Basically, it's a big old punt. Until next year.  

Beth [00:03:26] I celebrate that the government will not shut down. I celebrate that we found a way through this. I also celebrate that we're all just talking about a laddered C.R., as though that's a thing. It's a new idea. Instead of doing a C.R., that is just everything will expire at this deadline. Makes a lot of sense to me if your intention is to really do the budget work and try to pass the bills. Where I find less to celebrate, is the timing of those two deadlines, because with the holidays, this gives Congress very little time to actually do that work realistically. If they had passed this through, say, June and July dates or August and September dates, I would feel a lot more optimistic about the work actually getting done. I don't know what will be different on January 19th than today. Nevertheless, I will take the win. I'm thrilled that we're not going to have a shutdown, especially going into the holidays.  

Sarah [00:04:26] Yes, I celebrate the funding of the government every time. And if you are a glass half full kind of person, they're giving you plenty of opportunities to have that celebration these days. I don't think anything's going to be different on January 19th. Not a single dang thing. The problem here is that the House Republican Caucus, or at least a certain faction of the House Republican caucus, they don't have a future problem. They have a past problem. They're just still real big and mad about the deal Kevin McCarthy negotiated with Joe Biden for the Fiscal Responsibility Act. They don't like what he negotiated. To which I say, that's a shame. But we don't have a time machine, which is what they try to use the budgetary process for. A time machine to go back and unnegotiate that deal. But the deal is struck. The Senate is moving forward with that deal as if that is the reality we all live in, and they just refuse to accept that reality. I don't think that's going to be any different on January 19th. Now, I do think maybe, just maybe they are not looking to remove another speaker of the House and go through that debacle again. Maybe. But I don't know what else they're going to do. I guess this is just going to be the de facto Democratic majority running the government through a Republican speaker of the House.  

Beth [00:05:54] They absolutely do not like that deal that was struck. The other truth is that Congress has all of the latitude around spending, if they can get enough votes to pass it. And I think you're right, the reality that we're living in is that the Republican majority is not a majority. They're just ideologically not aligned. I do not envy the job that Speaker Mike Johnson has. I do not particularly love his approach to it, but I am glad that he saw fit to get this done. Because if he had gotten us into a shutdown here, I have no idea how we would have gotten out of it. And that to me is the scary thing, because he has said he will not do this again in January, that there will be no more short term pantings of the budget issues. And I truly don't know what happens after that.  

Sarah [00:06:47] I don't think anybody does, which I think takes us to the temper tantrum portion of the programing. Mike Johnson himself described it as a pressure cooker. I had to chuckle when he was like, "They've been here for 10 whole weeks." And I was like, well, that is difficult for you.  

Beth [00:07:06] Bless their hearts.  

Sarah [00:07:07] Bless your sweet, sweet heart.  

Beth [00:07:10] Most of us do work for 10 weeks in a row with our colleagues. That is how it goes.  

Sarah [00:07:15] Yes. But they have reached outer boundaries of their very limited amounts of patience with each other. So we had Kevin McCarthy, depending on who you ask, shoulder check, kidney punch or just bump into-- because the hallway was too small-- GOP Representative Tim Burchett, who was one of the eight that voted to oust Kevin McCarthy. Which I think lends itself to the perspective from Burchett and Claudia Grisales from NPR, who was staying there, that said, it was a purposeful physical assault of some degree coming from Kevin McCarthy, who has a history of this. Then you have my representative, Jaime Comer, pitching a fit because somebody asked, "Hey, you're so mad at Joe Biden for lending money to his brother. But also, didn't you lend money to your brother?" And he just threw the biggest fit. Pompous, pompous, pompous fit. And then you have Markwayne Mullin in the Senate trying to get in a fight with a Teamster official there giving testimony and Bernie Sanders being the voice of calm. It was quite a confluence of events.  

Beth [00:08:28] And that is what makes me say things like bless their hearts about them being there 10 weeks. I kind of feel bad about that, my meanness a minute ago, because it is a hard job no doubt being in Washington D.C. in session for 10 weeks. That is a lot. Reporters wanting to know your every thought when you leave a room. It is a hard job. This behavior is bananas. On the one hand, I was shocked watching all of this transpire. On the other hand, it is kind of a logical conclusion of a lot of behavior that's been tolerated over a period of a couple of years now. More than a couple of years now. And I just hope that people will pay enough attention. It does seem like things like this break through still, and I hope that people pay attention and say, we don't want to send Jamie Comer back there to have a pompous fit. Calling someone a smurf is not even worthy of kindergarten fighting. And I hope that people will see it and think, Jamie Comer, if you love owning so much land in Kentucky, why don't you just come home and do that? Because this is not how a member of Congress should behave.  

Sarah [00:09:38] Yeah, I wasn't particularly surprised. Jamie Comer, who is my representative, has been failing upward his entire career. And in my experience, people who fail upward love the power and have absolutely no tolerance for any type of accountability or pressure. And he has played that out multiple times. This is not the first time his temper has flared in his career in Kentucky politics or national politics. And I say that because our listeners from Oklahoma have also pointed out multiple times that Mark Westmoreland has a similar trajectory and personality type. And so what bothers me is I'm afraid that this is going to do what it always does, which is feed the narrative of people who don't pay a great deal of attention that it's a circus. And this is how everybody behaves and this is why it's not worth paying attention. What bugged me is when Markwayne Mullin came out and said, "Well, there's a history of this. They caned people in the time of Andrew Jackson." First of all, that's not something to aspire to. And I want to be clear. I don't think that's what's happening here. I think that, yes, there is an escalation between the caucuses of pressure and tension and resentment post January 6th. But I do not believe that this is like pre-Civil War behavior on that level or historically comparable, because this behavior bubbles up primarily on one side of the aisle. And it's a media strategy more than it is any sort of true reflection of real feelings or real passion. It's this sort of machismo media approach perpetuated by Donald Trump that they all sort of feed on. But I don't think it's because we're in the same situation that we were like pre-Civil War. And I don't want people to just read this and roll their eyes and think everybody in Congress is like this. There are serious people in Congress trying to do serious work. Republicans and Democrats. And so these temper tantrums to me are just reflective of a small faction that deserves disdain and deserves to be voted out. And I don't want it to spread like a virus. So people feel like that about the entire institution.  

Beth [00:12:12] As I follow the reporting some of the deepest. Most bitter tension in the Republican conference is about very small ball issues, rules issues, how people voted in the speaker fight, how the speaker removal was done. They're important. I don't mean to diminish them. Who is the speaker of the House is very important to all of the American public. But the things people are modest about come across In the reporting that I read as pretty small when you look at the whole of Congress inbox right now. The fight that Jamie Comer got in was about a pretty small ball issue. It is the fact that he wants to use the Oversight Committee to impeach the president on the thinnest of evidence, and I think his temper is flaring. And this made him an easy target for his colleague because he has failed to produce the evidence that he promises time and again on television he will. It's embarrassing. That's not an issue with National Steaks. It's personally embarrassing. And, look, I am not a perfect human, and I will tell you that probably the things that get me the most heated are also small ball things that have to do with my ego. But that's how all of this reads to me. These are ego issues, and I do think it's good for people to see Bernie Sanders especially stepping up to say, I get heated about big picture things, but I also will get heated about how we treat this job in this institution. And we are here to act like grownups. I loved it when he said, this is a hearing. This is a hearing. I hope that we can start to distinguish between passion based on issue that affects the big picture that is related to the job people are there to do and passion based on ego, which I think is what produced these three incidents yesterday that we witnessed.  

Sarah [00:14:20] Yeah, it produces them because that's why they're there. They're not there for good governance. They don't believe in the government. They're there for ego. That's the whole basis for their career. I can tell you that's what's going on. Jamie Comer he's not motivated by some greater calling to public service. Do we believe that about Kevin McCarthy? Do we believe that about Markwayne Mullins? I don't. Because the way they behave in all aspects of their job says something very different to me. There's an element of privilege. There's an element of entitlement. And, of course, that's all under the big giant umbrella of ego. And that Fox News media strategy, that just feeds this. It's like a just big toxic soup. And, look, aspects of the congressional job itself can feed that. Obviously, this is not a healthy environment for people like this is what I'm saying.  

Beth [00:15:13] And certainly some of this exists on the Democratic side of the aisle. But that's where leadership has a role to play. I do believe that if a Democrat shoved another Democrat, Democratic leadership would be all over that quickly. Who is the person on the Republican side of the aisle who is going to say this will not happen again and if it does, there will be consequences? Democrats can be a little too quick to punish each other over things. But I think that leadership really matters in keeping your caucus in line. And I would like to see Speaker Johnson, who is in this kind of honeymoon phase, he can't do anything about Senator Mullin, but he can certainly get together with the members in his conference: Representative Comer, Representative McCarthy, and say, we're not going to have this.  

Sarah [00:16:02] Well, I think this continuing resolution is probably the end of that honeymoon phase. Whatever political capital he had is greatly reduced. Now, again, I'm not sure they are bruising for another leadership fight, but that doesn't change the fact that this is not really a caucus. This just isn't a caucus. And if you have a large portion of the caucus that believes it owes nothing to leadership or anyone else, then how are you supposed to manage that? I think it's an unmanageable situation. And that's what we're learning through all these leadership fights for all these budgetary fights, is that it's unmanageable. And so as much as I don't like Mike Johnson, I still don't envy him because I don't think the situation either the temper tantrums or the continuing government funding fight is going to get better in January or February no matter what everybody's New Year's resolutions are.  

Beth [00:16:55] I don't envy him, but I am rooting for him because I do want the government to be funded and I want it to be funded in a durable way. I cannot imagine trying to run any meaningful federal program with the deadline for when we might be on the precipice of unable to do our jobs anymore just keep shifting down the road. This is just a terrible way to run a huge percentage of our economy and services that are life giving and life taking for people everywhere. This is a bad way to do it. And so I am glad he found this narrow path forward and I am rooting for him to find a more durable one. I just don't know how he will.  

Sarah [00:17:37] Well, we have talked about that. Government funding is a very important piece of our economy. And so let's talk a little bit before we move on to the next segment of the show about the economic numbers coming out about inflation. In particular, Beth, because I wanted to clarify a conversation we had a few weeks ago about the economy. We did a show about the fact that so many economic indicators, which show that Americans feel confident and positive about the economy. But when you survey Americans, it is the exact opposite. I think people thought we were saying that the economy is great and they should feel that way. That was not my point I don't want to speak for you.  

Beth [00:18:15] That was not my point either.  

Sarah [00:18:17] No, my point was that that's weird. And I am more inclined when there is a detachment like that to say something real is happening here. People are overwhelmed and consumed by the prices and inflation, and that matters. And if they're not answering that the economy is great, that means something. It doesn't mean the economy's great and they're just not paying attention. I'm sad that that's what some people took away from that conversation, because that was definitely not my point. My point was this is super weird. Something's happening here.  

Beth [00:18:49] Yeah, I'm sad about how that conversation was received too, and I'm trying to take what notes I can take from it to try to speak more clearly in the future when we discuss these matters. But what I've been thinking about since that discussion and seeing some of the feedback is how stressful expectation gaps are. And I think that where people are feeling economic pain, where we all are experiencing higher prices, where we all experience some strain in services and travel, the gap between what we expect when we see numbers like this and the lived experience is probably a huge portion of that tension and stress too. Because when you're being told things are going well-- and I think this has been a mistake in the Biden campaign's messaging. Because when you are told that it's going well, then your expectation is that it feels like it's going well and that it is reflected in your personal finances right now that it's going well, and the delta between those makes it even harder than it might be otherwise.  

Sarah [00:20:02] Yeah. And I just think any conversation about the economy and people's pocketbook is impossibly hard. I don't envy those people who are doing those surveys. I don't envy economists that are trying to make sense of these numbers in combination with those surveys, because it just becomes such a conflation of what I see, how I feel, individual situations and realities. I just didn't want anyone to think that we're saying it's great out there, be happy. Because that's definitely not what I'm saying. Now we do have new numbers that inflation is cooling. I read economists that said the inflation fever has broken, and I hope that is true because I know those prices for my family and everybody else's are an enormous source of pressure and stress and they are seemingly cooling. Even I saw that Thanksgiving dinners are going to be cheaper this year than they were last year across the United States. And that was the big picture I wanted to note, is that it doesn't matter. Some of these other indicators, if prices are high, people are going to feel it. They're just going to feel it. And afterwards, I was thinking about all the way so many states have restructured their taxes to be based on sales tax instead of property tax and all the different ways that pressure can show up for people. And so to me, it was just noting that the economy is going into a new phase. And so all the different ways that we've measured it and surveyed it probably aren't applicable anymore. We'll have to figure out new ways to think about it and see it and talk about it.  

Beth [00:21:40] And some of these measurements cannot capture things that stress people the most. For example, if you work for a company that is reaping the benefits of some of these numbers and that company is not spreading that wealth with employees, that is upsetting. And it doesn't matter what the macro indicators say if you feel like you're not being fairly compensated where you are. It's hard for policy to get to that issue because even if we change the tax code to narrow the gap in terms of the highest earners and the lowest earners, there are people all across the middle who are still going to feel at times that they are not being rewarded for what they contribute at the places that they work. And that's tough. And I think that a lot of that is going on right now. And that's another reason that these numbers tend to hit us wrong. There are people benefiting a lot from the positive trends here. And it's not everybody. And even if you are in a place where you can basically afford what you need and your life is manageable in your current circumstance, that doesn't mean you're going to be happy with the state of the economy.  

Sarah [00:22:56] Yeah, and the happiness to me-- maybe that's just the ultimate point of the conversation. Like, is that even something we should be measuring? Is that a reality anymore in 2023, with the complexity of our global economic system? Do we need to find new ways to talk about this and measure this? And there are people with economic degrees that I'm sure are busy working that out right now. I just think that the economy can be intimidating and I don't want to avoid the conversations because it is so opaque and it is vague and we are trying to measure things that are difficult to measure. And because there's so much emotion tied up in money and wealth in the economy, I don't want to avoid them even though they're difficult. So we appreciate all of you sticking with us through some of those difficult conversations and giving us that feedback. That's so helpful.  

[00:23:39] Music Interlude 

[00:23:51] Beth, the war in Gaza continues. The death toll continues to rise. At this point, the reporting is that 11,000 people have died in Gaza, including 4500 children. It seems as if we have reached an inflection point of a type with the Israel Defense Force moving in to Al-Shifa hospital, which they have consistently claimed as a military command post for Hamas. There is some U.S. intelligence that backs up that assessment. And I think just a continuing and heartbreaking conversation surrounding Israel strategy, Israel's leadership. Hamas's strategy and the impact all of this has, particularly on the civilians in Palestine.  

Beth [00:24:54] Reading about this hospital is so gut wrenching because it's not just seeing the images and thinking, oh, look at this horror in this hospital. It's look at this horror even in this hospital. It's knowing that throughout Gaza, there are places where people are trapped, where people who know how to help don't have what they need to to help. And you see the strain of that on images that come through in media reporting. Looking at doctors who have these babies in front of them and they know how to help the babies and they don't have what they need to do that work. And so just knowing the level of suffering even in a hospital, which is usually a place of refuge, is weighty in a way that's hard to describe. And as I attempt to describe it, I'm remembering something that I have learned from my physical body. I practice yoga and I frequently hear yoga teachers talk about how once you're in a pose, there's not a lot of benefit from pushing yourself deeper into the pose. Like, once you find the stretch that you're looking for, you just need to be there. If you keep pushing yourself to prove something, nothing good comes of that and some bad can come of it. So I struggle because I feel this pull to describe this with language that fully reflects the agony of the situation. And I also kind of feel like nothing good will come of that and some harm could come from it. So I'm trying to just take it in and offer to the universe my sincere desire for this to come to some kind of peaceful ending as soon as possible, because I don't know what else to do.  

Sarah [00:27:23] Yeah, because of our job and because I have a 14 year old son who wants to engage with this topic with me, I spend a lot of time thinking, "Why do I think this way? Why do I feel this? What has changed since I formed an opinion?" The one thing that has not changed for me is I am consistently depending heavily on experts. I think The New York Times has been doing some really good work. They had an incredible piece from Omer Bartov, who's a professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University. It was called What I Believe as a Historian of Genocide that I thought was incredibly helpful. They had a piece on the specifics of the standards with how we define something as a war crime and how we define something as genocide. What does it mean to be proportionate? I can't look at my 14 year old and say, "Yes, killing 11,000 people because there are 200 hostages is proportionate." No one thinks that. Or if they do, that is deeply problematic. And so you get wrapped up in these debates. Is it proportionate? Is it a war crime? What's the standard for that? Is it genocide? What does that mean? What's the standard for that? And I think listening to experts has been enormously helpful to me. I do think that things are escalating in a way that is dangerous for everyone involved, including the Israeli people. I think the Israeli people, many of them are at their wits end, particularly the families of the people held hostage. There are I think 50 families that are marching from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem to say, we're done here.  

[00:29:09] I think that the leadership of Israel under Netanyahu has failed and continues to fail. I both understand and believe the intelligence that says Hamas uses civilians, uses hospitals as shields. And also, I am concerned when other Arab Middle Eastern countries come forth and say this is a generational situation. The rage that is being built among this regional population, it's very dangerous for everyone involved, particularly Israelis. And so when you put all that together, I can't sort that out, nor do I feel called to, based on what I'm reading on Instagram. I do not think that is helpful or productive. I have to look at experts. I have to listen to people who have been there. Hillary Clinton has written a piece in The Atlantic that I found enormously helpful talking about a cease fire. The sentence that really stood out to me is she said ceasefires freeze conflicts rather than resolve them. That sounds right to me. And I trust her. I trust someone who has negotiated a ceasefire with Hamas. I trust Hillary Clinton because I know that she has a career, a lifelong devotion to children, and the suffering that we are all witnessing on social media of the children in Palestine is real and has taken into account by these experts. And so I think listening to people say, here's the complexity, here's how we hold this, here's how we learned about it-- because I think there's an instinct to pull away and say, "This is so difficult. I can't take any more complexity. It's too hard. It's too painful. There has to be an easy solution. There has to be an easy way to end this."  

[00:30:56] But it is leaning into the complexity and acknowledging that this is the path forward, saying we cannot go back to the Israeli policy of containment. Acknowledging that this put the Palestinian people in a hopeless situation and that hopeless people are dangerous. I don't know if comforted is the right word, but I do feel some stability, some reassurance when people say, "Yeah, this is the complexity here. This is what we're dealing with. This is what we have to acknowledge. We don't know what the future holds, but we know what the past has taught us." And I am encouraged by the people in Israel who are calling for Netanyahu to go. I think he has to go. I think he has to go in the middle of this conflict. It's not my place to say. I don't vote in Israel. But if someone asked me, that is what I would say. I think that his policies continue to endanger the Israeli people and therefore continue to endanger the Palestinian people. But humanitarian cease fires, teeny tiny steps that ease the suffering. I wish there was more to offer. I wish there was more of a path forward. But I think what we're doing here is we're looking like inches, feet, millimeters in front of us, that's all we can do right now.  

Beth [00:32:21] We're recording on Wednesday, November 15. I hope by the time this episode releases on Friday, November 17th, that the progress toward releasing hostages that the U.S. government has started to express some confidence about has happened, or that there is more to report on that. I agree with what you said about seeing millimeters forward and about needing expertise here. And I also hear loud and clear and don't really disagree with listeners who've written in to say what Hillary Clinton says about this doesn't make me feel better, or the administration's approach doesn't make me feel better. Because I feel like that approach has led the world wrong many times over. I both believe that the Israeli government, whomever is leading it-- and I absolutely agree with you and many of the Israeli people that Benjamin Netanyahu is not built to lead in a moment like this. Whomever is leading it, the primary responsibility of the Israeli government is the safety and security of the Israeli people. And I think it is fair to say we are not safe as long as Hamas is able to come into our country and kidnap and kill our citizens. I believe that at the same time that I believe you can never fully eradicate a terrorist organization. I see from the past few years that you can take an organization like the Islamic State that feels like a very present and powerful threat and systematically weaken their ability to do harm. And I think that's a fair objective for Israel to systematically weaken the ability of Hamas to do harm. I don't believe that it's possible to eradicate terror. And I think that efforts in pursuit of eradicating terror often sow the seeds of new terrorist organizations because of the generational trauma that's created in the process.  

[00:34:43] So, again, I put all that out on the table to say, I don't know, guys. I don't know. The primary things that I can think about here are things like, well, if I were a member of Congress, what would my responsibilities be and what would I be doing? And I think first and foremost, the government of the United States, like the government of Israel, has to think about the safety and security of its own citizens. So getting hostages released, getting American citizens who are in Gaza out is a primary responsibility. Combating antisemitism and other violence here in the United States that is informed by or inspired by this war is a primary responsibility. Being a good ally to our allies in the world, I believe is critical to our security as a nation. And I believe that being a good ally means that often in public you say we stand with you, and in private you say, hang on, we got to talk about this. If I were a member of Congress, I would have questions about the funding that's been requested for Israel and how it's going to be deployed and how we can put the maximum amount of dollars into humanitarian relief and not into weapons. I think there are lots of pieces of those MMS in front of us to do and to do diligently and soberly and with an eye toward the next steps. But I just have no idea how this ends. It's much like I feel about Ukraine. I do not know how a modern war is won. And that doesn't mean that I think everybody ought to just give up. I wish it could be that way, but I don't think that's the reality of living in the world where there are folks who will always do the maximum amount of harm. It just means that I can't personally take a maximalist position on this because there are too many pieces moving at one time.  

Sarah [00:36:52] Yeah, I completely agree that's Israel's primary responsibility. And that's why if you're an Israeli Defense Force official, it is proportionate because you're not talking about 200 hostages, or at least not only 200 hostages, you're talking about millions of Israelis because Hamas is clearly stated objective is to eliminate Israel. And I understand all of that. And I also agree that the only part of Hillary Clinton's piece I hung up on is when she said to end terrorism or something along those lines. And I thought, we're not going to get there. We're not going to stop this. I wish I felt that we could. I think that you can cripple it in a way, but I don't think anybody's figured out how to cripple it without creating fuel for the next one. That's the challenge. I don't know if that's achievable. I should hope it is. I should hope there is a way to do that. I do think a piece of this puzzle is saying we will move forward into a two state solution. We will not fuel this conflict for generations to come, at least not that way. Maybe we can't eliminate all sources of fuel, but we will eliminate that one. Because it was wholly and completely predictable to me. I feel like I probably said it on the episode when the Trump administration pushed through the Abraham Accords that the message was, forget it, you're out of the picture. We don't care. You are not a part of this calculus in the region any longer.  

[00:38:13] And then you listen to The Daily and the Hamas leaders said we felt like no one was listening, paying attention, even considered Palestinians anymore, and we wanted to upset that calculus. That was not hard to foresee. It shouldn't have been hard to foresee inside the Israeli Defense Force, which is I think why there is so much visceral anger among Israelis towards this leadership. And so all of that is true. Because I am a pragmatic optimist, I do think there is a way to at least turn down the fuel so dramatically that there's nothing to feed these movements. Maybe not forever and not everywhere all at once, but hopefully in this place. And I think you have to hold that. You have to hold some type of hope, because if the fuel is only elimination, then you do get arguably genocidal language coming from some officials inside the Israeli Defense Force. I don't think that is wrong to describe some of the language that way. I think this historian is saying it's not that yet, but it could be if we're not careful. And I hope the role of the United States inside this conflict is exactly what you described. Publicly supportive, privately saying be very careful. I don't know if we've seen carefulness. I don't have the intelligence. I don't know. And no one's gaining that intelligence from Instagram. Okay. Not to be dismissive or snarky, but I just don't think that's the reality. That doesn't mean I don't think that we should engage with this. Like I said, I think that the most responsible posture in a moment like this, if you care deeply about humanity on all sides, the Palestinians and the Israelis, is a posture of curiosity, humility, and deep, deep resilience in the face of complexity. I don't know what other approach you could take.  

Beth [00:40:14] And grief. Because however this ends, 11,000 dead Palestinians and Israeli citizens and Jews all over the world feeling unsafe, mourning their dead, the trauma created by Hamas's active terror on October 7th and everything that's followed, there is no ending to this that justifies any of these costs. There isn't. It is a stain on humanity that this is where we are. And, yes, the run up to this is filled with stains on humanity. The Palestinian people and the people of Israel have suffered enormously. And I don't need to sit in my suburban home in Kentucky and try to do the math on who has suffered more and who is more deserving of our grief. I just feel that grief across the board. Even as we talk about a two state solution, I worry for the Palestinian people. It is clear to me what the obligations of the Israeli government are and what the obligations of the United States government are. It is also clear to me that almost no one feels that kind of responsibility to the Palestinians. Almost no one in a position of leadership who is charged with taking care of the Palestinian people feels that sense that the safety and security of these people is my primary responsibility. And that is a continuous horror and tragedy. And so I hope a two state solution produces that where there is a government chosen by the Palestinians, for them that constantly has that clarity about its responsibilities to the Palestinian people. They are as deserving of that as I am sitting here in the United States, and I desperately want that to be on the other side of this.  

Sarah [00:42:14] Yeah, because nothing justifies 11,000 dead. But there is no need that it be in vain. That's kind of how I feel. If there's no reason that suffering on this level cannot also produce solutions deserving of this level of conflict. Like, this is a whiteboard moment. This is it. That's the only frustrating thing to me. And I try not to be too frustrated because I am not privy to all the conversations. But the idea that Israel should occupy Gaza again, the idea that the Palestinian Authority is the only solution available to lead us forward into a two state solution, like there has got to be more solutions available than that. And I hope that the experts behind the scenes are working on that.  

Beth [00:43:07] And it will take more than the experts and it will take more than Israel and the Palestinian Authority and Hamas or the people of Gaza. It will take Qatar and Iran and Saudi Arabia. This is a region that has worked out a lot of conflict through this very small area. And a solution here that actually in a sustainable way facilitates peace and prosperity is contingent on an awful lot of people going back to the whiteboard. You see that playing out in attacks on U.S. military assets in Syria, and reading about our proportionate responses on Iranian proxies in Syria. And you think again about how wrong it is. Even though it is our tried and true and considered approach, just on a gut level how wrong it is to be working out this conflict through Syria. The whole order here is due for a white board moment. And that is why, to me, continuing as a citizen, to say, "How can I, in my sphere of influence, cultivate a posture of peace and openness and humility and curiosity?" That's all I can contribute to that whiteboard moment, but that is the objective that I have.  

Sarah [00:44:47] That is the objective we share here at Pantsuit Politics. And we appreciate you joining us in that and pushing and giving all types of feedback. We can't say we hold complexity and curiosity and not welcome criticism. That's not how this works. We're happy to hear from everybody. It helps us in our thinking. And that's about all we can control at this moment. And I know that is heartbreaking and hard. And in the spirit of this time of year, we are so grateful for all of you that join us in that.  

[00:45:17] Music Interlude 

[00:45:36] Beth Silvers, we have taken a lot of hard turns here at Pantsuit Politics, but I want everybody to take a deep breath because this might be the hardest of all hard turns we have ever taken. Earlier this year, Beth, my friend Kate traveled to Ireland. She came back with lots of tales. She loved the country. She had a great time. But she said, Let me tell you about this show that my husband and I found in Ireland. It is a show called Naked Attraction, and it has hit the shores here in the United States. You can find it on Max. I invited you to watch it along with me, Beth. Do you want to tell the people the premise of Naked Attraction?  

Beth [00:46:22] Oh, sure. Especially I would love to since I remember that my mom listens to every episode that we make. I have watched a single episode of Naked Attraction. I don't feel particularly drawn to come back, but I am interested in the conversation with you about this. So Naked Attraction is a choose a date show. And it is choosing based not on asking people about their dreams for life or their occupation or their philosophy about money or what they like to do in their free time. It is choosing based on their physical bodies, which are naked from head to toe, and they are placed in these little chambers where you can't see anything except a shadow at first. And we are told that they will be revealed a little by little here.  

Sarah [00:47:15] It's a phased reveal.  

Beth [00:47:18] A phase reveal. But Chad and I watching this when we heard that thought that we might see perhaps an ear first or a hand. No, they first reveal the toes to the waist. Okay. So it is all right there from the very beginning. And then our person looking for a date goes with the host three rounds of eliminating one body at a time. So looking at toes to waste, who do I think is not going to be compatible with me? And we're not chatting with these people. They are just standing there naked as the day they were born, as these decisions are being made.  

Sarah [00:47:57] Important to clarify, there is no blurring.  

Beth [00:48:00] No blurring whatsoever. It is a 4D high resolution. Just the whole situation is right there in front of you. Now, our person who wishes to find a date is fully clothed as she chats with the very charming and Baggage British host.  

Sarah [00:48:21] I love her.  

Beth [00:48:21] Yeah. Just no hang ups about anything here. And I will say that I was impressed that they're chatting about these bodies was pretty neutral. Like there wasn't anything negative said about a body, really. It was just the language of this is my preference or I enjoy this or I am intimidated by that. And there was a lot to be intimidated by, I will tell you.  

Sarah [00:48:46] Yes, ma'am.  

Beth [00:48:46] And when we are down to two naked bodies, then our person looking for a date gets naked. So that they can all stand there naked together with our host who remains fully clothed.  

Sarah [00:49:00] Anna Richardson, that's her name.  

Beth [00:49:01] And eventually the date is chosen. The people hold hands naked together. They head out. They put their clothes on. They go out in the world. They have a date. And then we get a little follow up on how they're doing later.  

Sarah [00:49:14] Yes. Okay. Where to even begin? So many things struck me at Naked Attraction. Not even getting to the body. My favorite thing is with the first elimination, the naked person steps out of their box and then they go hug the fully clothed person. I don't know about you, Beth, but I have never given a hug to a person naked and been fully clothed, or vice versa had a naked person given me a hug.  

Beth [00:49:45] I have not either. I've never even contemplated that situation until you just mentioned it.  

Sarah [00:49:48] And it is quite bizarre every time. I'm like, "Okay, they're going to hug. That's interesting." But it's pretty chill. Pretty chill. They do a little hug. And then my favorite part is actually after that, when the person that's eliminated gets to give you a sentence or two on their experience on Naked Attraction. And almost everyone is like, you know what? It was fun. I feel a little empowered. They said positive things about parts of my body that I didn't like. I was really hung up on all these aspects, and just being out here naked really freed me and let me let go of a lot of that. I love it. And I'd do it again. I mean, I feel like almost everybody gets eliminated loves the experience.  

Beth [00:50:29] Listen, every single person participating is healthier in many ways than I am because this whole dynamic is just very positive and very supportive. And also, let me say, I think as a viewer, very unsexy. You don't watch this and think like, oh. It's not like a scene in a movie that gets you kind of excited yourself. It's kind of clinical. It's like very detached. You almost become immune or something to the nakedness as it goes on, even as it's the key to the experience.  

Sarah [00:51:05] This is what I've said about Korean spas when everybody's naked. Nobody's naked, okay? And also, Anna Richardson gives you this little scientific insight. She'll be like most women prefer X, Y, Z because scientists have found that X, Y, Z produces said results or whatever. There's always this little aside that you get, sort of like this anthropological insight into why a person might prefer pubes, no pubes, whatever the case may be. Okay. So I love that part. I love that everybody steps off and is like, you know what? I kind of dug this experience. That's my first favorite part. And I get it because after watching several episodes of Naked Attraction, look, I'm 42 years old, have been the same person since I was 19 years old. Do I get in my head sometimes about like, oh my God, what would happen if I had to go out on the dating scene? Everybody's thought that. After watching Naked Attraction, I'm like, you know what? I think I'd be okay. I think I'd be fine. There's a wide variety of bodies, and it makes sense. There is a wide variety of preferences, and you just got to figure out how they align, which is what we're doing here on Naked Attraction.  

Beth [00:52:06] My favorite part is how they don't get to speak until the very end. And then when they speak, there's a lot of conversation about their accents.  

Sarah [00:52:15] They're really into it over there. They are into that. Do you think there would be in a United States equivalent where people were so like, I think they'll be Southern. I think they'll be from California. I don't think there would be.  

Beth [00:52:24] I don't know. I think that's a really interesting question. I could see that happening because like tattoos become a big part of your analysis here if they are present. And I could see making some assumptions and reading some things in to people based on the tattoos in the United States. But the accents I think is really fascinating. What I want to know is if you think there is wisdom in this approach to choosing a partner.  

Sarah [00:52:53] It is very interesting to me because I think you believe that it's pure attraction, but I am often surprised by who they eliminate and who they pick. And so is Anna Richardson. That's always my favorite part. Somebody'll say I'm eliminating [inaudible] and she'll go, "Why? Why would you do that? You loved X, Y, Z about them." But people will say, "They felt shy or I like their confidence or the way they stood." Like there's so much more energetic flow going on here. And I think that's a really positive aspect of the show too. There's a lot of pearl clutching like, oh my gosh, what if a child stumbles upon the show? Look, I think worse things could happen to my 14 year old than seeing a woman going, "I'm sorry, that penis is too big for me. You got to go." You know what I mean? I just think it tears down a lot of the idea that everybody is just doing this cool headed assessment of your body when really there's a lot more going on. I will say so many of the times, I'll think, "Oh, you messed up. You should have picked that person." Now, sometimes in the follow up, I am proven correct. But it's just interesting to me that it's really never this pure sort of calculation of the body that I think we think in our head people are doing of us. But there's always more going on, even when the person is literally standing there naked in front of you.  

Beth [00:54:18] I try not to be surprised by who they choose, because I have said before I don't think I am a good reader of chemistry. I think I'm a good judge of character, but not of chemistry. What causes one person to be attracted to another, even what causes me to be attracted to someone is just all happening at a level that is invisible to me.  

Sarah [00:54:38] So true.  

Beth [00:54:38] I totally think it's interesting to see their reactions to like posture and even like just the stance they take in the boxes that they're standing in. It's really interesting. And that's true for both women and men. This is not a heteronormative show at all. It is kind of like, isn't life a variety? You do you in this big variety that exists. It is all about what works for you. And that's done in a light way. None of this is heavy handed despite the fact that everybody's naked. It's really strange. But I definitely think that whether it's something that can be explained through things like pheromones or body language or how however you track it, I definitely think there is something to I just have a gut level reaction to you. And that has in my life led me right more than trying to think my way through who might be a good match for me.  

Sarah [00:55:43] Well, and that's the other component of this that I think is super interesting right now. Because there's so many long reads, so much reporting that people are turning away from dating apps. And a lot of people on the show cite that. Like, I hate the app. I never feel like I see the real person. I think that's sort of probably where the premise of the show came from is like, well, let's just strip away all the stuff that we put in dating apps that people feel like obfuscate what they're trying to learn about the person and let's just put it all out there right there so we can get that part out of the way and then decide if we really enjoy each other's company. And so I think that part to me is super interesting that people are reacting to this situation that sort of occupied so much of the dating universe, which is like marketing. That's what online dating to me seems like, marketing. And we get marketed too a lot in American life and expanding spaces. There's no space really that is marketing free. That's a whole other conversation.  

[00:56:35] And so I think that's what Naked Attraction is trying to do. It's like, well, let's literally strip everything away so there is no place for marketing. You can't see what type of clothing I'm wearing. You can't see anything. Now, there are still things that shine through like tattoos and piercings. And do you shave? Do you not? All this stuff. But I think that there's a real moment that people are examining, like like you said, how much analysis belongs here and how much just chemistry should be leading the day. And so I think that it's fascinating. I have some real logistical questions. How cold is it in there? How long do they have to stay there naked and wait for the person? The singleton which is my favorite phrase, to take their clothes off. Do they just chat with Anna Richardson for 15 minutes naked while this person goes to take their clothes off. I got very many questions. I've also done a lot of Googling about couples that are still together after meeting on Naked Attraction. And there are several. I'm fascinated. Listen, I'm endlessly fascinated.  

Beth [00:57:34] I want to know if Nicholas has watched this with you. And if so, what he thinks about it?  

Sarah [00:57:38] He has not. He has been so hateful about this show, you guys. He won't watch it with me. He thinks it's stupid. He told me I was getting dumber by watching it, which I thought was very harsh and not true. I don't know why he has such a visceral reaction against this show. He will just have to come on Pantsuit Politics on the premium channel or something and explain this to the people. But I think it's fascinating. Listen, I am a student of human nature under any circumstances. And so this is what this is, just human beings being human. I love it. Give it to me.  

Beth [00:58:13] Well, you know that I tend to generally be very much a cheerleader for Nicholas. But I do think it's harsh to say it's making you dumber without having watched it. I think you got to watch it if you're going to access that. So I said to Chad, "Sarah would like me to watch a show called Naked Attraction on Max." And he said, "That sounds right." And we turned it on and watched it together. And I said at one point, "Do you think that we would choose each other in a situation like this?" Which is probably a dangerous question. But as he does, Chad answered it in a very safe way. He goes, "I think that you and I would be the people thinking, how did we end up here? What is going on? What is happening? And that would join us together." And that's probably true.  

Sarah [00:59:00] Yes. I mean, they are primarily very young people standing up there on Naked Attraction. I think the oldest we've got is like early thirties. I think that one point there was a 19 year old and I was like, hold up, wait a second. That's a little young for me to consent to Naked Attraction.  

Beth [00:59:16] I will say I would almost feel better if it were mostly older people. This is how I feel about the Bachelor franchises. I'm happy that they're doing this golden bachelor thing.  

Sarah [00:59:24] Golden Naked Attraction. Make it happen.  

Beth [00:59:27] I think older people are in a much better position to assess the long term consequences of participating in something like this and to say, "Whatever. I'm going to live my best life." Or to think perhaps that's not for me. Perhaps that seems like a fun idea. Perhaps I need to organize just here in my house a version of this that would satisfy whatever curiosity I'm feeling.  

Sarah [00:59:51] Well, it's so interesting because every time they say their job, I go, "But how? Because now everybody you do your job for is going to see you naked. How's that going to work?"  

Beth [01:00:02]  A lot of dance teachers. You have to wonder, is this helpful to the dance teacher profession?  

Sarah [01:00:06] The dance teachers, the waitresses. Okay, cool. But they'll get to a financial analyst, and I'm like, "What does your boss think about naked Attraction?"  

Beth [01:00:17] Could you run for office if you've been on Naked Attraction?  

Sarah [01:00:20] I mean, I guess you could. Listen, we've all seen Melania naked. She was first lady. 

Beth [01:00:25] I guess you just run on a transparency platform. This is how I approach my life.  

Sarah [01:00:28] Yes. Listen, I think Naked Attraction is a net positive for the human race, and I stand by that analysis.  

Beth [01:00:37] That's a bold statement.  

Sarah [01:00:38] Thank you. I stand by it. I feel strongly about it.  

Beth [01:00:42] I'm a real neutral on this.  

Sarah [01:00:43] Okay. [Crosstalk]. I can't wait to hear what everybody thinks about it. Got to think about how to walk out of Naked Attraction. Give me a second.  

Beth [01:00:53] I mean, I applaud you getting in.  

Sarah [01:00:59] Well, let's just leave that. That's how we're going to walk out of Naked Attraction right now. Thank you for being with us today. Next week, we have a couple of really special episodes for you, including an episode on Tuesday about how to actually enjoy your people this holiday season, not just grit your teeth and get through it. We want some joy and delight and we think thanks to all of you and your feedback, we may have gotten there. We've gotten amazing practical suggestions from our community and we're excited to share all those with you and we'll see you back here on Tuesday for that conversation. In the meantime, have the best weekend available to you.  

[01:01:31] Music Interlude 

Sarah: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. 

Beth: Alise Napp is our managing director. Maggie Penton is our director of Community Engagement. 

Sarah: Xander Singh is the composer of our theme music with inspiration from original work by Dante Lima. 

Beth: Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers. 

Executive Producers: Martha Bronitsky. Ali Edwards. Janice Elliott. Sarah Greenup. Julie Haller. Tiffany Hasler. Emily Holladay. Katie Johnson. Katina Zuganelis Kasling. Barry Kaufman. Molly Kohrs. Katherine Vollmer. Laurie LaDow. Lily McClure. Linda Daniel. Emily Neesley. The Pentons. Tracey Puthoff. Sarah Ralph. Jeremy Sequoia. Katie Stigers. Karin True. Onica Ulveling. Nick and Alysa Villeli. Amy Whited. Emily Helen Olson. Lee Chaix McDonough. Morgan McHugh. Jen Ross. Sabrina Drago. Becca Dorval. Christina Quartararo. The Lebo Family. The Adair Family. 

Sarah: Jeff Davis. Melinda Johnston. Michelle Wood. Nichole Berklas. Paula Bremer and Tim Miller.

Alise NappComment