Our Moment of National Reckoning, with Ambassador Susan Rice

Subscribe to Lemonada Premium for Bonus Content

In Andy’s conversation with Susan Rice, former UN Ambassador and National Security Advisor, see why she is considered a front-runner for Joe Biden’s pick for Vice President. Rice goes in-depth on her biography and shares her perspectives on how America’s strengths and challenges play out on the world stage. This is a rare chance to hear how she would approach issues ranging from the pandemic to climate change, race relations, the economy, China and more. Plus, reflections on the legacy of the late Congressman John Lewis. 

Website Notes

Check out these resources from today’s episode: 

In the Bubble is supported in part by listeners like you. You can become a member, get exclusive bonus content, ask Andy questions, and get discounted merch at https://lemonadamedia.com/inthebubble 

Take a brief listener survey and get a chance to win a $100 Amazon gift card at https://lemonadamedia.com/survey

Keep up with Andy on Twitter @ASlavitt and Instagram @andyslavitt, and find Susan Rice on Twitter @AmbassadorRice and Instagram @AmbSusanRice.

Stay up to date with us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram at @LemonadaMedia. 


[00:40] Rep. John Lewis: I met Rosa Parks at the age of 17. In 1958 at the age of 18, I met Martin Luther King, Jr., and these two individuals inspired me to get in the way to get in trouble. So I come here to say to you this morning, on this beautiful campus, with your great education, you must find a way to get in the way. You must find a way to get in trouble, good trouble, necessary trouble. As young people, you must understand that there are forces that want to take us back to another period, but you must say they will not win. We’ve made too much progress and we’re going to follow it. There might be some setbacks, some delays, some disappointment, but you must never ever give up or give in. 


[01:39] Andy Slavitt: Welcome to In the Bubble. This is Andy Slavitt. Glad you could join us today. The voice you just heard was that of the late civil rights icon, Congressman John Lewis. John meant so much to so many people, including our guest today, Ambassador Susan Rice. I had a chance to meet John and the pleasure to work with him on a number of occasions, and I can only tell you that for someone who was admired by so many, he was one of the humblest, most decent people that I had a chance to meet in Washington. And, of course, he has stirred us to pay attention to moments like these when there is so much that so many people aren’t getting as part of the American dream, as part of what they deserve. And John’s given his life to that. 


[02:23] Andy Slavitt: So has our guest, Ambassador Susan Rice, whose name is in the news a lot these days because she’s a front runner for the vice presidential slot on Joe Biden’s ticket. We are probably a couple days away from that announcement, and you’ll get a chance to hear a little bit of Ambassador Rice’s biography, and also how all the waves of the current moment — from the protests to the civil rights and justice issues to the police violence issues, of course, all the way to the health care issues we’re all facing right now and why those are not just major domestic issues, but while they’re also national security issues. She wrote a great book that’s now coming out in paperback. It’s called Tough Love: My Story of the Things Worth Fighting For. And I think you’ll really enjoy it. Before we get to that, we’re going to talk about Zach’s facts. I’m also going to update you on a couple things. Right now, the Senate and the House are in the beginning stages of trying to finalize the bill they’re calling COVID 4. I think as we speak, we have a $3 trillion bill in the House that we’re going to have a $1 trillion bill coming out of the Senate. And expect to see a lot of negotiation. And you can follow me on my Twitter feed as that develops. Sports leagues started up this week to not such great success. There have been some mishaps and some real questions about whether those will continue. And our vaccine trials are getting kicked off this week for some of the major drugs. And in that particular case, as we’ve talked about, we really have a shortage of people of color that are signing up for the trial. And that’s going to be critical to making sure the vaccine offers protection for all the communities that need it. All right. Everybody’s favorite part of the show: Zach’s facts.


[04:20] Zach Slavitt: I want to look at immunity for my fact today. So specifically, people who have preexisting immunity, as well as people who are infected. So as many people listening may know, there’s two types of immunity cells. There’s B-cells, which people get after being infected, and it looks like those go away pretty quickly. But then there’s also T-cells, which most scientists and researchers are saying is the best form of long-term immunity. And so a study from Nature Journal on July 7th says that there’s potentially somewhere between 20 and 50 percent of people who aren’t exposed that have significant T-cell levels. It’s important to note that these people have not been exposed to the virus. They had these T-cell levels before. And these were actually measured in 2018 since before the virus was even around. But then another aspect of immunity is people who have already contracted the virus. And a recent King’s College London study made headlines saying that immunity fades rapidly. However, as an Atlantic article and a New York Times article — The Atlantic one titled “How Long This COVID-19 Immunity Last?” states that their study was flawed. They only looked at those B-cells that fade rapidly and not T-cells, which are again perceived as the primary form of long-term immunity. And so many experts actually believe that there is a form of immunity if a significant T-cell response is created, which those two together say that there’s actually a fairly large level of immunity in this country and in the world, assuming that T-cells are actually effective. But I think the big question is if and when we will be able to test for T-cells.


[06:08] Andy Slavitt: Wow. OK, so Zach, let me see if I can make sure I can decipher that for my smaller brain. What I think you’re saying is we are learning more and more about immunity. That the first tests that we were doing for immunity were on the kinds of cells that fade away quickly. But in fact, there is another type of immunity cell called the T-cell that gives us more long-lasting protection. And the interesting thing about this Nature article suggests that people may already have some immunity built in possibly from other coronaviruses, for reasons we don’t yet understand, which may make them less susceptible or not at all susceptible to getting coronavirus. Do we know, Zach, if any of those people have gotten coronavirus? 


[07:00] Zach Slavitt: Yeah, I don’t think there’s enough research into this. It’s just all mainly observational, and there has been a few studies, I think, saying that T-cells are promising. I just  don’t think there’s been enough time. But do you know of any tests that can determine potentially who has kind of T-cell levels? Because, I mean, obviously the test exists if they were able to get that data. It’s just like is there any way people can figure out if they have immunity? 


[07:30] Andy Slavitt: Yeah, I don’t know how they did it back then, but there’s no wide-scale test approved by the FDA. Maybe there will be at some point. Well, interesting. Following that bouncing ball of immunity and understanding our immunity works is going to be very, very important. But there’s potentially some good news in there. And like everything, Zach and I would advise you to take it as one study, one data point, not necessarily double-blinded, but potentially good news. OK, shall we get Susan Rice? You’re really going to enjoy this.


[08:14] Andy Slavitt: How are you, Ambassador? 


[08:16] Susan Rice: I’m great. How are you? 


[08:17] Andy Slavitt: I’m fine. Let’s kick off and talk about 2020 a little bit. It has been a year that has given us a number of tests. I’m wondering if you can describe how you look at the events that we’ve experienced, obviously the pandemic, here in Minneapolis the murder of George Floyd and all of the things that have come since then, the last few years of the presidency of Donald Trump. Where do you feel like we are and how would you frame the place where we sit as a country? 


[08:52] Susan Rice: There’s a lot in that question.


[08:53] Andy Slavitt: You can run any way you want with that question. 


[08:58] Susan Rice: Well, I really think we’re at a moment of national reckoning where we’re being tested on so many fronts simultaneously. The coronavirus obviously is the most stark and deadly of the tests. But, you know, the economic crisis that has come with it, our failure to confront the virus collectively and in a unified fashion with a common sense of national purpose, our failure to lead the world on this and so many other dimensions when our leadership — or in this case, lack thereof — actually makes Americans less safe and less healthy over the long term. And then, of course, you know, we’ve had this extraordinary reckoning with racial injustice, which is, you know, the legacy of our nation’s original sin, slavery, that’s never been fully and sufficiently addressed. And all these things are coming together under the leadership of somebody so uncaring and incompetent and divisive that it further undermines our capacity to address these challenges effectively. It’s a real precarious moment.


[10:24] Andy Slavitt: We lost one of the people who became a symbol for many of us as to marching ourselves in the right direction, John Lewis. And at a time when people are questioning whether or not we have faith in our leaders, or as you say don’t send the moral message that we’ve sent overseas historically. I’m wondering if you can reflect on John’s legacy and how that fits into the moment that we’re dealing with. 


[10:55] Susan Rice: Well, his loss is just so profound and it couldn’t have come at a worse moment in some ways. When what we need more than ever is the kind of kindness and compassion and vision and hopefulness and courage that his whole life embodied. He was someone who had the daylight beaten out of him on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and then forgave George Wallace. Someone who understood that as human beings, we have so much more in common than divides us if we can see each other’s common humanity. And that’s what we need now more than ever, is to see each others’ common humanity. We have a shared interest in defeating this deadly virus. We have a shared interest in reviving our economy and educating our students. We have a shared interest in cohering as a nation and preserving our democracy and our fundamental liberties. But rather than doing that, we are in many ways doing the opposite egged on by a president who sees political gain in deepening and exacerbating our divisions along so many dimensions. 


[15:09] Andy Slavitt: First, I want to have you help give people a sense of your biography — and some of us know you very well. There’s obviously a number of people that would love for you to be the vice president or a part of the next administration. I’m not gonna ask you to comment specifically on that, but I do think it is useful for people to get to know who you are. Maybe you can talk a little bit about what it meant for you and what it was like serving in the Obama administration, what you principally focused on, and some of the other key elements of your life that really people should know about.


[15:50] Susan Rice: The opportunity to serve in the Obama administration as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, representing our country to the world and negotiating on some of the most difficult issues — from North Korea to Iran to how we approach human rights in the world — was a huge honor and a great privilege for me. And then I was proud to be able to serve in President Obama’s second term as his national security adviser, where my responsibilities were not only to inform the president and advise him on how to approach the toughest international issues, but to chair the Interagency Principals Committee of the National Security Council. That’s the cabinet level decision making body that is supposed to meet regularly and make recommendations to the president on all the core national security issues. And I came to that experience both at the U.N. and at the White House as national security adviser, having spent much of the rest of my career in government. Starting at age 28, when as a young foreign policy expert, having just gotten my doctorate and just spent a couple of years working in the private sector, I was privileged to join President Clinton’s administration in the very early days at the National Security Council staff. And I served there for four and a half years working on initially U.N. issues, and then on African affairs. And then in President Clinton’s second term. I went over to the State Department where I was named the assistant secretary of state for African affairs, and was responsible for all of our policy, all of our personnel, all the budgetary resources for the 48 countries of sub-Saharan Africa. 


[17:53] Susan Rice: And, you know, public service is something that I was raised with. My parents came from a background where service was important and frankly, so did my grandparents and great-grandparents. I have a sort of diverse background. My mother’s family were immigrants who came from Jamaica to Portland, Maine, in 1912, where there were very few people who were African-American or of color at all. My grandfather was a janitor, my grandmother was a maid. Neither of them had any formal education to speak of. But they came here, like so many immigrants, trying to give their family and their children a better future. And they saved and scraped and managed to send all five of their kids to college. I had four uncles, two of them were doctors. One was a university president. And the third was an optometrist. And then along came my mom, the baby, and she went on to be a leader in the field of higher education, finance and access. She was known, Andy, as the mother of the Pell Grant program because she spent many years working to make it possible, working with Senator Pell to enable what has become now 80 million Americans to have the resources to attend colleges and universities in this country. 


[19:23] Andy Slavitt: What a legacy for someone to have. 


[19:24] Susan Rice: She was amazing. And then she went on to serve in the corporate world for a while. So she was a pioneer. But at her core was this commitment to try to pave a better path for those who came from low-income backgrounds in this country of all races to be able to have what had been so important to her and her family, which was the opportunity for an education. Then on my dad’s side, my father was born in 1920 in segregated South Carolina, in the heart of Jim Crow and at the height of lynching and segregation. And he was actually the grandson of a slave who had fought in the Union Army during the Civil War, and then managed to get an education — an elementary education, then ultimately a college education — after the war ended. And my great-grandfather, Walter Rice, founded a school in New Jersey in the late 1880s known as the Bordentown School. And that school, for 70 years, educated generations of African-Americans in college preparatory skills, but also in vocational and technical skills. And it was a school that was extraordinary, it attracted people like Eleanor Roosevelt and Albert Einstein to the campus. And so here again was somebody who came from nothing but understood that with the blessings he had and the opportunity he had to get an education, it was his duty to give back and to create something that could benefit others. 


[20:52] Susan Rice: By the time my dad came along, his grandson, he was expected to try to go to college and get an education. He did. My dad served during World War II at Tuskegee with the Tuskegee Airmen. And then he went on to the University of California at Berkeley and got his PhD in economics. And he served in government for many years at the Treasury Department, at the World Bank, and then ultimately as a governor of the Federal Reserve System. So on my dad’s side as well, a tradition of service and of trying to contribute in a fashion that was beneficial to the broader good.


[21:38] Andy Slavitt: Well, a couple reflections as I listen to that story. And I got goosebumps at a couple of points. I mean, just about the opportunity and the impact that your family has had. And standing on the shoulders of great generations of people before us. And doing things like your mother did to create opportunity for others. It feels like we don’t hear those stories as much the last couple of years as we might. The other thing you said, I think that’s important for people to reflect on is when they hear foreign policy and they hear security, what they don’t always think of is that every single issue of domestic policy, economics, justice, education, health, it all has to be part of the portfolio, because you’re dealing with how all those things, both in our country, impact our relationships overseas, but also how those things overseas are very much part of your job. Which job did you like better, by the way, the national security job or the U.N. ambassadorship? 


[22:43] Susan Rice: Well, you know, they’re so different. I liked them both. The U.N. job, it’s a very outward facing job. You’re speaking and negotiating and representing the country to the rest of the world every day. It’s almost like, you know, being in a Congress or parliament, where in the case of the United States, you represent the biggest state in the union. But, you know, it’s a lot of glad-handing. It’s a lot of schmoozing. It’s a lot of building relationships. It’s a lot of persuasion. And it’s a lot of tough negotiation. And that was fun. The national security adviser job is almost the opposite. It’s a very much behind-the-scenes job. Your role is to provide counsel to the president, to coordinate the other agencies, to make the policy behind the scenes. And once in a while, to speak publicly and to represent the policy or the president. But it’s not nearly as outward-facing a job. The opportunity to serve as national security adviser to President Obama, who was so thoughtful and careful and committed to trying to do what was best for this country, and make the tough decisions that, even when they weren’t popular — one of the many experiences I had with him, Andy, that you’ll recall was the work we had to do to try to combat the Ebola epidemic in 2014 when, you know, Americans were understandably very, very fearful of what that very deadly and grotesque virus could do if it were to gain a really significant foothold here in the United States. President Obama was under enormous pressure, political pressure in a midterm election year, to close the borders and prevent anybody who traveled to West Africa, and anybody from West Africa to return to the United States, which would have crippled the economy of West Africa, left thousands of Americans who’d gone to do humanitarian and healthcare work stranded. But it was a very popular political call. And guess who was among those cheering for closing the borders? Donald Trump. 


[24:55] Susan Rice: And Obama looked at the science and he looked at the facts and he understood that to do so in that context, which is a different case than what we’re facing today, would have been exceedingly counterproductive on many different levels. And it wouldn’t have prevented the virus from getting here. What would have prevented it, and what did prevent it — because as many will have forgotten, very few Americans ended up infected and very, very few dying in the United States. But that was because he followed the science, and didn’t politicize the epidemic, and didn’t cave to the pressures and the political gamesmanship that was being played against him. And so I got to see that kind of leadership, and to be able to support his leadership, you know, upfront and close and personal. And I wouldn’t trade that experience for anything. 


[25:48] Andy Slavitt: When you talk to foreign leaders, whether they’re heads of state or they’re just part of the foreign policy apparatus, what are you hearing today about the U.S., about our reputation, about our role in the world? 


[26:06] Susan Rice: Well, I think that particularly among our friends and allies, there’s shock and dismay, even heartbreak at how they perceive America has fallen so far so fast. I think it exceeded anybody’s expectations that we could be leading the world in coronavirus infections and deaths. And be completely incapable, it would appear, of exercising the discipline and the rigorous leadership that’s necessary at the national level to get a grip on this the way many other countries around the world have done, many without the resources or the scientific infrastructure and the medical capacity that we have. And so they look at that as just sort of the most dramatic indication that this emperor that we are has no clothes. But then you combine that with leadership that has trashed and undermined our allies. That’s embraced and lauded dictators and enemies, that, you know, doesn’t even pretend to have any regard for the truth or facts. It’s very, very, very disconcerting for our friends. And they have come to conclude that they can’t trust America in this moment. And we’ve got to change that. We’ve got to fix that, Andy. 


[27:35] Susan Rice: Or, you know, we’re not going to have the partners we need to deal with the challenges that we’re inevitably going to face. A more aggressive China, a confrontational Russia that’s trying to undermine ours and every other democracy, climate change, this pandemic. You and I know well that we cannot stamp out this pandemic purely by getting it under control here in the United States. And, of course, we’re a very long way from doing that. If we’re going to succeed in stamping out this virus, we’ve got to stamp it out all over the planet because it has the ability to morph and mutate and come back at us again. So it really matters whether in parts of Africa or Asia or Latin America that this virus persists, because unless and until with American leadership, and that of others in the international arena, we stamp it out everywhere, it’s going to remain a threat to all of us everywhere.


[28:39] Zach Slavitt: Ambassador, how quickly do you think we could reverse all that’s happened with our standing in global organizations like the WHO and like you’re talking about under a Biden administration? 


[28:54] Andy Slavitt: Well, I think, you know, obviously it’s absolutely essential that we change leadership, that we elect Joe Biden, and that we demonstrate to the world that we are prepared to be a responsible, constructive player. I think that on the question of how we can recoup our standing in multilateral organizations, like the WHO, I think that part of the challenge is relatively easy to address. I mean, Biden’s already said he’s going to rejoin the WHO on day one. We need to pay our delinquent dues and do the same in other multilateral organizations. He’ll rejoin the Paris climate agreement. I mean, I think those are the kind of low-hanging fruit. But the bigger and longer-term challenge, which is not going to be easily reversed, although I think it can be if we have Joe Biden in there starting in January, is to persuade our allies that they can trust us again. That our leadership is worthy of their support and cooperation. They have got to be terrified that we have shown how fragile our democratic institutions are, how fickle our public is, and they must be wondering if, you know, even if we elect Joe Biden in November, what’s going to happen in four, eight, 12, 16 years? Could we find ourselves back to leadership that is actively engaged in pursuing self-interested objectives to the detriment of not just the United States, but many of our partners in the world? And that’s got to be terrifying. 


[33:23] Andy Slavitt: You mentioned China. What is your real sixth sense of China? What their strategy is, how we should be feeling about their role during the pandemic? What responsibility should they hold? And can you help sort out how you view the next, say, decade of our relationship with China? 


[33:45] Susan Rice: Well, the U.S.-China relationship is the most complex and consequential bilateral relationship in the world. And, you know, we are at this point very fierce competitors in the security realm, in the economic realm. And we’ve allowed that competition to edge towards conflict. And, you know, there’s blame on both sides to go around for that. But the reality is, you know, whether it’s advancing our economic interests vis a vis China, our security interests, we need to do that with allies and partners. And China wants very much to see the rupture and the atrophy of our alliance relationships, not just in Asia, but globally. And when Donald Trump takes on China in a unilateral trade war, fails to bring our allies with us, and starts parallel trade wars with them in the process, he’s not serving our interests and he’s not positioning us to compete effectively against China. And the same is true in the security realm. And he has really made a complex, precarious situation, much more dangerous. And he has taken a whole variety of steps that have had the assume unintended consequence of ceding the field to China. And a great example is the WHO. You know, China’s role in this pandemic is something that deserves to be investigated, and we need to understand what happened and didn’t happen. But at the end of the day, we all need to defeat this virus. 


[35:22] Susan Rice: And it’s not going to happen effectively with the United States and China working at cross purposes. And the United States having exited the WHO, and leaving the WHO essentially in China’s hands. So we’ve approached it all the wrong way. And the question going forward in this bilateral relationship is, can we compete with each other responsibly without that competition tilting over into conflict, which would be catastrophic for all concerned, and can we find, again, as we have in the past, ways to cooperate when it is in our mutual interest? We should be cooperating despite all the water under the bridge in trying to stamp out the pandemic, and giving least-developed countries greater resources and capacity to do the same. We ought to be cooperating on climate change and issues of nonproliferation. And instead, you know, we stand by watching China and Iran forge a much deeper relationship that’s going to be beneficial to both. That’s not good for the United States. When we back out of a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement that the United States led in negotiating, and leave our Asian partners to conclude that they can’t trust our word, who benefits? China. So we’ve mishandled this in so many ways, across so many dimensions. And what we need to do, again, we hope with new leadership in January, is to put the U.S. China relationship on a more predictable footing. Doesn’t mean we’re not going to be fierce competitors. It doesn’t mean we’re going to be less concerned about their misbehavior in the economic realm or in the security realm, quite the contrary. But it will mean that we approach these challenges with partners and allies, and with sobriety, and with a recognition that even as we compete fiercely, there ought to be some areas in which we can find ways to cooperate. 


[37:31] Andy Slavitt: I just have a few final questions. I really appreciate the time. First one, what’s the cost to the U.S. not being a global leader? 


[37:42] Susan Rice: There’s a huge cost because the whole purpose of American global leadership is to be able to accomplish objectives that advance our interests and advance our values. And the only way to do that, because we live in a world where no one country can wave a magic wand and make everything happen automatically according to their will, we need partners and we need allies and we need peoples to want to work with us to accomplish those objectives. We’re not safe and secure, whether we’re fighting terrorism or climate change or a virus or an adversary, when we are acting alone. It’s just not enough. 


[38:24] Andy Slavitt: Second question, and you’ve written about this, is there a cost to us in the world for not having our domestic house in order? For not having racial justice, for not having healthcare available to Americans as needed, for not having a functioning education system that allows people to close racial and economic gaps?

[38:45] Susan Rice: Absolutely. I mean, what I’ve often said is that our domestic political divisions, our domestic dysfunction, is in many ways our greatest national security vulnerability. And it’s for two reasons. probably more than two, but two main reasons. One is, as you implied in your question, when we cannot get basic stuff done in this country that is necessary to advance the interests of the American people — we can’t, for example, agree to fund infrastructure, so our roads and our bridges and our airports and our lack of broadband access in many areas is completely pathetic. And, you know, we can’t agree on how to secure our elections, and make it possible for people to vote, even people whose health may be at risk if they were to go to the polls in a pandemic. These things should not be matters of partisan debate. They are things that benefit all of us. And yet, because of our broken politics, we’re unable to get things done. The other reason why it’s a major national security vulnerability is because our adversaries have figured out that they can exacerbate our divisions.


[39:58] Susan Rice: We’ve seen the challenges in stark light that we face around race in this country. But our adversaries like Russia are trying to divide us not only on racial lines, but on every kind of dimension that they can envision. You know, immigration, gay rights, guns, all of the hot-button issues that leave Americans at very different ends of the spectrum. And they are actively sowing hatred and fear between and among Americans. They do it every day on social media. They do it every day through their propaganda. And they are actively trying to cause us to fear and hate each other and to distrust our government institutions, and therefore democracy itself. And that’s their way to weaken us to their own advantage, and it’s a very dangerous opening that we’ve created for our adversaries by allowing these divisions to fester. But the good news is because they are divisions of our own making their divisions, that we have the capacity to heal. The solution is within our power. But we need to understand its importance and urgency. And we need leadership that is about repairing that damage, building bridges and unifying us rather than profiting politically by dividing us.


[41:24] Andy Slavitt: Well, that thesis, that unification of our domestic and our foreign policy, that is probably why a lot of people think you’re such an attractive candidate to be on the ticket. I won’t make you comment on that. I do have a final question: throwing out the first pitch at a baseball game, how stressful is that? 


[41:43] Susan Rice: As I write in my book, Andy, that was probably the moment of greatest stress of anything I’ve tried to do in public. I’ve spoken to crowds of, you know, the size of a football stadium at Ohio State. But throwing out that first pitch at National Stadium — and I was determined to throw it from the mound and not take the easy way out — was terrifying. And I practiced it pretty diligently for almost a month. You get out there and before you know it, you’re being called to the mound, it felt like a millisecond, and you’re up there and you just have to do it. And I threw it and thank God it was a strike. And I’m never doing it again. I’m one and done. I’m dropping the mic. It was fun, but it was terrifying.


[42:34] Andy Slavitt: Well, here’s to hoping you’re forced to do it more times.


[42:39] Susan Rice: Thanks, Andy. Appreciate it. It was a lot of fun. 


[42:46] Andy Slavitt: So speaking of the first pitch, you ought to check out Ambassador Rice’s Twitter feed. She has a very funny reference — as it turns out, she did this after our interview. Maybe we even reminded her of it. I wish her all the luck this week. As you can tell, she is quite an accomplished person with a great biography. OK. We have shows next week. Let me tell you what they are. Monday we have a show on colleges and universities. What are they thinking? What are they doing? Should they be opening? That’s not necessarily a Toolkit episode, but it’s certainly a Toolkit-ish because we are going to help parents who are sending their kids off to college. But it’s also a great show for people who just want to understand what’s going on with higher education. Scott Galloway will be our guest for that. Then on Wednesday, we have the man who created the gang, Andrew Yang. And I think that will be quite a good show, and then in the following week, one of my favorite people, Reverend William Barber. If you’ve not heard Reverend Barber, go play some video of him or go play some audio of him. He is riveting. He oversees and started the Poor People’s Campaign. And then on Wednesday, we have our first couple coming on the show, Senator Sherrod Brown and his amazing spouse, Connie Schultz, who is a journalist and is phenomenal. Maybe we’ll get Lana on and we can all have a little dinner party with you all. We’ll see. Anyway, have a great rest of the week. Thank you so much for listening and supporting the show. Over and out. 


[44:33] Andy Slavitt: Thanks for listening In the Bubble. Hope you rate us highly. We are a production of Lemonada Media. Kryssy Pease is our producer. Ivan Kuraev is our editor. Jessica Cordova Kramer and Stephanie Wittels Wachs executive produce the show and run our lives. My son Zach Slavitt is my cool co-host and onsite producer. Music is by Dan Molad and Oliver Hill. You can find out more about our show on social media @LemonadaMedia. And you can find me at a @ASlavitt on Twitter or @AndySlavitt on Instagram. If you liked what you heard today, please, please, please tell your friends to come listen, but from a distance. And for now, stay safe. Share some joy. And we will get through this together. And #StayHome.


Spoil Your Inbox

Pods, news, special deals… oh my.