Let’s Argue Substance For A Change

In a world where narratives count more than facts and data, we may be evolving to a time people armed with actual knowledge are in a place to shut down those too lazy to ground their positions in something other than personal prejudice. Take the Trump true believers claiming election fraud. They’ve yet to produce anything when challenged to show us the basis for their claims. The other side has placed their goods on the table. Only the like-minded listen to these people. Others cast their votes against “Trump Won” candidates.

We can deal the same fate to those claiming the world is ending because of overpopulation, climate change, or a combination of the two. Adherents of “the science” tell us Covid came from a “wet Market,” locking everyone down, including children, prevents the spread, and mandating vaccination for everyone numerous times is necessary. Our nation’s history is really what “The 1619 project ‘ claims. The gap in the U.S. between rich and poor has grown to an all-time high.

We know from the Russian Collusion and The Biden Laptop fiascos those without facts turn to suppress those that do. Unless you’re the Chinese Communist Party, facts ultimately will come out. We can extend the growing embarrassment of elites in politics and media taking this route to their followers.

Simply asking for the basis of their position on any of these subjects may result in a blank look. How can you question dogma? Everyone knows this is true. I read it in the N.Y. Times or The Washington Post. O.K., but where are the facts? Could you show us the data? Volunteer to read whatever they can provide, but in return, they have to read your sources. 

Of course, you need to have sources to offer. If you don’t readily have them, may I suggest a few easily accessible books and articles that skewer many progressive, most cherished themes?

Continue reading

Out of the Jaws of Victory

Ukraine could still lose its war with Russia. It isn’t for lack of skill or courage of the Ukrainians we’ve arrived at this point. For all the sacrifice and treasure expended to repel Putin’s legions, the invaders may still prevail. From Russia’s 2014 invasion to the present, the Obama and Biden administrations have been playing catch up in providing the weapons needed for the Ukrainians to win. Trump sent Javelin anti-tank missiles, while Obama sent only non-lethal supplies. 

Only Ukrainian success in the initial battle for Kyiv brought forth supplies of modern arms. Our military and intelligence establishments expected a quick Russian victory and were unwilling to waste resources in a losing cause. They were unaware of the nation’s military improvements and the use of the weapons and other military aid they received from the Trump administration. The fact the Ukrainians had fought the Russians-backed forces in the eastern part of the country to a standstill was unappreciated.  

I and others opined we should give Ukraine whatever weapons they needed as fast as their ability allowed them to use them. As they have proved to be fast learners, they should be sporting the most sophisticated arms by now, and the Russians are paying an unbearable price. 

We haven’t given them weapons to shoot back This failure has allowed the Russians to inflict horrendous civilian casualties and infrastructure degradation. Instead of routing the poorly led and trained Russians, the war degenerated into WWI trench warfare. 

It’s not that potent weapons never get to the Ukrainians; they need to get there quickly. Eventually, we send HMERs, effective air defense, better artillery, and tanks only to stave off defeat. Even now, we are doing the same dance over sending F16 fighter jets. Eventually, we will send them, but they should already be there.

Some Republicans are questioning the expense. Instead of Russian defeat and Ukraine being made whole, we have a war likely to drag on. The longer a fight drags on, the likelihood of war weariness appears. Democrats always have an anti-war wing. 

Other powers might perceive it in their interest to keep us engaged in Europe. In China’s case, a U.S. bogged down, depleting our military assets gives it a more substantial hand in Asia.

Biden says he is relying on the weapons advice of the military. These are the same military leaders who failed so dramatically in Afghanistan and predicted a quick Russian victory in Ukraine. There is no reason to be confident in their advice. Bringing in new people at the joint Chiefs and Defence Department might get us on track to winning the war.

Russia will strike again if it can hold a big part of Ukraine and rebuild its military. The next time will probably involve NATO members drawing the U.S. directly, resulting in American bloodshed. We know this is true because Putin has told us his intentions.

Cancel Culture is Alive & Well

Standing up for Roseanne Barr when she made some nutty comments wasn’t a popular stance. Rather than losing the program she created, I felt an apology was sufficient. My rationale is that people in the humor business must test boundaries to hold a mirror up to us. Sometimes the humor falls flat. Often it takes off-kilter people to have to view things differently. As Jay Leno often said, “this comedy thing isn’t so easy.” Still, we need George Carlins and Jerry Seinfelds to make us aware of ourselves in a humorous way.

Now we have Dilbert cartoon creator Scott Adams having his work dumped across the board. His sin, citing a Rasmussen Poll showing approximately half of the blacks unable to agree that it’s alright to be white. Adams took this to indicate racism. If every other black you meet views you negatively simply because of your skin color, that is the definition of rampant racism.

My first reaction is Adams is kidding us on the square. He went on to say you should stay away from blacks. The inference is an interaction with people unfavorably viewing you might end badly. Many whites, including myself, avoid interactions with blacks for fear of inadvertently saying something that could ruin their life. The situation is different t when traveling abroad. You must cut others’ slack and hope they do the same with you there.

If a poll instead showed half the whites could not agree that being black is alright, would that indicate racism? In today’s climate, I think most would agree it is racist. It would lead on CNN and MSNBC. “Half of the whites won’t say it’s alright to be black,” proving widespread white racism.” You know it’s true.

The formula is the same. Adams says 50% of a population (P) polled (in his case, blacks) won’t agree with the proposition. In his case, it’s 50%P=racism. In the latter case, 50%P (White)=racism. How is this different? How is Adams wrong? Has he held the mirror up to us?

Adams told us on what he based his statements, a poll. Some have said Rasmussen is right-wing or unreliable. Still, it’s included in the Real Clear Politics averages and ranked for accuracy like CNN/Opinion Research Corp. Your beef is with the poll, not Adams.

 To survive, we must give people, especially humorists, room to ply their trade here at home. You can’t be friends with someone you fear is looking to get you. Stay away from Blacks and anything relating to them is excellent advice. Sadly, Adams’ cancellation supports his advice to avoid anything Black.

If you can no longer find this blog, WordPress probably canceled me.

Continuing to Revisit

Catching up in several areas is necessary from time to time. It’s essential to see where I’m right, wrong, or a mixed bag. Rather than put it all in one post, I’ll do it in smaller bites over the next few days.

 While I perceived the frenzied attack on police would backfire, I missed other things. Making assumptions about the efficacy of covid vaccines is a significant whiff.  

Like many others, I concluded after receiving the two shots was protected. After all, this is the way vaccines such as those for smallpox and polio work. Further, I could no longer spread Covid.

Vaccinating everyone on a cruise protects everyone from passing Covid. The more people vaccinated would slow and eventually stop the spread.

 Based on this perception, I favored vaccine passports and some mandates. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis saw it differently. He banned orders requiring vaccination for Covid in his state. At the same time, he actively opened his state. People were walking on the beaches without masks. Children went back to school.

We both supported the Great Barrington Declaration thesis lockdowns are the wrong approach and do great harm. A governor has far greater resources to dig deeper than a lonely blogger. DeSantis did just that. Based on what he found, he concluded the vaccines were being oversold. There is no evidence that vaccines prevent the spread. We found out Pfizer never even tested its vaccine for spread prevention. 

The basis for passports and mandates evaporates if the vaccines don’t stop Covid spread. DeSantis dug into the data and realized this was the case. Even though a big state Governor has far greater resources than a lowly blogger, I should’ve looked closer at DeSantis’ reasoning and the data, or lack of it; he based his actions. I drank the Kool-Aid.

My admiration for the Florida Governor began with his diligence during the pandemic and willingness to stand up and take the heat for his data-based actions. This stance is what leadership is all about.

In my series on Covid, I did get other aspects right. The lockdowns were a disaster. Lost jobs, trillions unnecessarily spent, and children’s learning loss resulted from failing to follow my and the other Great Barrington Declarations signer’s recommendations. Rather than continuing to suppress data on the lab, leek theory and natural immunity have belatedly received proper coverage. 

We still need a thorough investigation of the mishandling of our Covid response. Why were legitimate concerns and information suppressed in opposition to all of our methods of scientific inquiry? Reversing a greatly diminished faith in our medical and other institutions is necessary before we suffer another calamity.