Rebane's Ruminations

Debate1 Reflections (Addended)

George Rebane

President Trump did not pull off a good debate last night.  His biggest mistake was again his motor mouth – he kept interrupting Biden’s long answers in which the man had the best chance to display his faltering mental faculties.  To such welcome interruptions Biden’s response was always a cherubic smile as he sent another ‘Saved again, thank you God’ heavenward.  Hopefully, Trump’s debate coaches Giuliani and Christie will tell him to STFU next time when Bumblebrain is required to give a long answer.

The former VP spent most of his mic time just repeating unsubstantiated lies, the main one being that the president has totally mismanaged the country’s C19 response, and has no plan for it going forward.  No one in the country has had the brains to make him answer as to what he would have done that would have produced markedly different results with his declared penchant to keep the economy locked down.  The second biggest lie was that Obama put him in charge of the country’s economic recovery in 2009, and that singlehandedly he did an outstanding job – talk about the invisible man during those years.  And perhaps the biggest obvious whopper was that the Democrats’ published platform does not back implementing the Green New Deal.  The only benefit that Trump got was Biden being the first to launch ad hominem attacks – “clown”, “racist”, … - against the president.

Then it was Trump who left a lot of strong points and rebuttals on the table – was it poor prep or just his motor mouth getting in the way of considered thought?  He didn’t say anything about creating an economy that delivered the lowest minority (especially black) unemployment rates in living memory.  He didn’t say anything about being the most effective Mideast peacemaker in the last 50 years, and now being internationally nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.  He didn’t effectively rebut the ‘climate change causes wildfires and hurricanes, and the US going green will stop them’.  His proper response would have cited the recent reports by NOAA and the IPCC (also in these pages) stating that neither agency could conclude that climate change has had any effect on the frequency and intensity of both kinds of disasters; that constant repetition of preventable manmade global warming nostrums continue as just politically motivated hysterical hype.

Finally, the president got a fantastic opening from Biden on the latter’s claim that his economic plan, based on green energy, would create 4M new jobs and result in a $1T marginal contribution to GDP.  Since none of these new jobs would provide any benefits that current market-driven technologies already provide, their being mandated through more stifling government regulations and subsidies would actually inhibit economic growth – in short, they would have the same in/effect as  did FDR’s depression era alphabet soup agencies.  Frederic Bastiat explained the whole thing in his easy to understand ‘Broken Window Fallacy’.  This would have been a major rebuttal to the socialists’ perennial approach to building economies, an approach that has failed every time it has been tried – you can’t build an economy with gratuitously created jobs and unnecessary spending.

Hopefully President Trump will do a much better job in Debate2 by letting Bumblebrain bumble, and remembering his list of strong responses.

[Addendum]  At first I decided to leave out evaluation of Chris Wallace’s strictly one-sided performance as the debate’s moderator.  At home we were aghast at how blatantly and asymmetrically Wallace conducted the session, lobbing softballs at Biden and Democratic talking-point gotchas at President Trump. (more here)  Among his many egregious tactics was Wallace preventing Trump from correcting Biden’s continuous stream of obvious lies and indicting innuendos.  This made it clear that the president was debating both Biden and Wallace.  Overall, it was a very unprofessional and somewhat incompetent performance by Fox News’ star leftwing correspondent and host of its Sunday commentary program.

With regard to a better control of debaters talking out of turn and over each other so that no one can understand what either is saying, I am in favor of the moderator having control the debaters’ microphones.  When it’s time for one participant to stop their diatribe and let the other one respond, then just turn on-and-off the appropriate mics.  The mics can also be of the kind, or even baffled, to make them very directional – i.e. they will greatly attenuate sounds that arrive off-axis of their receiving beams.  In Debate1 this would have allowed Wallace to effectively silence Trump, and permit Biden to deliver much longer and more revelatory responses with his usual acumen for extemporaneous public speech.

Scattershots – 29sep20 (updated)

George Rebane

AI remains a mystery.  To the overwhelming share of people AI is nothing short of software magic.  Latest evidence of this is how smart gasoline pricing systems formed duopolies and oligopolies in Germany’s gas station sector.  This surprised the so-called experts who had recommended installing such systems in gas stations, so they could dynamically adjust prices in any given neighborhood in order to squeeze the last euro out their customers.  The AIs worked beautifully, increasing margins up to 30% as they were fed data on nearby competitor prices.  But then someone noticed that the implemented pricing policy resembled that of collaborating duopolies and oligopolies.  Well, no s#!t Red Ryder.  Given their embedded utility function of increasing margin amounts, they would naturally work together to boost prices to the maximum ‘hilt’.  And they did it without any obvious collusion other than knowing what others in the region were charging, and their own sales volume.  And FYI dear reader, it doesn’t take a very smart system to achieve such results.

‘Let my people go!’,  Moses called out to the pharaoh a few thousand years ago, an appeal which we all should echo as we face toward Sacramento.  The lockdown powerplays by our power-hungry, socialist party politicians are doing nothing but provide grist for their anti-Trump propaganda mill.  The CDC has underlined the wrongheadedness of this policy in publishing its latest findings on Covid-19 survival rates –

Ages 0-19: 99.997%
Ages 20-49: 99.98%
Ages 50-69: 99.5%
Ages 70+: 94.6%

For those who have some trouble with probabilities, these survival rates apply to people who have been infected with C19.  To get the actual measure of C19 risk, i.e. the probability that you will contract the disease and die, you have to multiply one minus the above numbers by the probability that you’ll get infected.  Say, that your probability of infection over the next year is a generous one in ten thousand or 0.0001.  Using this number, your probability of succumbing from C19 is shown below –

Ages 0-19: 0.0000003% or 3 chances out of one billion;
Ages 20-49: 0.000002% or 2 chances out of one hundred million;
Ages 50-69: 0.00005% or 5 chances out of ten million;
Ages 70+: 0.00054% or 54 chances out of ten million.

Now how do you spell s-t-u-p-i-d, or is it c-y-n-i-c-a-l?

[Update] Lamestream media continues its policy of fake news, a practice which includes omitting major news events that go counter to the narrative dictated to them by the Democratic National Committee.  This past weekend more that 50,000 Americans gathered on the Washington Mall for a prayer march from the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial. (more here)  Not a peep of this major gathering of religious Americans was told to the rest of the nation.  To the Left, these deplorables are to be terminally shunned by all politically correct Americans, and that they are.  We have to remember that those denied such a major news event are people our progressives characterize as sensitive, inclusive, non-discriminatory, multi-cultural, non-racist, … .  Were they to be shown such scenes of mass attendance at a prayer march, who knows what levels of PTSD or other psychological distress they might suffer?

Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are neck and neck vying for the top spot for the Leftwing Liars championship.  Schumer is currently pulling ahead with his repetition of the Democrats’ Big Lie du jour, that the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett was “illegitimate”.  He does not even attempt to substantiate his allegation with a citation of what law or constitutional provision her nomination and subsequent empanelment violates – why? because he doesn’t have to.  He knows that the most evil part of such material Big Lies is that they totally bamboozle the lightly read voter who has neither the intellect nor the gumption to check out the crap his party’s leadership dishes out.  So, trusting scumbags like Schumer and Pelosi, he winds up voting against his own and his family’s best interests.  And, of course, our local leftwing lackeys will again send in their Collectivist Crickets Chorus to respond to such reports.

On Covid-19 The Economist blows it again

George Rebane

When the latest issue of the “world’s oldest newspaper” (aka the left-leaning The Economist) arrived this week with its cover story ‘Why governments get it wrong’, and promised to reveal how government can get it right, I got all excited.  Finally, someone is willing to step forward and tell us what the proper response should have been to the Covid pandemic.  All of us in the US have heard about eight months of Democrats telling everyone who would listen that President Trump has done it all wrong and thereby cost the nation tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths.  Moreover, candidate Biden has had the correct response tucked under his armpit the whole time, and now is the time to get Bumblebrain into office so that under his (her?) leadership we can finally be rid of this dreaded disease.

Of course, it’s already turned out that Biden’s Monday quarterbacking has nothing in it that Trump doesn’t already have in play, and he didn’t even think of putting vaccine development into an historically novel overdrive with Project Warp Speed.  But all that makes no never mind to the legions of loyal leftwing lackeys (you know, all those people with college degrees) – perhaps the country’s most unaccomplished presidential candidate is still their man with all the answers, just as soon as they swear in the Harris/Biden administration.  The bottom line of all this campaign hyperventilating is that it delivered no specifics as to what Trump should have done when, a response policy that would have saved all those thousands of lives, and not put the economy into lockdown life support.

Enter the 26sep20 issue of The Economist. With its lead piece claiming that governments have been playing whackamole when the correct response strategy lay at hand.  And then you continue to read their rhetoric which turns out to be nothing but a rehash of the year’s global Covid history of various responses, in all of which governments are “failing” to practice “the basics of public health”.  And what exactly are these failures?  Well nothing that is not already being done in various forms by all governments guided by their own situations and executing their available best practices.  Ignoring this, the newspaper’s editorial worthies blithely go on to advise that “governments must identify the trade-offs that make most economic and social sense.”  Specifically they laud British Columbia “that set principles and invite individuals, schools and workplaces to devise their own plans of realizing them, will be able to sustain the effort in the months ahead.”  Whaaat?!! Does that critique and advice sound like going in circles?  

What also brought a smile to my lips was the quiet insertion of “The increase in Europe’s diagnosed cases reflects reality, but the global effect is an artefact of extra testing, which picks up cases that would have been missed.”  Do you recall what the Democrats and their lamestream media did when President Trump pointed out that increased testing contributed to the jump in Covid cases?  This eminently reasonable conclusion was shouted down, and Trump was accused of practicing medicine without a license, of claiming that testing caused Covid and its cure was to minimize testing.  In short, the president was made out to be an imbecile by all leftwingers (including those who read RR), when anyone with a 3-digit IQ could understand the effect on Covid case count from the widespread testing of more people.  Did anyone hear of a retraction by our Democrat brethren and cistern?  Or perhaps we missed their red-faced admission that they were the actual imbeciles?

And finally, The Economist admits that, among all the governments’ errors, in America it was the CDC, “once the world’s most respected public-health body”, that was “plagued by errors (and) poor leadership”.  As a responsible leader, President Trump correctly pointed this out to Americans as the CDC continued to miss its projections, and waffled this way and that on its recommendations.  But in the view of the revered, almost two-century-old newspaper, it all was President Trump’s fault for “denigrating” the agency.

So the conclusion I draw from such reportage is that TDS has also become a global political pandemic, little remains of what once was known as journalism, and that in the 21^st century the public may have little or no chance of finding reliable information about anything that issues from the current cacophony of broadcast and online news outlets.

Sandbox – 28sep20

[Pelosi and her team continue to accuse President Trump of having violated laws and the Constitution without providing a shred of evidence or supportive back-up.  And their vastly more college-educated leftwing constituency laps it hook, line, and sinker up without ever asking which laws or constitutional provisions the president has violated.  As we have observed, it all turns out to be part and parcel of progressive jurisprudence - all allegations from the Left are on their face to be accepted as evidence sufficient for indictment.  gjr]

Empaneling 2016/2020 SCOTUS Justices Explained

George Rebane

Democrats are going through a nationwide hissy-fit about President Trump’s announced nomination today of the replacement for the late Justice Ginsberg.  Their anguished screams ring hollow as they attempt to ascend Mount Morality to denounce the Republicans’ election-year nomination and confirmation of a new justice to fill the ranks of SCOTUS, and thereby avoid an irresolute court that must inevitably adjudicate the results of the most momentous election of our lifetime.

The charge against Republicans is hypocrisy – In 2016 Majority Leader McConnell denied an election year hearing for President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, yet now in 2020 he is proceeding apace to rush through President Trump’s (presumed) nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett.  But giving the matter a smidgen of thought (not a widely shared ability) quickly reveals the practical and coherent reasoning behind these seemingly disparate actions.

First and foremost, let’s start with the acknowledgement that what was done in 2016 and being done now is legal and constitutional, and, thanks to former Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid, procedurally correct.   Second, the appointment of SCOTUS justices is a political act intended to bias the court’s future rulings that will promote the ideologically motivated stratagems of the party in power.  Appeals to alternative reasoning on the matter are intended for the ideologically ignorant or sclerotic.

To understand the Republicans’ reasoning then and now, we have to review the divergent governance goals of the Left and Right.  Democrats seek to fundamentally transform America into a weakened socialist state with a crippled sovereignty that is no longer a global hegemon and prepared to accede to a one-world order.  Democrats view people, not as individuals with diverse needs, wants, and aspirations, but as members of various controlled and compliant classes, the societal roles of which will be mandated and managed by a cadre of the governing elite.  In short, Democrats are now avowedly Marxists, and all of their proposals and programs are readily predictable within this ideological framework.  And continuing on this tack, the Left remains anti-science, now with their ‘woke science’ programs they again return to the practice of science (cf. eugenics and Lysenko) that must first and foremost support the party’s political predicates du jour.

The Republicans, on the other hand, reject any notion of a one-size-fits-all global government, and believe that a peaceful communion of more or less culturally coherent, independent, and sovereign nation-states, will provide for a world order that benefits all humankind in the widest sense.  In this social framework, individuals are seen as discrete agents maximally free to pursue their own dreams as they work in co-operative commercial environments to satisfy their daily needs.  Government is seen as a minimalist social enterprise that only undertakes tasks and performs functions for the common good that are ill-suited for businesses competing in minimally regulated capitalistic economies.

Returning now to 2016, we see a federal government viz SCOTUS divided along party lines with a Republican Senate and a Democratic Executive.  With the prospect of a Democrat victory likely, McConnell makes the politically astute decision to reject Obama’s nominee, with the off-chance hope that Trump will win and then have the opportunity to nominate a suitable candidate more likely to support Republicans’ goals.  It is clear to all who can reason, that should Hillary win, then she and the Democrats could subsequently exercise their option to nominate, and the people’s will would be served.  In short, there was no intrinsic harm to either party in delaying Merrick Garland’s hearing in the outgoing Congress.

Now in 2020 the federal government viz SCOTUS is structured differently with a Republican Senate and also a Republican Executive.  Moreover, a month before the election, the current odds of a Trump victory do not look good.  We add that Trump’s election was based on his promise to shift the country’s court system toward the right, and correctly interpret his retention of the political prerogative to continue implementing that shift as long as he is in office.  In sum, getting Judge Barrett empaneled may be Trump’s last hurrah, one that he and the Republican Party dare not pass up, given the country’s rush toward a socialist autocracy.  The Republicans see a conservative SCOTUS as perhaps the remaining redoubt from which to impede our anti-American Left that has promised its minions a new socialist dawn.

And to think that all this was made possible by Dirty Harry.

[Update] Heritage gives a short summary of SCOTUS FAQs here.

Scattershots – 25sep20 (updated 26sep20)

George Rebane

SCOTUS term limits are now proposed by Democrats.  A bill limiting justices to 18-year terms is to be introduced in the House (here).  The Constitution only specifies that there will be a SCOTUS, and then gives Congress the permission to organize it and set up lower courts.  Why Democrats are suddenly considering reducing the life terms of justices is an interesting speculation.  Is that their alternative to packing the court after President Trump’s third nominee is sworn in?  How will that legislation read – will the sitting justices be grandfathered with their life terms?  If not, how will they be unseated?  The whole process looks like it will be another dust-up between the parties.  It will have no chance of passage until the Dems sweep both houses, and maybe even require their taking the WH.  All such moves are intended to remove the checks and balances built in by our Founders to establish and maintain a democratic republic, and not let it lapse into a pure democracy which is so appealing to the nation's double dummies.  However, the Democrats’ plan for an American autocracy requires that we first become a democracy with an ignorant and malleable electorate.  Then the rest will be easy.

Obamacare popularity drops 5% since 2018.  In the ten years of its existence, the unaffordable Affordable Care Act has managed to eke out only 8.3 million subscribers out of a population of 330 million Americans. (here) There is no more robust statistic that communicates the ‘popularity’ of this unfortunate program of nationalized healthcare that continues to be mismanaged by governments at all levels.  Yet, hearing the Big Lie Democrats talk, you’d think that if Obamacare were replaced by some other safety net program, then the entire country would be on their own, putting on band-aids to treat cancer in the kitchen.  Nothing could be further from the truth; our healthcare system is still the envy of the world which receives a steady stream of medical migrants coming to get treatments unavailable to them at any cost in their nationalized healthcare countries.

[26sep20 update]  Politics causes dementia is a plausible proposition, especially in the ranks of collectivist politicians.  California qualifies as Exhibit A.  Here we have a governor, one who can easily be replaced by a 2x4 with a face painted on it, mandating no more fossil-fueled cars sold in the state after 2035.  In the interval we are supposed to be transitioning to EVs for which no provision is being made for expanded charging stations, let alone expanding the now shrinking power grid as the natural gas and nuclear generating stations are taken off line.  California's sky high electric rates now will soar to heights only seen in third world countries.  Our one-party Democrat politicians are busy actively exploring new frontiers of idiocy.  This is known to all middle-class taxpayers, many of whom are packing their U-Hauls as they join the Great Exodus to greener pastures, and all while our socialists – legislators to locals - are welcoming more welfare recipients and illegal aliens with attractive unfunded programs to succor their every need.  To Democrats reliable voting constituencies are worth every penny they can extract from you.

‘Our Upside Down World’

[I received this little summary of today’s anti-American insanity by an anonymous writer from a correspondent.  I post it as received.  gjr]

Today I woke up and I realized that everything is about to change. No matter how I vote, no matter what I say, something evil has invaded our nation, and our lives are never going to be the same.

I have been confused by the hostility of family and friends. I look at people I have known all my life--so hate-filled that they agree with opinions they would never express as their own. I think that I may well have entered the Twilight Zone.

You can't justify this insanity. We have become a nation that has lost its collective mind!

• If a dude pretends to be a woman, you are required to pretend with him.
• Somehow it's un-American for the census to count how many Americans are in America.
• Russians influencing our elections are bad, but illegals voting in our elections are good.
• Twenty is too young to drink a beer, but eighteen is old enough to vote.
• People who have never owned slaves should pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves..
• People who have never been to college should pay the debts of college students who took out huge loans for their degrees.
• Immigrants with tuberculosis and polio are welcome, but you'd better be able to prove your dog is vaccinated.
• Irish doctors and German engineers who want to immigrate to the US must go through a rigorous vetting process, but any illiterate gang-bangers who jump the southern fence are welcome.
• $5 billion for border security is too expensive, but $1.5 trillion for "free" health care is not.
• If you cheat to get into college you go to prison, but if you cheat to get into the country you go to college for free.
• People who say there is no such thing as gender are demanding a female President.
• We see other countries going Socialist and collapsing, but it seems like a great plan to us.
• Some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born, and other people are not held responsible for what they are doing right now.
• Criminals are caught-and-released to hurt more people, but stopping them is bad because it's a violation of THEIR rights.
• And pointing out all this hypocrisy somehow makes us "racists"?!

Nothing makes sense anymore, no values, no morals, no civility and people are dying of a Chinese virus, but it racist to refer to it as Chinese even though it began in China. We are clearly living in an upside down world where right is wrong and wrong is right, where moral is immoral and immoral is moral, where good is evil and evil is good, where killing murderers is wrong, but killing innocent babies is right.

Wake up America, the great unsinkable ship Titanic America has hit an iceberg, is taking on water, and is sinking fast. The choice is yours to make. What will it be? Time is short, make your choice wisely!

These are Not my words, but very accurate and disturbing!

Following the Covid Science (addended)

George Rebane

[This is the addended transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 23 September 2020.]

The most recent Covid news is that the CDC “pulled new guidelines acknowledging the new coronavirus could be transmitted by tiny particles that linger in the air, saying a draft version of proposed changes was posted in error on the agency’s website.”  Apparently there are still some unknowns, and the debate continues about how the virus spreads through the air. (more here)  The point here is that the science isn’t settled, and moreover, science is rarely settled, and then only in the minds of people who know next to nothing about science.

We have survived for eons and continue to do so in pathogen-rich environments where all kinds of bugs are always floating around, which in sufficient concentrations could kill us.  Our immune system has knocked out the overwhelming share of these, and allowed us to lead ever longer lives.  But not all immune systems are created equal, and from time to time we do dumb things to weaken them.  And then there’s the science that attempts to discover the known unknowns about things like, say, the toxicity of Covid aerosols.  In what size volumes at what levels of concentrations, and for how long will the aerosol-transmitted Covid virus infect a healthy person in this or that age range with a given likelihood or probability?

I hope you’re getting the picture here about all the unknowns and uncertainties involved that must be recognized in the making of a coherent, let alone reasonable, pandemic response policy.  Science does not speak with a single, comprehensible, and clear voice saying ‘do this, and then you’ll be OK’.  Science speaks in many tongues, and it’s up to us humans to sort things out, select what we think is important and likely, and then put that into a complex mix with all kinds of other impacting factors, to come up with a decision or plan with which to go forward.  Only naïfs, media charlatans, and politicians attempt to dumb down this process into something simple and certain.

To dwell a bit on this very important aspect of understanding science, the well-read person knows that science seldom settles anything.  The power of the scientific method is that it is the most reliable way with which we can discover realworld relationships between stuff we can measure.  Science tells us that so much of this causes so much of that, or more precisely, this rarely/sometimes/always causes that, and attempts to put a number on it.  And with more science, these relationships often change.  And then there’s the reality that not all scientists know all these relationships at any given time.

Finally, science does not and cannot put a value on its outcomes that prescribe ‘do this and not that’ from a list of alternative actions.  Such prescriptions result only from various groups of humans putting different values on certain expected outcomes.  Today we again see an example of that in where the CDC has formed an advisory panel to determine how to roll out the various Covid vaccines that will shortly become available in increasing quantities. (more here)  Each of these vaccines will have certain prophylactic properties – immunity levels and durations for various demographic categories - all of which will be known only to within certain probability ranges.  It is the panel which must evaluate risks, pick performance thresholds, target populations, and distribution policies all based on their adopted consensus of subjective values.  In such policy-making realms, science is silent.

With this in mind, we all should pay attention, as this kind of policy-making goes on behind the scenes, and as we will continue to be assured by politicians of various hues, that they will only ‘follow the science’ and not be swayed by politics.  I hope that with some reflection, dear listener, that you will now understand that such demagoguery is pure nonsense.  Politics will drive all such decisions and response policies, which are then painted with the best coat of science before they are trotted out for public consumption.

My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on Rebane’s Ruminations where the transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively.  However, my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

[Addendum]  Here in America and across the world we have been subjected to the Covid-19 pandemic, and additionally to an “ ‘infodemic’, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media.”  The responses of most governments, particularly ours, have ranged between hysterical and insane – most certainly these policies have not been advised by the growing body of knowledge about the virus and its virulence gained during the course of this year.

A group of over a thousand Belgian physicians and medically trained health professionals have written an open letter (here) to their government that lays out the clinical particulars of the disease along with the statistics of its international impact, and concludes with the following –

There is no state of emergency. … An open discussion on corona measures means that, in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients, we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population. These include damage in the psychosocial domain (increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse)16 and economic damage. … If we take this collateral damage into account, the current policy is out of all proportion, the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law.

As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.

• We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures.
• We are questioning the legitimacy of the current advisory experts, who meet behind closed doors.
• Following on from ACU 2020 46https://acu2020.org/nederlandse-versie/ we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organisation. It was also at the heart of the fight against the “infodemic”, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media. This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.

We would like to make a public appeal to our professional associations and fellow carers to give their opinion on the current measures. … We draw attention to and call for an open discussion in which carers can and dare to speak out.

With this open letter, we send out the signal that progress on the same footing does more harm than good, and call on politicians to inform themselves independently and critically about the available evidence – including that from experts with different views, as long as it is based on sound science – when rolling out a policy, with the aim of promoting optimum health.

This letter with some of its disturbing revelations is now making its rounds internationally.  You can help by informing your elected representatives.  H/T to one of our more attentive readers.

Sandbox – 22sep20

[Reminder to keep all SCOTUS related comments under ‘Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – RIP’ until President Trump announces her replacement nominee.  Then I’ll post a new commentary under which we can comment on and debate the ensuing congressional confirmation hullabaloo.  gjr]

Ruminations – 20sep20 (updated 24sep20)

George Rebane

‘Why the Abraham Accords Happened’ is another reason so many Americans focus on President Trump’s walk and not his talk, and another reason they (I included) will vote for his second term.  I cannot believe the incompetence, let alone the socialist cynicism, that will descend on the White House and country if the Harris/Biden administration is installed.

[21sep20 update]  Here are some (non-exhaustive) bullet points that summarize why I favor the re-election of President Trump –

1. Experienced and accomplished businessman who understands the role and function of the private sector v the government in a nation’s economy.
2. Demonstrated accomplishments in revamping America’s foreign policy in international relations and trade.
3. Demonstrated accomplishments in growing America’s economy, managing the C19 pandemic, and has plans for more of the same.
4. Understands the role of a strong military in maintaining America’s hegemony.
5. Understands the role of secure borders in maintaining America’s sovereignty.
6. First president in generations to help blacks start shedding their plantation mentality.
7. Understands the correct way to maintain energy independence and integrate green energy into our economy.
8. Speaks his mind directly to the public without embellishments, but with some unfortunate braggadocio which detracts from his more substantive message and methods.
9. Understands and opposes the evils of collectivist governance and the history of collectivist governments.
10. Is a demonstrated constitutionalist, understands and opposes the Left’s efforts to fundamentally transform America into a socialist cum communist state.

Here are some (non-exhaustive) bullet points that summarize why I oppose the election of former VP Biden –

1. A dismally unaccomplished political hack with almost half-century of undistinguished service in Congress – no one has served longer and done less.
2. A record of uniformly wrong calls on foreign policy issues and decisions.
3. Understands nothing demonstrable about the operation of a nation’s economy – an economic imbecile as witnessed by his endorsement of the 2020 Democratic platform.
4. Opposes the maintenance of a strong military in favor of expanding vote-buying social programs.
5. Opposes the maintenance of secure borders and does not understand their function in preserving a nation’s culture, cohesion, and sovereignty.
6. Long history of supporting programs which destroyed black families and shrank their middle class. Intends to maintain and amplify our minorities’ sense of victimhood and dependence on transfer payments – a naturally divisive politician.
7. Has no discernible understanding of science or how it communicates and advances, which includes his support of devastating programs to prematurely mandate the nation’s abandoning fossil fuels and conversion to renewable energy sources.
8. Has a long history of two-faced speech and lying to comply with the political winds du jour from the Left. Is now sufficiently senile (possible dementia?) and in poor health as to make a farce of executing the office of the president – clearly would not complete first term if elected.
9. Strongly supports collectivism in all its forms as confirmed by his embrace of the 2020 Democrat platform (especially the provisions of the Green New Deal).  Strongly supports widening the voting franchise to include incarcerated criminals, non-citizens, and malleably ignorant teenagers.
10. Is a demonstrated constitutional revisionist who believes the Constitution is a ‘living document’ that is badly outdated and in need of major overhaul. Wholeheartedly supports the nation’s fundamental transformation into a socialist state.

[22sep20 update]  Recently read a piece by a retired teacher who lamented the absence of critical thought by our young because of the paucity of their knowledge base, which he charmingly relabeled as “stuff”.  He recounted that as a student he went to school to learn stuff, because in those days teachers taught stuff that was useful and needed for when you grew up.  And when he was a teacher, he taught his students all kinds of stuff that they would need.  But today in our schools teachers no longer know much stuff, and, for mainly political reasons, they most certainly teach very little useful stuff to our kids.  (I like ‘stuff’, and will be using it a lot when talking about knowledge bases and repositiories.)

UV light as a disinfectant.  Given the debate about how Covid spreads through exhaled aerosols, I keep wondering why stores, restaurants, and other closed volume venues don’t install UV lights to reduce the concentration of all kinds of nano- and micro-level critters that can do us harm.

An example of radical leftwing propaganda can always be found on the proto-communist truthout.com.  ‘Trump Fuels March Towards Fascism With “Anarchist Jurisdictions” Edict’ is an example of the typical fare its readers consume on a daily basis.  It’s always worth a read now and then to update yourself on their ideological temperature.  Our leftwing commenters’ contributions read as if they all regularly digest such a ration of rage.

‘The Military's Secret to Fighting COVID-19’  Here’s something to frost your external plumbing.  Check out the stats from the military on how their C19 response policy is working  out.  Out of 1.3M active duty personnel, they have had about 38,500 cases, and (seatbelts please) only ONE death.  You have to digest this with the fact that “the vast majority of those men and women serving in our armed forces are between the ages of 17 and 40”, while, of course, the vast majority of C19 deaths have occurred in the comorbid elderly.  Now what does this little piece, so well covered up by our lamestream, tell us about continuing our current patchwork of restrictive civilian response policies?  (H/T to reader)

[24sep20 update] Florida passes anti-riot and anti-mob law.  Gov Desantis gives an excellent summary of the law in this video.  H/T to the 22sep20 Sandbox commenter who posted this link and asked why no Dem governor is promoting such legislation to bring safe communities back to their state.

Neo-Marxist BLM has blanketed the nation with more lies about the Breonna Taylor’s death at the hands of the Louisville police who did NOT execute a ‘no-knock warrant’, loudly announced their presence, and opened fire after Breonna’s drug-suspect boyfriend shot one of the police.  Sadly, the grand jury returned an indictment against one of the officers for nothing more than poor marksmanship during a tense and chaotic exchange of fire.  Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron explained the facts of the encounter to the nation (here), but that made no never mind to the lied to and organized BLM mobs rioting in various cities across our land – evil afoot.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – RIP

George Rebane

Justice Ginsburg was a great lady and a great jurist.  Her record speaks for itself.  The paeans to her accomplished career have already started, and deservedly so.  As most readers know, I did not share her social and political orientation.  Nevertheless, I can say that she was from the age when Democrats and Republicans still believed whoever the American electorate voted into office, that they were then the legitimate holders of that office and deserved to serve without the other party launching a campaign of subterfuge to sabotage their term and malign their character.

So with 46 days until the election, now starts a whole new political battle over her successor.  The choice and timely empanelment of the new appointee to fill Justice Ginsburg’s seat will be a critical requirement, since it is almost certain that SCOTUS will have a hand in determining November’s outcome at more than one level.  And for those rulings we need a full court that cannot be irresolute.

My own preference is that President Trump immediately puts forth an appropriately vetted and qualified conservative jurist, and that Majority Leader McConnell gets the Senate to hold hearings and give its imprimatur to the new justice with all prudent haste.  

Growth v Tax Rate v Revenues (Addended)

The more you tax something, the less of it you get. – Fundamental tenet of economics rejected by the Left.

George Rebane

To the above we can add another truth rejected by all leftwingers – ‘Tax rates don’t impact economic behavior’.  Understanding how the Democrats ignore these fundamental aspects of economics, goes a long way to explain most, if not ALL, of the progressives’ public policies that have now reached their penultimate in the Green New Deal as reflected in the Democrats’ 2020 platform.

Taxes and regulations raise the cost of starting a business and then operating it for an acceptable profit.  First, let’s cut the crap that the overarching purpose of a business is NOT to make a profit for its owners who have put their own time, talent, and/or treasure at risk into the enterprise.  A for-profit enterprise can neither serve nor succor the needs of a broader klatch of so-called “stakeholders” if it is not able to do Job1 – make a profit that can be reinvested in the business and distributed to its shareholders.

There are millions of progressives, leftwingers, communists, socialists, liberals, … who neither understand nor believe the above fundamental truth about private enterprise.  In this short essay I will provide a very accessible quantitative argument that explains with numbers how ever higher taxes and more restrictive regulations cripple and kill businesses.  Trigger warning – if you are a member of one of the above groups who fundamentally believe that taxes don’t affect economic behavior, then this is the time to stop reading.

In this dissertation I illustrate quantitatively how higher tax rates not only stifle growth, but also markedly reduce government revenues.  Those with a smidgen of numeracy should be able to follow the arguments that relate to the revelatory numbers.  I invite you to examine the toy economic model shown in the graphic below.

Sandbox – 16sep20

[Today the Dems’ Big Lies are dropping faster than I can record them.  Some major moves in the lamestream include the sudden silence of 1) reports on the progress of fighting C19, and 2) ignoring the historical and momentous progress toward lasting Mideast peace, Palestinian resolution, and thwarting Iran that President Trump’s foreign policies have achieved – not to mention the much-needed realignment of relations with Russia, China, and North Korea.  And, of course, then there’s the robust health of our economy that has been able to weather the C19 lockdowns initiated by the states, and is now on a solid road to pre-C19 recovery.  All of this must be kept from the nation’s sheeple.  gjr]

Democrat 2020 Platform – The Disaster Revealed

George Rebane

Well, here it is boys and girls, the ‘2020 Democratic Party Platform’.  It is a stark blueprint for ending the United States of America; it outlines much more than just the ‘fundamental transformation’ that Obama sought to bring about.  In short, realizing its provisions will be the first step in a two-step trip to our communist future.  The programs outlined will fail utterly, leaving the country devastated and bankrupt.  Into the ashes will ride a man on a white horse who will promise the Marxist utopia, to arrive right after his party will ‘crack a few eggs’ that inevitably need cracking.     Download 2020-07-31-Democratic-Party-Platform-For-Distribution

I received the following summary of the platform’s contents, which you can verify yourself as you go through this 92-page roadmap to the United Socialist States of America.  Regarding the long-awaited agenda of America’s socialists, our wait is over – the DNC has spoken.

*Universal healthcare and Medicaid for all Americans and illegal aliens. (Pg 61)
*$15 minimum wage
*Immediate citizenship for illegals (Pg 63)
*Free college (Pg 65)
*Forgiveness of student loans (Pg 71)
*Eliminate border walls and Immigration Enforcement (Pg 62, 64 & 65)
*Make Washington D.C. the 51st State.
*Abortion for “all women & girls.” (Pg 83)
*$70 trillion Green New Deal, where the USA would be “net-zero greenhouse gas by 2050.” But CLOSE all coal & natural gas power plants by 2035. By 2030 all new construction in the USA must be net-zero greenhouses.
*Create a U.S. Agency for Global Media “to ensure that only accurate information is reported in the news or on the internet.”
*Rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement
*Create a new federal agency of 100,000 people to trace every American.
*Immediately restore voting rights for convicted felons.
*Provide funding to facilitate vote-from-home and mail-in-voting.
*Create a new Federal Credit Bureau (to replace Equafax, et al), and require banks to use this new credit reporting service that will be set up to assist low-income people in buying houses and cars.
*Make gun manufacturers responsible and liable for how their guns are used. (Destroy gun manufacturing)
*Declare and treat drug use as a mental illness instead of an illegal activity.
*Declare the support for the Rights of BLM, Multi-gender, and preferential treatment for gays wanting to immigrate to America. (Pg 63)

[Addendum]  Compare the 2020 Democratic platform with Yoram Hazony's essay on Marxism and today's neo-Marxism - 'The Challenge of Marxism' - a must read for anyone wanting to talk intelligently about what is happening today in America.

Evil – a timely reflection

Do not scorn an evil though small, for it never comes singly, but in battalions, as does joy; good fortune and bad concentrate where they are already thick.  Gracian #254

George Rebane

History records that when Christian knights subdued Jerusalem during the Crusades, they slaughtered most, if not all, of the then resident Muslim population, including women and children.  And we are all witness to the killings of thousands of innocents in the 9/11 attacks by devout Islamist fanatics.  Neither the perpetrators, planners, nor their supporting populations considered these acts as anything other than carrying out the will of God; most certainly neither side considered the massacres to be evil acts.

Yet in the eyes of the targeted populations, these and many more such acts were the very embodiment of unspeakable evil.  And the belief systems that spawned them to be wellsprings of irredeemable evil, that were nevertheless confirmed in their respective canons and credible visions wherein God directed and gave imprimatur to the mass killings.

Countless other such historical narratives can be presented to abet the conclusion that evil is almost entirely in the eyes of the targeted recipients and sympathetic observers.  In a broader sense, we may conclude that evil is really culture dependent and/or culture specific.

Today we see more examples of such relativistic expressions and interpretations of evil.  They continue to be a global phenomenon and an historical constant.  Consulting dictionaries gives us lame meanings that should not inflame any sensibilities, but nevertheless cannot help but corroborate the above interpretation.

From Dictionary.com - Evil (adjective) 1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.  2. harmful; injurious: evil laws.

From the Random House Dictionary of the English Language – Evil (adj) 1. Morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked.  Evil deeds, and evil life.  2. Harmful; injurious.  Evil laws. … 4. Due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character.  An evil reputation.

From the Oxford English Dictionary – Evil (adj)  A. Antithesis of good in all its principal senses.  1. Morally depraved, bad, wicked, vicious.  2. Doing or tending to do harm, hurtful, mischievous, prejudicial.

All the definitions appeal to the violation of morals which are overwhelmingly determined by culture (e.g. cultural mores), and therefore relativistic, in the eye of the beholder, etc.

When we bring this understanding to today’s polarized America, we run head on into the political attribution of evil by our Left.  Democrats are now on a growing public record of defining Trump and all those who support him and his policies as being evil.  That is their core, and to date, only argument as to why the president should not only be denied a second term, but also be prosecuted for crimes claimed and yet to be claimed.  In sum, he is fundamentally evil, and a good person opposes evil with no further argument or evidence needed – the constant chorus of its attribution should be more than enough to indict, convict, and punish.

In the eyes of the Left, we who oppose BLM, Antifa, et al - the new radical organs of the Left and the Democrat Party - are of necessity painted with the same broad brush.  We too are of the deplorably irredeemable cohort of evil people in the land already blemished by indelible racism, prejudice, white privilege, and social injustice to the very marrow of our bones.

This sentiment is not reciprocated per se by the Republican Party.  The country’s political representatives of the Right today are a timid bunch, that has pretty much lost its way and will to fight in the ongoing chaos.  As an institution it doesn’t know whose ass to kick or kiss, a deficit not shared by its audacious and blustering fearless leader who can still be taunted off-message in a heartbeat by any unsubstantiated charge or even a randomly tossed ad hominem.

I, on the other hand, have no such inhibitions, as RR readers with functioning memories will attest.  (e.g. search ‘The Liberal Mind’ category with ‘evil’)  Along with a number of conservative commentators, I long ago concluded that the Democratic Party, as embodied by its leadership, is an evil and anti-American institution.  And I readily acknowledge that my perspective on evil is not some assessment from Mt Olympus, but one that also succumbs to all the culturally adorned attributes outlined above.  Of course, I don’t value all cultures equally, and consider my own to be the custodian of more goodness and light by far than most others on the planet.  I am among those who do not necessarily want to impose their own culture on others, but I will willingly fight to maintain the right to practice it with other like-minded people.

So from that standpoint, the question arises about America's socialist leadership.  Are these Democrats intrinsically evil in that they recognize the harm their public policies will do to America and its people, as they continue to pursue them for their own political and personal benefit?  Or are they true believers, and therefore as tragically ignorant as their grass roots constituents – all those who oppose meritocracy, free enterprise, open markets, minimally regulated capitalism, smaller government, ownership of private property, lower taxes, and abundant liberty to pursue happiness?

In the final analysis we can ask what difference does it make in how we respond to those who seek to diminish our freedoms, fortunes, and futures.  Whether they deprive us individually while they devastate the country with intentions good or ill, either will produce the same end state.  Socialism in America will not stop with the mild-mannered versions in the EU that have been anchored by capitalist America.  When America succumbs to socialism, with no other great nation to anchor us, our nation will inevitably slide into tyranny.  The governance promised by Democrats will be indifferent to their kind of evil - either will equally will herd us into a draconian land in which all will suffer.

Scattershots – 14sep20 (updated 15sep20)

'It's not what you know that worries me, it's what you know that ain't so.'  Variously attributed.

George Rebane

Fake news from National Propaganda Radio.  This morning’s news blithely reported that preparing for his visit to Sacramento today, “President Trump claimed that California’s fires are the result of poor forest management, but numerous studies have shown that they are caused by climate change.” (emphasis mine)  The use of ‘claim’ makes the president’s provably true statement sound tendentious.  And sliding in the connective ‘but’ to denote contradiction with the truth, as “shown” by implied science, completes another hit job on Trump by the socialist media.  These are the real impactive Big Lies that continuously rain on our electorate.

[update] H/T to RR commenter who dug up the well-hidden news that the leftwing eco-nazis have been fighting prudent forest management for years (more here).  Now the lamestream’s silence on this and their continuing to trumpet Trum-caused climate change as the reason for this wildfire season is just evil, and intended evil at that.

Revisionist and radical historian Howard Zinn has a direct connection to today’s riots and street protests.  The man wrote an abysmally fake history of America that was immediately embraced by our anti-American Left and ensconced into our K-12 at various levels, in addition to becoming the ground truth of our past in what used to be our institutions of higher learning.  It was he and his academic and political cohorts who have now imbued the minds of half our younger generation in hate for their country, and left the other half confused as to what really describes our past and cultural inheritance.  What we see in the streets confirms that it’s easy to hate the hateful. (more here)

Democrats claim to be better educated than Republicans.  Were that really the case, then why do Democrats and their lamestream lackies continually stream ‘news’ and commentaries that are so anti-scientific, illogical, counter-historical, and just factually incorrect (e.g. tax rates don’t impact economic behavior) to the extent that any mildly educated person would reject them on their face?  The most plausible answer is twofold.  First, Democrats count on their critical contingent of abysmally educated ‘minorities’ (now majorities in many regions) to ignore the details of their messaging, and just consume the summarizing punchlines.  The other even more stark explanation is that their college educated constituents matriculated in majors and courses of study that long ago abandoned scholarship for collectivist ideological indoctrination – in short, these people are dumber coming out than going into such institutions (e.g. see the above Zinn entry).

Politicizing the development and release of C19 vaccines is the new evil that Democrats have spread across the land.  Their claim is that President Trump’s wise and timely policy of rapid and extensive funding of these vaccines through his ‘Warp Speed’ program will somehow yield products that are both ineffective and dangerous.  Democrat luminaries such Kamala Harris, our would-be next president in waiting, have loudly announced that they will not trust any vaccine that is released prior to election day, and recommend that others do the same.  This on its face is a blatant and dangerous Big Lie misrepresentation of the FDA regulated process by which these and other vaccines are developed and released to the public.  Its acceptance by the nation’s light thinkers will inevitably cause additional suffering and death.  President Trump has no impact on the vaccines’ development and release process.  Nor do the vaccines now in development and testing magically acquire benign and useful properties suitable for public consumption once the 3nov20 date is passed.  This is the kind of evil which TDS has spawned for the last four years, and the kind of evil that has always come so naturally to the Left in their ascent to and retention of power.  (see also above entry)

[15sep20 update]  ‘Judge Rules Pennsylvania Governor’s Shutdown Orders Unconstitutional’ reports the Epoch Times.  Hopefully this will be the removal of the key log in the nation’s logjam of shutdowns.  Given the Dems’ hard work in keeping the pre-election economy hobbled, this news will be stifled by the lamestream and protested by the progressives who will cite all kinds of dangers to public health and safety that would follow from this ruling.

Leftwing columnist George Boardman in The Union again brings a smile to our lips with his latest interpretation of the how and why of the nationwide riots (here).  His worldview is simple – Trump started the riots with his racist monologues, and the cities’ mayors didn’t/couldn’t do anything to stop them since Trump kept egging them on as the weeks passed.  Reading Boardman’s account of the summer replicates those found in the pages of outlets such as HuffPost, DailyKos, and truthout.com.  In his favor, he does acknowledge Biden's Bind on whether to condemn the rioters or not – either tactic can get his tit in a wringer with one leftwing faction or the other.

Climate change link to wildfires – there is no evidence of such.  The Democrats keep promoting their latest Big Lie to Americans, telling one and all that the west’s wildfires are due directly to 1) preventable man-made global warming, 2) could have been prevented had we started going green four years ago (Obama got a pass), and 3) will be greatly reduced if California goes through with its draconian climate change policies.  The Democratic Party is still our anti-science party, their protestations notwithstanding.  As far back as their assessment of the primitive nature of blacks and promotion of eugenics, through their active destruction of STEM education, to now ignoring the conclusions of NOAA and the IPCC (more here), the Democrats have been our political party of the intellectually stunted and ideologically blindered.  Both agencies have unequivocally stated that “It is premature to conclude that human activities – and particularly greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming – have already had a detectable impact on Atlantic hurricane or global tropical cyclone activity.” (NOAA), and cite “the lack of evidence to support claims of increasing frequency or intensity of hurricanes, floods, drought or tornadoes on climate timescales is also supported by the most recent assessments of the IPCC and the broader peer reviewed literature on which the IPCC is based.” (IPCC conclusion reported to Congress).  Yet Gov Newsom, along with other national Dems, continues the drumbeat amplified by their lamestream lackies.  And the nation’s snuffies have no choice but to genuflect and cry, ‘Aahh beliieeeeve!’

End of an Era

George Rebane

Puna

6 June 2009 – 30 August 2020

Democrats’ Great Divide or Revolution?

George Rebane

According to Democrat luminaries like Hillary Clinton and Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks, a peaceful transition of power in January 2021 will occur only if Biden wins in a popular and Electoral College landslide.  Every other election outcome will result in blood in the streets, a deep nation shattering constitutional crisis, and even the Pacific seaboard states seceding from the Union.  The lamestream media is locked and loaded to call out the rioters, and President Trump will call out the military. 

That’s all according to some serious thought put into “wargaming” various election outcome scenarios as reported in the Washington Post (here and here).  We recall the Democrats' predictions about Trump not accepting the results of the 2016 election, that instead turned into a four-year rejection of that election’s results by Democrats, the party that has since mobilized every political, news media, entertainment, and radical leftwing group into a coordinated program to permanently render the country.

With all the pieces in place for November, Democrats have prepared to reject any outcome save a Biden tsunami.  And they make no bones in threatening the American electorate at every opportunity about what they will do if the people again don’t vote correctly – short version, there will be an historical hell to pay that may easily turn into America’s first civil war.  (The last one was for southern independence.)  November will seal a Marxist future or bring coast-to-coast madness.

The Democrat/Left ideology is now firmly in place, approved by its radical controlling wing of their organized and funded militant BLM and Antifa factions.  The intellectual basis for their anti-Americanism is all wrapped up and focused on the thesis of critical race theory (CRT).  The Democrats don’t front this ideology, but have allowed it to grow uncontested in the country’s educational and corporatist institutions.  David Harsanyi of the National Review makes the case and expands on it.  (more here)

If you want to go to a documented source, then familiarize yourself with “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction”, which says African Americans aren’t only subjugated through hate and terror, but also kept down through supposedly white cultural mechanisms of individualism, objectivity, neutrality, meritocracy, and color blindness.

“Critical race theory’s foundational precept is the centrality and permanence in society of racism against blacks, rejecting the idea of significant racial progress.”  This is an important precept which keeps the looting and burning going in our cities.  Nothing of note has happened since the civil rights acts of 1964 and 1965.

A central Big Lie of their revisionist history, now taught in our unionized K-12 schools is that “In critical race theory, racism is not a local variant of the ancient practices of caste or slavery, but something new in the world that was born with European imperialism, colonialism, capitalism, and rationalism.”

Hence all modes of western civilization must be rejected on their face, since it is all just various forms of white privilege in action to promote racial injustice against the blacks.  And in its most insidious and racially unjust expression we have the principle of meritocracy, which is nothing but a camouflaged practice of subjugating people of color.  Determining the achievement and further promise of merit through testing is proof of systemic racial prejudice in practice.  “It’s a pseudo-science,” Stovall (black law professor, CRT intellectual) said. “Standardized testing is an extension of eugenics.”

Finally, and this is important in order to grasp what is really the goal of their brave new world.  “The key to understanding critical race theory is grasping the difference between equity, the social justice goal of developing policy to produce equal outcomes, as opposed to equality, the scorned liberal ideal of equal rules and procedures.”  (emphasis mine)

Communicating Uncertainty

George Rebane

Years ago when our kids were in grade school, our dinners involved discussions of matters that most people considered too deep for children.  Our kids knew nothing of this and participated wholeheartedly – kinda like the bumblebees who don’t know that they’re not configured for flight but fly anyway.  As a nascent systems techie, practicing aerospace engineer, and perennial grad student, I was very involved with the science of uncertainty, risk, and things barely known.  One of the things that intrigued me and Jo Ann as parents of young children was how we try to communicate our own assessments of uncertainty, and how these assertions are understood by others.

The thing that really set off an investigation of this was my reading of how the Bay of Pigs disaster was approved.  It turns out that President Kennedy charged the Joint Chiefs to assess the CIA’s plan for the expatriates’ invasion of Cuba.  The general in charge of the study reported to JFK that there was a “fair chance” of success for the invasion.  With this input, the president gave the go ahead, and the rest is history.  Monday morning quarterbacking the disaster, the general was interviewed and opined that he intended ‘fair chance’ to communicate about a 30% chance of success.  JFK hearing of this later said that he never would have approved the invasion had he known that success came with such a low probability.

In the 1970s Kahneman and Tversky did a lot of research on the matter, publishing their landmark results in ‘Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’ (1974).  Having read this as part of my day job, we decided to run an experiment to see how well we communicated uncertainty within our family circle given the wide range of family member ages involved.  We generated a list of uncertain statements based on how many black marbles there were in a bowl of a hundred other colored marbles from which a marble was drawn randomly.  These statements were more or less similar to the ones reported in Behn and Vaupel (1982) who cited a study by Donald H. Woods published in the Harvard Business Review that involved a large group of student subjects to “test the communicative content of some common probability phrases.”  The results were intriguing.

To give you an example of some of the phrases to which the students were asked to assign a probability, consider the following –

• There is a much better than even chance that …
• There is a possibility that …
• There is a high likelihood that …
• There is little chance that …
• There is a high probability that …
• They will probably …
• The possibility is low that …

The results were reported in a columnar format with headings ‘Lowest’, ‘Lower Quartile’, ‘Median’, ‘Upper Quartile’, ‘Highest’ for each of the presented probability phrases which the students were asked to assess according to their own lights.

When the Rebane family did our assessments of the number of black marbles out of a 100 that each of the phrases represented for us individually, the results were striking.  All five of us flew in very tight formation, especially given the wide range of ages from about seven to thirty-six.  Jo Ann and I had a hard time believing the results until it occurred to us that we all learned to communicate uncertainties with each other within our tight family circle.  With this in mind, it was not unusual that our linguistic biases had formed a tight and very effective quantitative group; we learned from each other.

Now that result does not imply that other families' assessments of the same phrases will match that of the Rebanes.  But it does suggest that each family or closely working cohort will, over time, develop a similar understanding and expression of everyday uncertainties.  And it also strongly suggests that people from different cohorts attempting to communicate uncertainty should augment their probabilistic phrase with a quantitative statement such 20%, or 45-55, or 99 out of a hundred.  At a minimum this would go a long way to preventing the redux of Bay of Pigs disasters.

OK, so what?  Well, in these pages we discuss and debate a lot of issues and notions which have a bit or more of uncertainty connected with them.  A lot of our debates also generate more heat than light because we don’t successfully communicate our uncertain beliefs.  I’d like to see what kind of a spread we have, or how tightly we agree, given the Harvard probability phrases.  If you want to participate and see how you stack up with RR readers, then download, fill out (your numbers in place of the blue Xs), and email back to me a copy of this spreadsheet – Download ProbPhrases – shown below.  I’ll do the tabulation and post the results which, if a sufficient number of you respond, should be very interesting.  And I don’t need to go into a long dissertation on how such communications (of carefully wordsmithed phrases) in the media impact people’s views about almost everything that is reported.  BTW, you can copy the spreadsheet and do this experiment with your family, friends, and/or colleagues.  I guarantee that the results will be very revealing, and useful for future communications.

Behn & Vaupel (p77) report that “ambiguous probability phrases also plague legal communications.  For example, there is much confusion over the commonly used statement that, for a conviction, “a reasonable man” must believe that the evidence indicates a person to be guilty ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’  A survey of 347 judges found that some thought this meant that there had to be a 70-percent chance that the defendant was guilty (one judge even thought this meant only a 50-percent chance) and nearly a third of the judges thought it meant 100 percent.  A group of 69 jurors gave similarly divergent responses.”

And all of us continue using such phrases while believing that we are communicating effectively.

Blackouts Transparency

George Rebane

[This is the addended transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 9 September 2020.]

Two weeks ago in this commentary I discussed California’s blight of 3^rd-world country blackouts, and argued that the Power Shortage Blackouts were unnecessary and caused by incompetence at the highest levels of California’s state government.  The other kind of blackouts we are being trained to accept are the so-called Public Safety Power Shutoffs.  These blackouts, we are told, are necessary to prevent wildfires like the one that burned down the town of Paradise.  The real reason for such tragedies is that the power transmission lines which cross our forested mountains have not been properly maintained for decades.

Power companies like PG&E have prematurely focused on the administrative and political machinations involved with the mandated conversion to green power.  All this hullabaloo has been going as they have let their existing power lines deteriorate and become invaded by dangerously flammable foliage, waiting for a spark from a faulty connection or insulator to trigger the next disaster.  In short, our power utility mavens have ignored their existing infrastructure required for reliable power generation and delivery, in favor of new, more expensive, and insufficient means of providing electricity for California’s homes and businesses.

Sandbox – 8sep20

[Heard of the new leftwing propaganda wave – there is nothing abnormal or extraordinary or illegitimate about elections the results of which are not known for days or weeks after election day.  That is their newest Big Lie.  For at least the last two centuries America’s election results have been known to the public on the eve of election day or the day after.  There has been one exception to that (2000 – Bush2 v Gore) during all this time, and other developed nations have fared equally with their election results.  Given Trump’s recent traction in the polls, the Democrats have now started to prepare us for Bumblebrain’s possible loss in the ballot count, and their Plan B of a subsequent drawn out litigation process to win in the courts.  gjr]

Labor Day 2020 Laments

George Rebane

This Labor Day we again awakened to all lamestream media channels awash in various forms of anti-Trump vituperation and propaganda.  There is no talk or discussion of what the president has accomplished or of his second term plans, only endless repetition of the latest resurrected faux pas he uttered years ago.  Neither are the public apprised of Biden’s plans, for he has none of his own, and his handlers are at the horns of a dilemma – how not to reveal their devastating political desiderata that would surely lose them the election.  So the default is to spew diversions and lies more frequently and louder than ever.  And with Democrats’ total control of the Fourth Estate (even Fox News is timidly easing itself leftward), the Republicans flounder helplessly.

If our electorate has any understanding of the growing Marxist revolution, they are keeping it to themselves, perhaps to reveal their wisdom in November.  In the meanwhile, the observables don’t look good.

Here in California we are neck and neck with the other socialist dominated states in the race to the bottom.  One of RR’s astute longtime readers, ‘scenes’ (formerly ‘Scenes from the Apocalypse’ when he arrived on these pages), provided an excellent summation in a recent comment stream which is worth rereading –

… the Blue State Boogie continues.  "Far-left protesters march to the @PortlandPolice north precinct, start a street fire & begin dancing. They’re playing their new “F— Ted Wheeler” rap song."  At least the power is still on for a bit. I always assumed that California would morph into Latin America given unchecked immigration, but we seem to have managed it on our own. A China virus no one knows what to do with, problematic electricity, overpopulation and poor forest management keeping insufficient fire suppression busy, home insurance slowly but surely going away, Communist Anarchists (a thing I've never wrapped my head around) marching in the streets as part of an election, grumblings from the patriots, drug money running a great deal of the local economy. Welcome to South America.

Prominent conservative scholar, commentator, and film-maker, Dinesh D’Souza, is among the latest politically-savvy intellectuals who see the rising likelihood of a Great Divide.  He also joins those of us who have seen this future coming for some years now.  In an interview D’Souza tells FN’s Laura Ingraham that “recent riots and political unrest could lead to a rise of citizen militias around the country” while stating that “I’m not advocating this, I’m predicting it.  It is a natural and inevitable response to the militarization of one side.”  He goes on to point out that the rioting street thugs learned their hatred of America from today’s universities, which actually are no longer universities in the sense that they have eliminated the free discussion of ideas which has been the fundamental raison d’etre of universities upon which everything else that they may offer is built. (more here)  D’Souza’s latest documentary film ‘Trump Card’ is set for digital release on 9 October 2020.

D’Souza agrees with the longstanding Rebane Doctrine assessment, "I think that the Democratic plan is [to swap out] Biden after the election. They don't want Biden to keel over before the election.  The reason they picked him is they think they needed a white male to camouflage the racial radicalness of their party. It's not like some chaotic process produced these horrible candidates. They chose him."

And regarding the Great Divide, D’Souza maintains that the real reason the Democratic Party relies on force is that, “ultimately, they can only win if they can force us to live their way. Now, I don't think we're going to. We are no more going to submit to them and change our ways than perhaps they are going to submit to us. This raises the deeper question of how do we find a way going forward... We don't want the America they want and they don't want the America we want. The real question is, how do we coexist with each other. That's the real question of the future." (Emphasis mine)

What today’s rioting BLM and Antifa thugs have no clue about is that, come the real revolution, their undisciplined lifestyles and supporting values will be instantly abolished and replaced with organized, mandated, and disciplined somber marches under approved banners interspersed with enforced cheering.  There will be no more burning and looting; most of their visible leaders will be summarily shot.  An Orwellian peace will descend upon the land in which all public expressions will be pre-authorized, and private expressions duly noted for later adjudication.

From my perch, were there no Great Divide in our future, the road to tyranny then may well proceed according to the events of 1917 Russia.  History students recall that Russia’s Menshevik (‘minority’) socialists, under Kerensky, overthrew the czar in March to establish what turned out to be a weak and naïve anti-capitalist, pro-labor socialist regime that still played lip-service to a form of democracy.  Lenin’s Bolsheviks (‘majority’) never trusted the people and advocated a strong ‘dictatorship of the masses’ under an unabashed and ruthless central control.  In October the Bolsheviks ousted the Mensheviks and established communism as the state’s secular religion and template for organizing society.  This regime became the USSR and lasted for 80 years, until collapsing internally from massive corruption, inbred thuggery, and widespread incompetence.  For all those years, the people’s modus operandi was ‘They pretend to pay us, we pretend to work.’  And this has been replicated under all subsequent communist regimes.  Such a merit-free/optional economic order is today proposed by the Democratic Party and its violent street cadres.

Happy Labor Day.

Scattershots – 4sep20 (updated 9sep20)

The most important goal of the leftist project is to use the twin 2020 tragedies to alter the very storyline of America. – Mike Gonzales

George Rebane

The Great Divide draws nigh.  One of our astute readers highlighted ‘The Revolution is Upon Us’ by Mike Gonzales in the comment stream of the last Sandbox.  It is in an important essay that correctly highlights much of what is going on in America today as we approach the most contentious and possibly disastrous presidential election in our country’s history.  Read it.

Bumblebrain’s Big Lies continue with his latest claim in Kenosha that it has been President Trump who has divided the country.  In the meantime, more clear-minded commentators from both the Left and Right recognize that it has been America's Left, dragging the Democrat Party with it, that started the quick march to Marxism.  If anything, this leftward lurch has also attracted some spineless Republicans to lean to port in the attempt to keep their elected jobs.  The Republican Party's platform has remained unchanged over the last years, which cannot be said for Team Pelosi et al.

Trump on voting twice.  The president’s words and meaning have been mangled beyond recognition by the lamestream and our desperate Democrats.  (more here and here)

Here are the president’s exact words to Jon Evans of North Carolina’s WECT:  “Well they'll go out and they'll vote, and they're going to have to go and check their vote by going to the poll and voting that way, because if it tabulates, then they won't be able to do that. So, let them send it in and let them go vote, and if the system is as good as they say it is, obviously they won't be able to vote. If it isn't tabulated, they'll be able to vote so that's the way it is. And that's what they should do.”  He repeated a similar message last night in Pennsylvania.

School shutdowns are butt stupid.  Using persuasive, cogent, and technically correct arguments more suitable for polite company, Drs J. Battacharya and M. Kulldorff of Stanford and Harvard Universities respectively,  inform us in ‘The Case Against Covid Tests for the Young and Healthy’ that – “There is little purpose in using tests to check asymptomatic children to see if it is safe for them to come to school. When children are infected, most are asymptomatic, and the mortality risk is lower than for the flu. While adult-to-adult and adult-to-child transmission is common, child-to-adult transmission isn’t. Children thus pose minimal risk to their teachers. If a child has a cough, a runny nose or other respiratory symptoms, he should stay home. You don’t need a test for that. … Sweden was the only major Western country that kept schools open for kids 15 and younger throughout the pandemic, with no masks or mass testing. How did it turn out? Zero Covid-19 deaths among 1.8 million children attending day care or school. Teachers didn’t have an excess infection risk compared with the average of other professions.”  I want to emphasize that I’m using ‘butt stupid’ as opposed to ‘ignorant’ to describe public policies keeping kids from attending school – ignorance can be corrected by supplying the ignorant with relevant data and information; stupidity refers to the cognitive inability to process, which is a deficit much more resistant to remediation.  Unfortunately, it is the latter that afflicts government bureaucracies far and wide.

[6sep20 update]  We are no longer sufficient unto ourselves.  Foreign worker visas have been hampered by C19 strictures and other prohibitions intended to give a helping hand to the non-existent American worker.  Worker shortages have cropped up everywhere, led by the lack of qualified and willing talent in sectors such as technology, hospitality, recreation, and agriculture. (more here and here)  Equally troubling is the prohibition on academic visas for grad school students studying and researching STEM fields.  Since these resident workers earn and spend the bucks here in this consumer dominated economy, it is not clear where the additional consumer spending will come from to make up for the dear departed or never arrived.  More and more of our fellow Americans continue to get college degrees that require skill sets for which no one is willing to spend their own money to hire – of course, government spending OPM is the ever-present employer of last resort for those know-nothings, for which then the country suffers.  This reliance on legal and illegal foreigners cannot end well for us.

‘America Hit by Roughly 550 Violent Demonstrations in Three Months’  A bit of news totally alien to consumers of lamestream media.  National Propaganda Radio wakes up the country every morning with reports of “protests” against “racial injustice” in our cities, never mentioning the real openly declared aims of the BLM and Antifa rioters, amply funded, supplied, and transported as required to keep the heat on in the cities with incompetent, compliant, and abetting Democratic administrations.  And then, led by Team Pelosi and their lamestream lackeys, the word goes out again that the whole thing is fomented by our divisive President Trump.  And for millions of light readers across this land, this kind of reportage sustains their ground truth about what’s really going on.

China is weaponizing water.  China is the source of major Asian rivers that flow into over ten other Asian countries.  On its rivers China has built over 87,000 dams, and continues to build ever more of these critical infrastructures that create huge reservoirs for in-country irrigation, transportation, and exerting strategic influence on its neighbors.  China can and has created droughts and floods that cause major impacts on the lives and economies of downstream countries.  If you don’t play ball according to China’s rules, your lands may be flooded or crackling dry. (more here) Now China also has dam problems, witness the structural cracks developing in its Three Gorges Dam and others (more here).  Also, dams are very vulnerable to attack during wartime, and many experts predict that in this century the major cause of wars will be over access to fresh water.

[9sep20 update]  Left always wants to silence the Right, but not vice versa.  Why?  This litmus test for a leftwinger is reliable because the Left never ever has any new ideas, but can only offer slogans for old collectivist policies that have never worked here or elsewhere.  So in the battle of ideas their best tactic is to take a pass and call off the contest.  Instead of ideas, they substitute the Big Lie and a stream Alinsky Alternatives.  Locally this tactic was again evident in calls to silence both RR and Jo Ann who sits on The Union's editorial board.  And the Big Lie gambit is constantly available in its various forms in our local left-listing newspaper, today having a particularly vicious cornucopia of anti-Trump copy.

The Democrats continue to work a brilliant tactic to promote Biden, they keep Trump talking about Trump.  Biden is a singularly unaccomplished, corrupt, and feckless politician with a 50-year record of absolutely no accomplishments that he can be allowed to burnish in public.  And he doesn’t even dare read off the list of policies his Marxist handlers have planned for us.  So to divert and suppress the Republicans’ strong suit of accomplishments and planned policies, the Dems have made the campaign about personalities, and ego-brimming Trump is more than happy to comply.  Our president still doesn’t understand that not many people like him personally, and that his only hope is informing voters of his record of accomplishments and plans for a prosperous and sovereign America.  Were he to make the campaign about what he’s done and plans to do, ol’ Bumblebrain would show up at that gunfight with an empty holster.

Federal budget and “blowing holes” in it

As I watch this new generation try to rewrite our history, one thing I’m sure of, it will be misspelled and have no punctuation. 

George Rebane

We have been deficit spending the federal budget for a few generations now.  And the Simple Simons of the land always lay the deficits at the feet of the current administration.  We just had an example of that (here) from local leftwing columnist George Boardman.  It really seems that these people have no idea how federal budgets are manufactured and structured.  Since all appropriation bills must start in the House, the situation becomes a bit complicated when one party doesn’t control both the House and the White House, and even more complex when Senate approval is thrown in.  (more here)

Even thought the budget process normally starts with the President’s submittal to Congress of a recommended budget, it is usually DOA in a House controlled by the opposite party.  What really goes on then is that the House drafts a budget that it dickers with the Senate to go along, and then winds up, hopefully, as a ‘concurrent budget resolution’, which is essentially an outline for spending for the coming year enabled by a sequence of subsequent individual appropriations bills.  The concurrent budget resolution does not need the president’s signature to take effect.  If the two houses can’t agree on a concurrent budget resolution, then Congress has to pass a series of continuing resolutions to keep the government operating at current funding levels.

So with all this going on to have the federal government finally spend through its various departments, bureaus, and agencies – each operating under their own regulatory structures – you really have to be a double dummy to think that the deficit, let alone individual expenditures, are all the president’s doing and fault.  However, in our land of the free, we also enjoy the freedom to be double dummies; there’s no law against it and you can even vote.

At this point we haven’t even come to the major parts of the budget divided into mandatory spending and discretionary spending.  And then there’s the interest on the national debt – the part we must pay ‘the public’ and not merely government paying itself.  Take a look at the figure below.

If we break down the components of discretionary spending, that’s where the real dickering starts.  The Dems have an advantage here because they are the champions of social programs that easily buy favorable votes during elections.  Historically, the Dems would like to push as many of their social programs into the un-sunsetted mandatory category as possible, and then continue to demand an equal share of the next year’s remaining discretionary spending (and, of course, to increase it through higher taxes).  The tension here comes with the Repubs always wanting to reduce taxes while also making sure the US doesn’t fall behind the bad guys militarily – i.e. only the Right wants America to maintain its white hat hegemon position in the world.  Both parties succumb to various forms of corporate and agricultural subsidies.  A breakdown of discretionary spending is shown below.

So now we come to the special events category like Mideast Wars, ‘quantitative easing’ during the recovery from the Great Recession, and Covid Relief spending after the states variously and unnecessarily shut down their economies to create historic levels of unemployment in the land.  These boondoggles costing trillions really did lay waste to our budgets and the national debt.  Do we now stack all of these expenditures solely, or even mostly, on the backs of the presidents in office during those fiscal years?  (For example, Trump was responsible for the China virus and its impact on the country's economy, ergo the subsequent relief spending.)

We have always had two basic ideologies contending for money, added to the natural habit of politicians to indulge in local pork.  One side wants big government to be the end-all of control and the source of largesse, the other side wants small government and open markets, but knows that it has to play along with the spending game in order not to be swept out office by a population that grows more ignorant and dependent with each passing generation.  Anyone with a smidgen of history under their belt knows that this is the real dynamic that determines the levels and directions of federal spending.

When all the budget dust settles, we have 535 congress critters, all jostling each other for credit on the passage of spending bills that they think will promote their re-election chances.  So out in television land, what can we make of these self-aggrandizing worthies who failed high school civics (remember when that was still taught), and are now trying to sound like they know how our government works by pointing to this or that president as having “blown a hole in the budget”?

Sandbox – 1sep20

[So here’s the drill about the riots.  According to the Big Liberal Lie Factory, up until last week there were no riots, only peaceful protests for social justice – ask anybody in the Dem leadership including Bumblebrain.  This week this position became ludicrous even for the country’s liberal contingent.  So a massive pivot was necessary and pulled off on the Sunday lamestream talk shows.  This week the riots are suddenly real, and have been so for some months, all caused by President Trump inciting white nationalists to violence from the White House.  Now that’s a more palatable version of reality for all the land's leftists.  gjr]