Mar 22 2025

Second To The Party

     Apparently, men’s discovery of the minefield that is marriage in America today has been mirrored from the distaff side, albeit not for the same reasons:

     American women have never been this resigned to staying single. They are responding to major demographic shifts, including huge and growing gender gaps in economic and educational attainment, political affiliation and beliefs about what a family should look like.
     “The numbers aren’t netting out,” said Daniel Cox, director of the survey center at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a conservative think tank. He ticked off the data points: More women than men are attending college, buying houses and focusing on their friendships and careers over dating and marriage.
     Stories of women complaining about the lack of quality men have long infused pop culture—from “Pride and Prejudice” to Taylor Swift’s oeuvre. Yet women throughout history rarely questioned whether finding and securing a romantic partner should be a primary goal of adulthood.
     This seems to be changing. Over half of single women said they believed they were happier than their married counterparts in a 2024 AEI survey of 5,837 adults. Just over a third of surveyed single men said the same.

     It’s not surprising that the general dismissal of marriage and family as a goal should have become bilateral. The tensions between the sexes have been stoked to an unprecedented level. Men have much to fear from the potential dissolution of a marriage, which is effortless for a wife to contrive. The socioeconomic changes since the Sixties have weakened one of women’s former inducements to seek a husband. Perhaps worst of all, contemporary media have encouraged both men and women to seek mates only available in fantasy novels.

     Yet until recently, single women still sought the marital bond more enthusiastically than did single men. If there’s been an addition to the stew that specifically discourages women from seeking a mate, I’m unaware of it. But I have a particular interest in the “fantasy mate” business, as you might expect from one who… ah… writes fantasy.

     Statistically, there will always be very few pinnacle-level individuals of either sex:

  • There will always be very few men who are tall, extremely handsome, traditionally masculine, wealthy, and faultlessly chivalrous.
  • There will always be very few women who are tall, beautiful, demurely feminine, and willing to devote themselves to a man.

     The Bell Curve is like that. Add to the paucity of such fantasy mates that the god[dess] you yearn for must be unattached, sane, and must take a reciprocal interest in you. Most of us are unlikely to meet and click with such a paragon.

     But modern entertainment is shot through with fantasy mates. They’re ubiquitous in both the printed and the visual media. Thus, we are subtly encouraged to seek them, and discouraged from taking an interest in anyone who “fails to meet our standards.”

     Among formulas for failure, this one is near the top.

     There’s no “solution,” if one views the situation as a “problem.” It’s the way things are and will probably remain for quite some time to come. Perhaps the swelling of the ranks of lonely singles, puzzled about how their lives have turned out, will stimulate some fresh thought about it, as our population dwindles and older folks’ stories for the young change coloration. But it will take more than occasional regret.

Mar 22 2025

The Counter-Flood

     There’s been a lot of chatter about how, by moving in so many directions simultaneously in its first weeks, the Trump Administration completely confused its opponents on the Left. The shorthand applied to this effect is “flooding the zone.” And it does seem to have flummoxed the Democrats… for a little while.

     But there’s no such thing as a sword that can cut your enemy yet can’t cut you. The Democrats have responded with their own version of “flooding the zone:” left-wing District Court judges have issued a flurry of injunctions and orders intended to halt the MAGA initiatives, or at least confuse the Administration about whether the judicial branch has the authority to override presidential executive orders. Fresh reports of such leftist judicial intrusions arrive daily.

     These injunctions and orders have little to no Constitutional basis, yet they’re having the desired effect. Executive branch deference to judicial decrees has been a feature of conservative administrations. The jurisdictional monkey wrenches they’ve thrown into the works have slowed many Administration moves. Some may prove impossible to overturn, especially given Chief Justice John Roberts’ reluctance to take them up quickly.

     Perhaps we ought to have expected it. The Biden Administration put quite a lot of leftists on the federal bench. What else do the Democrats have, besides their pet judges and the filibuster? Attacks on Tesla dealerships?

Mar 21 2025

Growth Always Comes At A Price

     Courtesy of Knuckledraggin’, we have this reflection on a greatly changed America:

     “It wasn’t always like this.”
     I looked up from the litter I was collecting in the park. Discarded trash was a constant battle in the city in which we lived before returning home. It became so bad that my wife and I organized events to pick up litter in the park followed by yard games with other families. The voice belonged to a very old man and I asked him what he meant, fully expecting to hear a lecture about how people were just more diligent back in his day and had more civic pride. He surprised me though.
     “Nothing had its own packaging.” he explained. “Now everything has its own wrapper that you throw away.”

     Please read it all. It’s a touching reflection on traditions that have vanished, or have been greatly weakened, over the postwar decades. But it also omits something: a bit of context that goes along with the other developments in American society since the end of World War II and the immense demobilization that followed.

     Why was it, generally speaking, that “nothing had its own packaging” in those pre-war decades? The unnamed gentleman who said that may have had more in mind than just the litter itself. Though it’s a seeming paradox, an expanded context helps us to see the details more clearly.

     Convenience foodstuffs – both “fast foods” and the sort of snack foods that are purchased on impulse, eaten outside the home, and which generate the greater part of the litter the article mentions – were both fewer in number and less frequently purchased before World War II. The ones that existed were less appealing. Their purchasers had the means to buy them far less often. This must be factored into an analysis of the postwar changes.

     Production and consumption operate in tandem. Producers need something to produce, but their choice will always be constrained by what consumers choose to consume. Similarly, consumers cannot consume what hasn’t been produced. Something that’s being consumed enthusiastically will be produced in increasing numbers, and by increasing numbers of producers. The immense demographic transition the U.S. experienced after World War II changed a great deal in that regard:

  • Nearly 11 million American men were demobilized into civilian society;
  • A large number of American women were freed from wage labor to become wives, mothers, and homemakers;
  • The men found the women and started producing children;
  • An economy that had been oriented toward war production shifted back to civilian goods with a lurch.

     At first, the emphasis was on houses and cars, but that couldn’t carry the tide for very long. Houses and cars are expensive; besides, how many people need more than one of each? A substantial number of women found that they missed their workplaces, and were willing to divide themselves between the duties of the workplace and the demands of the home. Concurrently with those trends, true mass marketing, supported by the burgeoning of broadcast radio and television, exploded nationwide. When new consumer goods arose, the marketers and advertisers were quick to popularize them.

     Men, absorbed by their occupations, typically were away from their families during the daylight hours. That left their wives with nearly the whole burden of homemaking and child-rearing. Convenience products aimed at alleviating that burden arose immediately, were promoted on the airwaves, and were embraced by their target market: the American housewife. The swelling of postwar prosperity also meant more discretionary family income, some of which found its way into juvenile pockets.

     Production stimulated consumption; consumption stoked production. Nearly all the new products came in cans, cardboard boxes, or plastic wrappers. Quite a large percentage of those products were sold to children, who were spending ever more of their time outside the home, essentially unsupervised.

     The behavioral changes were inevitable. Both the economics of the marketplace and the economics of home and pantry pushed them along.

     America in the Fifties was still highly civic-minded. Adults took care not to litter. Apartment buildings provided centralized disposal services, sometimes through incinerators. Parents taught their children that littering is an offense against good citizenship and good taste. But all that would change as disposable products and their packaging proliferated and the burdens on homemakers increased.

     Other influences would have their part, especially the large inflations of the Seventies, which practically eliminated the one-income family as the American norm. In aggregate, the pressures on private citizens pushed them away from traditional American kitchen practices and toward the use of convenience foods and “snack” products. The rise of the “fast food” restaurant, which became pronounced in the late Sixties, partook greatly of those trends.

     Unless a consumable product came straight from the greengrocer or the butcher, it came in packaging. The packaging had to go somewhere. It didn’t always go into the trash can… and even when it did, it didn’t always make it to the dump.

     It was predictable that there would be an increase in disposable things. Indeed, if there hadn’t been such an increase, the economy wouldn’t have expanded as swiftly as it did, whether or not you think that was a good thing. We of today must cope with the remnants of what we consume. Generally, we do pretty well. But the attitudes of those that produce the mounds of garbage are often less than pleasant, as the city of Baltimore has shown us:

     Look, we appreciate anyone who is willing to roll up their sleeves to help Baltimore. More than 170 people came from all over the country and cleaned up nearly 12 tons of trash, according to Mr. Presler’s Twitter feed. He doesn’t post any photos of the totality of the trash, so we’ll have to take his word for it….
     Whatever he says his motives were, Mr. Presler’s presence in Baltimore reinforces the tired image of our failing urban cores. That the poor people in this dilapidated city can’t take care of their own neighborhoods and all the public officials around them have failed as well. The bureaucratic, all-talk Democrats strike again. If a crowd of volunteers could clean up 12 tons of trash in 12 hours, how incompetent and helpless must Baltimoreans be if they can’t manage it in decades, right?…
     The silver lining in all of this is that the residents of West Baltimore did get a much needed cleaning up. That is something that they deserve. Streets and alleyways free of trash go a long way in improving the psyche of a neighborhood and its residents. Not to mention deterring crime. Mr. Presler says that people around the country are planning similar clean up events in their own communities. A loud round of applause for that as well. Spiffier neighborhoods are good for everyone.
     We also hope Mr. Presler keeps his promise to return to Baltimore once a month. It would definitely give his motives more credibility. It might also give him better perspective about the city’s problems than any single visit can provide. Maybe it could even lead him and his followers to advocate for federal housing, health care, transportation, education, criminal justice, civil rights and anti-poverty policies aimed at urban communities.

     It’s not just economics, to be sure.

Mar 21 2025

What Did They Expect?

     Here are the photos of the South African Antarctic expedition that’s been in the news recently:

     From The New York Post:

     Nine members of an Antarctic expedition are locked up together at a research station 2,000 miles from civilization.
     And one of them is a madman — accused of violently beating, threatening and sexually harassing at least two of his teammates.
     The Post can reveal that the South African crew of three women and six men includes a glamorous doctor with her own skincare line and a deputy team leader who helped produce a short horror film during a previous stay at the station — along with engineers and a meteorologist.
     The researchers on South Africa’s SANAE IV outpost won’t be relieved until December, when temperatures at the South Pole are at their warmest for the year and seasonal ice storms pass.
     […]
     According to urgent emails fired off to authorities from the remote base, an unidentified male member of the South African crew stuck at SANAE IV became “deeply disturbed” within weeks of arriving.
     This was despite, the complainant alleged, authorities being warned about his behavior even before the team left South Africa on Feb. 1.
     […]
     The message, which was sent Feb. 27, alleged the crew member assaulted and sexually harassed colleagues, and even threatened to kill one of them, creating “an environment of fear and intimidation,” the Guardian reports.
     “His behavior has escalated to a point that is deeply disturbing. I remain deeply concerned about my own safety, constantly wondering if I might become the next victim,” the email said, as first reported on by South Africa’s Sunday Times newspaper.
     The identity of the crew member believed to have snapped was not released.

     Hm. Six Negroes, an Asian, a Muslim, and a beautiful white woman. Confined together, inescapably, for 13 months in the harshest land conditions on Earth. There’s no reason to exercise a little forethought about such a crew, is there?

     Quoth Divemedic:

     Take 6 black men, a Muslim, a Black woman, an Asian woman, and a white woman. Put them in an isolated research station on Antarctica. What could go wrong?

     The who-what-when-where of the threats and “sexual harassment” aren’t given. I can’t imagine why. Apparently the unnamed “madman” at the center of it all hasn’t been forcibly restrained by his colleagues. I can’t fathom that, either. Can you, Gentle Reader? As for what possessed a beautiful white woman to sign on for such a hitch, I decline to speculate.

     But the South African “authorities” are “remotely monitoring” the situation and assure us all that it’s “under control.” Such a relief to know!

Mar 21 2025

You’re Not Imagining It

     The Democrats really are at war against America:

     We knew. They’d hardly troubled to conceal it. But to have their Senate bigwig confirm it openly removes all doubt, or should. There will still be a few who claim this is “the normal cut and thrust of politics,” but after a few Republican Congressmen have been attacked, their families harassed and their homes vandalized, no one will listen to them.

     Some have called this a symptom of panic. They’re right. But a tactic adopted out of panic can be effective if it’s not properly countered. If you have a good Representative who holds to the Trump agenda and speaks about it to his constituents, consider attending his public meetings and lending your support.

Mar 20 2025

Everything Everywhere All At Once

     Did you ever wake up an ungodly hour and find yourself muttering “It’s going to be one of those days, isn’t it” — ? Has that happened to you lately? It’s been happening to me rather frequently.

     I tried my best, Gentle Reader. Really and for true. I got up, lit the lights, fed, watered, and walked the dogs, made coffee, made the bed, showered, shaved, and dressed, ate the ritual cup of yogurt, and compelled myself to smile – and it changed nothing. The Future Columns folder is still overflowing. And you know what that means.

1. Future War.

     Some technologies are purely benevolent in application. Others, not so much:

     Approximately 60 drones were launched from Ukraine overnight to attack the Russian capital city of Moscow. This is the largest escalation of drone/missile attacks into Russia so far.
     […]
     Hitting Moscow with a wave of 60 drones is a major escalation, because face-to-face meetings with U.S and Ukraine officials are at a critical inflection point. Each uptick in the offensive action from Ukraine is directly proportional to the increased seriousness of the peace talks.

     Let’s leave aside the politics of the situation for the moment. What does the use of drones as combat instruments portend? Some have claimed that it will ultimately remove humans from the battlefield. I find that to be unsupported by either logic or experience. Whatever the case, today’s combat drones are precursors to something more frightening: combat drones guided by artificial intelligence.

     Warfare in the Information Age implies that such drones would not merely inflict damage on things. Rather, they would target important strategists and tacticians. By removing the guiding intelligences of enemy forces, they would create disorder and reduce enemy efficacy. As the strategic / tactical pyramid always has the political leadership at its pinnacle, such drone swarms would attack heads of state.

     Does that strike you as a stabilizing change?

2. It’s Out In The Open Now.

     This news is frightening even by recent standards:

     The website “Dogequest” reportedly doxes Tesla owners and employees of Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), listing personal information and Tesla dealership locations.
     The site encourages vandalism of Tesla vehicles, stating it supports “creative expressions of protest.”
     Recent incidents include vandalism at Tesla dealerships, gunfire attacks in Oregon, and harassment of Cybertruck owners.

     David Strom notes:

     We have already seen a huge spike in terrorism from trans activists. Many of the attacks on Teslas and Tesla showrooms were done by trans “women,” and a number of mass shootings have been as well. “Kill TERFs” has become a common slogan as well.
     Relatively normal AWFLs are fantasizing about violent resistance, and while they won’t do it themselves, they have already cheered it on, up to an including endorsing Luigi Mangione’s cause and helping fund his very expensive defense.
     As far as I can tell, there is no backlash among Democrats to the increasing violence, which instead has inspired a bunch of “I don’t endorse violence, but…” tut-tutting. That is, in fact, a tacit endorsement of violence, and we know that the Democrat-controlled ActBlue is raising money for the extremist wing of the Party that commits these terroristic acts.

     We’ve been wondering when the sotto voce civil war would burst out into the open. I submit that it has. This puts us to the test: What are we willing to do about it?

     Ace suggests that we treat the militant Left like an American chapter of HAMAS:

     The antifa left needs to be dealt with, like Hamas — once and for all.

     I concur.

3. Chaos Is The Goal.

     Lincoln Brown spells it out:

     Encouraged and protected by teachers, legislators, social media, and, for that matter, the press, the chaos of the day has been a long time coming and is practically institutionalized. These miscreants have appointed themselves the marshalls of a dystopian Dodge City. They have no problem violating social contracts, such as not burning things that do not belong to them, because they recognize no social contracts other than their own. They have the right to do as they wish to administer their version of justice. In return, you also have the right to do as they wish. Or face the consequences. Consider the irony of fascists calling people fascists. When it comes to such people, the revolution will not only be broadcast, it will be promoted, lauded, and bankrolled. By way of reminder, one of the reasons for all the violence is to remind us that none of this would have been necessary if we had only voted for Giggles McPantsuit and Uncle Fester. This isn’t just intimidation; it’s a warning about how you better vote next time.

     Remember, Gentle Reader: It takes only about 2% of the population of a society to destroy all pretense of order in that society. Is the insane, destruction-minded component of the Left is that numerous? I don’t know… but I think we’re about to find out.

4. Alternate Outcomes.

     Sundance at The Last Refuge highlights a recent speech by Vice President J. D. Vance:

     During a speech to the American Dynamism Summit, JD Vance outlines his optimism for the future of the U.S. economy, as boosted by the technological advances in artificial intelligence.
     Within his remarks, Vance correctly notes some voices are saying there is going to be a major fracture between the “Techno-optimists” and the “populists.” However, Vance defines that chasm, and then refutes that fear/concern around jobs, advanced AI, automation, innovation and the economy. He misses what will be the root cause of the fracture completely.
     Vice-President Vance notes there is nothing to fear from innovation, artificial intelligence, robotics and advanced industrial application of emerging technology. Indeed, all facets of economic growth through the use of all the aforementioned enterprises are correctly framed by the vice president.
     There is nothing to fear on the economic front from the technological advancements currently underway.

     But economics are only a part of the picture:

     It is not the economic side of the AI system Vance supports on behalf of his benefactors that is problematic; it’s the creation of a compliant surveillance state that flows as a natural outcome of advanced and automated AI systems within a highly weaponized government. That’s the problem. That where the fracture will occur.
     […]
     The problem for Americans is how advanced AI will be deployed under the guise of efficiency to create a comprehensive DHS surveillance state.
     The predictable system will automate, connecting every aspect of our lives to our compliance in living that life in the manner approved by those who control the system.

     In his darkest nightmares, George Orwell could not have imagined such a world. Yet the union of inexpensive video cameras, high-bandwidth Internet, facial recognition software, government databases, and artificial intelligence makes it perfectly plausible.

     Really now, Gentle Reader: how much longer do you intend to tolerate the obscenity we call the State?

5. For Your Perusal.

     In light of all the above, I’d like to suggest a review of some previous essays:

     Is their pessimism still justified, given the segments above? Or are we really making progress back toward a free and peaceful America?

6. On A Lighter Note.

     Populism, in essence, is about the rising of previously neglected (or suppressed) voices. It appears to be ascending throughout the Western world. Peoples in nations across the water are feeling abused in several ways that are already familiar to Americans. One such people, the Irish, have an unexpected spokesman in martial-arts figure Conor McGregor – and the Irish mainstream media are incensed:

     It was a ‘dismal’ sight, cried the Irish Times. It was ‘beyond distressing’. It was ‘enough to curdle many a pint of stout’. ‘The shamrock bowl lies wilting’, the paper wailed, like one of those be-shawled auld women who once stalked the lanes of Ireland issuing dark prophecies to all and sundry. What has happened to stir up such fright and foreboding at Ireland’s newspaper of record? Have the Brits returned? Is a new potato blight afoot? Are the Magdalene laundries reopening? Nope – Conor McGregor went to the White House.
     […]
     The meltdown over McGregor’s jaunt to Washington, DC has been equal parts hilarious and terrifying. No sooner had the UFC braggart done his ‘billionaire strut’ outside the White House than Ireland’s scribes were pounding their keyboards in fuming disapproval. ‘The Irish image abroad took a hit’ when this ‘MMA fighter was given the microphone in the White House’, said one at the Irish Independent. They really can’t believe a Crumlin boy was allowed to speak in public. The horror!

     Please read it all. After the segments prior to this one, I’m sure you could use a laugh.

     That’s all for the nonce, Gentle Reader. Enjoy your Thursday, if that’s possible.

     “This must be Thursday. I never could get the hang of Thursdays.” – Arthur Dent.

Mar 19 2025

Creeping “National Security” Syndrome

     Americans must keep an eye on this practice:

     United States District Judge James Boasberg of the District of Columbia ordered the Trump administration to turn around two planes the White House says were carrying members of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang to El Salvador.
     Homan strongly defended Trump’s decision to use the Alien Enemies Act to deport members of the Venezuelan gang, calling it a “game changer.”
     “I don’t know why. I don’t know why any judge would want terrorists returned to the United States. First of all, that video, what a beautiful thing to see,” Homan told the Fox host.
     “Look, President Trump, by proclamation, invoked the authorities of [the] Alien Enemies Act. Which he has a right to do and it’s a game changer and we removed over 200 violent criminals from the United States. Just not TdA, but also MS-13,” Homan continued. “The actions of President Trump made this country safer. Every criminal alien, every criminal public safety threat, and national security threat removed from the country makes this country safer. That’s what American voters voted for. That’s the mandate of the president, and the president is keeping his promise.”

     I added the emphasis.

     I’ve ranted about “national security” before, of course. It’s a dangerous pseudo-concept, more often than not used in defense of some federal action that could not be justified on statutory or Constitutional grounds. But there’s no need to invoke it when the subject is the deportation of criminal illegal aliens, so why do so?

     I don’t know why Tom Homan did so, considering the lack of necessity. Perhaps it’s a reflex of sorts. Longtime federal employees develop habits from such service; this could be one of them. (A fellow I worked with, some years ago, replied to virtually every inquiry with “You have no need-to-know.”) Nevertheless, it’s an impulse that should be resisted.

     Politicians and bureaucrats who defend actions and policies on the grounds of “national security” are seldom challenged to be explicit about the matter. I don’t have an example to hand, but I’d give odds that on at least one occasion, a politician who was challenged on it would reply “I can’t answer you because it would impinge on national security.” Such persons find an undefined concept with a handy shibboleth exceedingly useful for deflecting unwelcome probes of their actions.

     Sharp questions that demand clear, specific answers are the things politicians and bureaucrats most hate to face. One of the sharpest is “What do you mean by that?” If pressed home relentlessly, it can pin its target as immovably as a specimen butterfly is pinned to an entomologist’s display case. Quoth Arthur Herzog:

     [T]he best tool the radical skeptic has is the sharp question—“Why?” “What for?” “When?” “What do you mean?” “Who?” These are terrifying questions, in a way, considering how seldom they are answered. And when answers are given, they don’t appear to be the right answers.

     Considering how widely it’s proliferated in political rhetoric, a few sharp questions about this “national security” business could prove vital to the future of the Republic.

Mar 19 2025

Conversations

     Mine is a rather silly household:

CSO: What’s your plan for today?
FWP: Plan a Wednesday? Naah. They’re too easy. Now Fridays, those I have to plan.

CSO: When do you do that? Late Thursday?
FWP: No, Friday morning, the moment I get out of bed.

CSO: Sounds risky, doing that before you’ve had any coffee.
FWP: It does account for how my Fridays have been going.

<rimshot />

Mar 19 2025

The Awesome Power Of Cheese

     I like cheese. Quite a lot, actually. I eat cheese virtually every day. And not just a few common varieties, mind you; over the course of a calendar year, I chow down on the cheeses of many nations. But until Scampydog at AoSHQ sent me to this story, I’d never truly appreciated cheese’s potentials in warfare:

     During one such skirmish between a Brazilian and an Uruguayan ship, the Uruguayan vessel ran out of cannonballs. The Uruguayan ship was just sitting ducks without any ammunition. All they had on board was the ration for the crew and the handguns they possessed.
     Thinking on his feet, Captain Coe, the commander of the ship, ordered the cannon to be loaded with stale Dutch cheese of which they had plenty, more so than ammunition. The captain reasoned, “The cheese was too old and hard to eat anyway”. The crew obeyed the orders and loaded the cannons with blocks of cheese.
     Moments later, the Uruguayan ship opened fire again, throwing hard stale blocks of cheeses at the Brazilian navy. The first few balls went sailing over the intended target ships, but soon enough one crashed into the main mast of a Brazilian ship. Funnily, the big block of cheese caused the mast to shatter into a thousand pieces. The Brazilian admiral was taken aback. Two of his crew members were wounded with cheese shrapnel.
     After taking a few more cheese balls crashing into the ship, the Brazilian admiral ordered his ship to retire from the battle and return to the port. Uruguay made food history that day.

     Don’t mess with the old cheese. It will hurt you!

Mar 18 2025

The Tactic They Thought Would Never Fail

     Word gets around. I must have said and written that millions of times by now. Yet those who most need to remember it often seem unwilling or unable to do so.

     Barbara Tuchman defined folly as “knowing better but doing worse.” As a historian, she had plenty of examples to study. They continue to accumulate today.

     In the main, people will remember what you do longer than what you say. Moreover, they’ll talk about what you did; what you said will be a footnote at most. That’s why promises matter less than performance.

     The hundred words above suffice to explain all that will follow.

     Mark McCormack listed three sentences as the hardest to learn how and when to use:

  • “I don’t know.”
  • “I need help.”
  • “I was wrong.”

     Contemplate the brevity of those three sentences. The third one is the focus of today’s sermonette. Note this especially: between wrong and the full stop, there is no but.

     He who can admit to an error without qualifying it as (partly) someone else’s fault is a mature, honest man. He who cannot or will not do so is of dubious quality. Yet as desirous as we are of being thought honest and mature, the majority of us seek to offset our culpability for our mistakes and failures by citing someone else’s “contribution.”

     One’s motive for “butting” after being revealed as wrong could be any of several: averting unpleasant consequences, retaining a particular reputation, and asserting authority come to mind at once. In politics and politically associated matters, the assertion of authority, especially moral authority, looms large. Consider the sentence made famous after the Dan Rather / Mary Mapes falsehoods of the 2004 presidential campaign were disproved: “The facts were wrong but the narrative was right.”

     Moral authority is easily lost by those who “but.” It takes time, but as I said at the outset, word gets around. In this case, the word that gets around is cowardice.

     He who “buts” is revealed as unwilling to accept the blame for his mistake. While the blame may be severe for an honest man, it can be devastating for the “butter.” His status is reduced by the magnitude of his error plus the suspicion that will henceforth attach to his assertions of moral authority.

     This is one of the largest consequences of the recent revelations about the origin of the COVID-19 virus:

     [B]asically, everyone in power knew all along that the Chinese Communist Party was responsible for the covid-19 epidemic, perhaps with an assist from Anthony Fauci’s NAIA, which funded gain of function research in Wuhan, despite Fauci’s later, desperate denials.
     So whoever believed government assurances about the genesis of covid in 2020 and thereafter was a sucker.

     The decline in the willingness of ordinary Americans to believe health-and-medicine-related government edicts has been staggering. No one likes to admit to himself that he’s been “had.” However angry he might be with himself for being overly trusting, he’ll be twice as mad at those who deceived him, once he knows that it was deliberate. As bad as that can be for individuals, it’s catastrophic for a government agency.

     Claiming the moral high ground was the Left’s favorite tactic for many years. It was always a pose, but as long as their representations survived attempts to falsify them, they could continue their public hauteur. Moreover, that hauteur alone was sufficient to cow and silence many who dared to question them.

     As regards the COVID-19 fiasco, “butting” has cost them their pose. We’ve heard the pleas for “pandemic amnesty.” We’ve learned that the “COVID vaccines” were never what they were represented to be. And we now know that governments and their private-sector hangers-on were fully aware of what we now know. Yet the “butting” continues:

     You’d think that by now we’d have learned it’s not a good idea to test possible gas leaks by lighting a match. And you’d hope that prestigious scientific journals would have learned not to reward such risky research.
     Why haven’t we learned our lesson? Maybe because it’s hard to admit that this research is risky now and to take the requisite steps to keep us safe without also admitting it was always risky. And that perhaps we were misled on purpose.
     […]
     It’s not hard to imagine how the attempt to squelch legitimate debate might have started. Some of the loudest proponents of the lab leak theory weren’t just earnestly making inquiries; they were acting in terrible faith, using the debate over pandemic origins to attack legitimate, beneficial science, to inflame public opinion, to get attention. For scientists and public health officials, circling the wagons and vilifying anyone who dared to dissent might have seemed like a reasonable defense strategy.

     Note the source of those cited paragraphs. Note the deliberate conflation of “scientists” with “science.” Note the wholly unsubstantiated assertion that “the loudest proponents of the lab leak theory… were acting in terrible faith.” When you attribute malice to your opponent in a dispute over facts, you haven’t defended your moral status; you’ve forfeited it. To cap such a “but” by saying that vilifying your questioners “might have seemed like a reasonable defense strategy” is beyond my ability to parody.

     I’ve had little regard for the New York Times for many years. Its sole value is as a leftist weathervane. In the above, the Gray Lady shows its colors for what they are: entirely black.

     Moral authority? Please; it’s too early in the morning for a gale of uncontrollable laughter.

     The Left’s pose of moral authority is being demolished from end to end. If youngsters who’ve been miseducated by Left-dominated “public” schools can – despite their lack of perspective and sophistication – flummox willing Leftist apologists, the Left is teetering from its ivory tower heights. What will they have left, once their pose of moral superiority is stripped away? Simply asserting without evidence that their critics and opponents are “wrong,” as Michael Ian Black does:

     There’s no point in combing through the conservatives’ claims; they were almost all incorrect, as fact-checked by Jubilee during the video. But, contrary to the t-shirts, the MAGA worldview is not informed by facts but by feelings. They feel that Social Security is a disaster despite the fact that, as Sam pointed out, it keeps 2/3 of our senior citizens out of poverty. They feel that gender-affirming care for minors is, as one said, “a huge problem” despite the fact that, as Sam correctly stated, a miniscule number of children actually receive such care.
     The reason there’s no point in identifying where they misunderstand—or ignore—facts is because the MAGA worldview is immune to them. No, DEI initiatives cannot be a tax credit for government agencies because government agencies do not pay taxes. Yes, vaccines work. Yes, climate change is real and man-made. But none of that matters because their bias is of the confirmation variety.

     Assertion after bald, easily falsified assertion! “Fact-checked,” my ass. But note the supercilious dismissal of the “MAGA worldview:”

     Although there were moments when Sam threw his opponents a bone, none of the conservatives conceded a single point back to him—because they’ve internalized the most important lesson for all the aspiring Jordan Petersons and Candace Owens out there: it doesn’t matter if you’re wrong so long as you are confidently wrong. And oh boy are they confident.

     The Left’s towers aren’t just teetering; they’re crumbling. Don’t let them posture as your moral superiors.

Mar 17 2025

This is Profoundly Disturbing to Me

It’s partly the pain anyone who loves Shakespeare would feel.

I attended Lakewood High School, in Lakewood, OH. That was back in the bad old days, when the standard English curriculum was rife with Old Dead White Men.

And, probably the most outstanding ODWM of all – William Shakespeare.

I was fortunate to be able to attend during the early years of the Great Lakes Shakespeare Festival. The board had apparently made an agreement for them to provide access to the auditorium for the duration of the festival, in return to giving performances to Lakewood’s students during the day. I don’t know the financials, but it was a profitable deal for all. The actors and staff got paid, the students were exposed to live, professional performances of Shakespeare’s most well-known plays. I remember it as 2 plays a year, one year we attended 3.

All students attended, no cost, transportation provided by the board. We dressed up for these occasions. We behaved ourselves. We were enraptured.

I remember some of them:

  • Taming of the Shrew
  • Hamlet
  • Romeo & Juliet (Yes, we focused on the romance; only years later did we fully understand the tragedy)
  • Midsummer Night’s Dream
  • As You Like It
  • Julius Caesar, I believe – although I could have seen it later. I did attend some plays even after graduation.
  • The Merchant of Venice
  • Othello
  • The Comedy of Errors
  • Anthony & Cleopatra

Those are the ones that come to me off the top of my head.

The live performances made Shakespeare come to life for us. The kids reacted much like the audiences of his time would have. Laughing at the broad jokes, intently focusing on the nefarious plots, becoming one with the lovers, and seeing the words they’d read come to life right in front of them.

We were instructed by our teachers on our expected actions during the plays, and I honestly don’t remember any problems. Keep in mind, this was WAY before medicated kids and excuses for unacceptable behavior.

For me, it was magic.

On a personal note, I recently located the church where an ancestor of mine was married. The person was from my mother’s side of the family. We’d always assumed that they were Catholic, as we were.

Nope. The church they married in is Anglican. St. Matthews Church, in Walsall, England, is located only a short distance away from Stratford on Avon (now called Stratford Upon Avon), where Shakespeare lived. And by short distance, it’s the better part of a day away (43.8 miles or so on a horse would be a good stopping point). It’s a fascinating history – check out the link. The church is first mentioned in 1200. Naturally, it was Roman Catholic until Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries.

Fun news – there is a crypt! I really have to get busy saving for a trip there. Hopefully, England can hold on to the Midlands long enough for me to do it safely.

This is my heritage. The English part is about 38%, inherited from both parents. My dad’s mother was Delia Edgill – probably derived from ‘Edgehill. My mother’s family, the Devilles, were the ones married at that church on December 25, 1852. Thomas arrived in New York on June 12, 1862. The records don’t show his family traveled with him. He was naturalized September 19, 1865. When he signed his papers, he did so with a mark (indicating he was illiterate).

From the records, he appears to have been enterprising. In 1869, he was arrested for selling liquor without a license. He made bail at the time. He was in the 1870 census as a store keeper. I do suspect that some intoxicating substances might have been in his inventory.

Why do I add all that information?

Because it’s the truth. Because no matter what Thomas’s faults were (and I do suspect that the official record may hide a LOT of other unsavory reality), that is, in fact, my heritage.

Warts and all.

And I REFUSE to bury his legacy because he was an imperfect ODWM. Just as Shakespeare is more than his financial struggles, his use of foreign material to build his plays (Oh, HORROR! He appropriated other cultures!).

I don’t expect perfection of anyone. That’s why, despite some flaws, I voted for Trump – THREE times.

I’m generally pretty chill about others. If they aren’t trying to take my money, cause me harm, or butting into my personal business, yeah, sure, dye your hair blue, get those tats, harbor insane beliefs (as long as you don’t act on the violent fantasies).

Live and Let Live.

But, by attempting to erase MY culture, they have crossed the line. And I will not stand for that.

If you want to avoid the problem of Amazon’s removal of books you have paid for, try using Gutenberg.com. It’s free, they have improved the product considerably, and you can save the books in multiple formats in case Amazon reverts to their clampdowns on UNGood writing.

Not bad, but UNGood – something that offends the Overly Offended.

Mar 17 2025

Tis the high and holy feast day of St. Patrick

When I was stationed in Lost Angeles, my bishop there had spent many of his formative years in Ireland with his family. He didn’t have an accent, but there were vocal tells. He would always say that someone was “at hospital”, not “in the hospital”, and every time he said the word Saint, it would be pronounced as “Sint”.

I apologize for my absence. I wish I could say that I’m automatically coming back full time, but I’ve been dealing with a few things. I feel like I’m crawling out of a huge chasm, and I can now start to see daylight. I’m not in the light yet but I can see it.

Now then……

Father O’Brian was walking into town one morning when he spied Mrs. O’Grady, a woman that he had married to Mr. O’Grady a year ago. And being the kindly priest that he is, he stops and has a bit of a chat with her. “Mrs. O’Grady, how are you on this fine morning?”

“Oh, I’m quite fine, Father.”

“Ah, good, good. And how is Mr. O’Grady doing?”
“He’s doing fine, father. Off working this morning.”

“Wonderful, wonderful! And do you have any children yet?”
“Nay, father, we’ve been trying, but we have no children just yet.”

Father O’Brian makes a worried noise, and says “Well, I’m off to Rome soon for studying soon, and so I shall light a candle for you and Mr. O’Grady in Saint Peter’s.”

Mrs. O’Grady smiles and says “That would be lovely, father.” And then they part ways. Father O’Brian goes to Rome to study, and returns back to his little town in Ireland after three years. As he’s walking up to the church, he spies a tired looking Mrs. O’Grady and runs up to have a chat.

“Mrs. O’Grady! Saints be praised, it’s wonderful to see you! How are you doing?”

“Oh, I’m fine father, just a wee bit tired these days.”

“Tired, are you? And why is that? Do you have any children?”

“Aye, father. We’ve seven little ones. Two sets of twins and one set of triplets.”

This rocks father O’Brian back on his heels a bit. “Why…. that’s wonderful! Praise God for his good works! And where’s Mr. O’Grady in all of this?”

“Oh, he’s gone to Rome father, so he can blow out that fookin’ candle.”

And now, more coffee.

Mar 17 2025

Fraud In Depth

     There are days when I read the news and ask myself “How could they have missed something as obvious as that?” But there are other days when I read the news and ask myself “How could I have missed something as obvious as that?”

     Yes, Gentle Reader: Certified Galactic Intellects have bad days too. Remember that you read it here first.

     Here’s the stimulus:

     We are being regularly told about the stunning abuses of public money in the US by DOGE. Certainly the same thing is true across all COMINTERN countries such as Canada, the UK, Germany, the EU in general, the UN and so on. To make up a representative example, DOGE might reveal that they have discovered two hundred and sixty million dollars earmarked to teach gay turtles how to put on a version of Hamlet as a trans person in Bububu Tanzania. And that fictional example is really a pretty mild exaggeration of the DOGE headlines.
     With zero data points to support the following statement at this point in writing, and going purely on the model in the title, itself informed by a couple of decades, actually a lot more than a couple of decades of observing how nascent communist governments and polities operate, the following hypothesis is presented:
     None or next to none of that money was ever sent to those ‘charities’. In fact they may not exist at all.
     Or if they do, they were created as a beard for which to pretend to send money. In all likelyhood, the idea was to get people outraged about the nature of the recipients of the high amounts of cash and not look any farther.

     After I’d read that, it took less than a tenth of a second for satori to hit. My oh my, how it hit. Remember how we learned that the payments branch of the Treasury was instructed always to pay, never to reject a demand for payment? If all the paymasters needed was an invoice, why would anything be required to stand behind the invoice? But if there’s no real “charity” behind the invoice, where did the money really go?

     Eeyore’s theory is that it was funneled directly into the importation of destroyers:

     In fact, the money was likely used to find the invasion of Western nations by millions of people from Africa, especially the Islamic Maghreb and Islamic nations who are hostile to Jewish and Christian culture, and Greco-Roman Civilization, and intend to work triple shifts to bring it down. In fact, paid to bring it down.

     That’s a trifle strong, especially when one ponders the incentive structure that governs the disbursement of “nobody’s money:” i.e., taxpayers’ money. The more powerful incentive would be to distribute the purloined funds among insiders: legislators, high-ranking appointees, and favored associates. We have all those Congressional millionaires to account for, don’t we?

     Whatever the true destination of the money, we may be certain that it didn’t go to an Article I, Section 8 authorized power of Congress. We may also be certain that were the recipients’ identities to be revealed, the American public would want to see them boiled in oil. But “justice” in the U.S. today cannot be relied upon to produce actual justice. Were that the case, we’d have seen the Epstein and Maxwell client lists by now. We’d also have learned just what the “Pizzagate” discoveries were about. And just maybe, a few Congressmen and Senators would be wearing orange jumpsuits and learning to make license plates.

     Combine this with the autopen scandal currently breaking, and what do we get?

     The core need of a conspiracy that seeks enrichment through graft is to contrive not to be prosecuted for it. In a political system such as ours, that mandates corrupting the prosecutors before all else. What we’ve learned about Justice Department practices in recent months suggests that it’s been corrupted beyond any metaphor to describe. Despite copious evidence of severe wrongdoing by prominent persons with highly placed political allies, they never see the inside of a courtroom. Epstein and Maxwell were sops to Cerberus, nothing more.

     The Trump Administration is plowing through the Justice Department, straining to root out the betrayers of the public trust. While this suggests that there may yet be hope, I’m inclined to say “Let’s wait and see.” The rot is unlikely to be unipartisan. Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment – “Thou shalt speak no ill of a fellow Republican” – is likely to save a few GOP necks from their deserved nooses. That would imply ongoing corruption: a change in the vector’s direction, not zeroing it out.

     Partisans with axes to grind will encourage popular attention to focus on particular aspects of these atrocities, while discouraging attention to others. Misdirections and deflections will be many. They may be too many, and too prolonged, for us to endure. Soon enough, talking heads will be saying that in a government as large as ours, “a few errors” and “a little waste” are “inevitable.” Other talking heads will nod in sage concession to “the realities of life.” Go back to sleep, Mr. Taxpayer. Outrage is tiring, after all.

     But let’s wait and see.

Mar 16 2025

Notes on Slowing Down

I decided to follow my own advice to others:

Stop trying to be everywhere for everyone – follow the directive on airlines, when in crisis, put the mask on YOU first!

So, although I know my daughter is missing me, I’m taking care of myself, because:

  • I need some time to heal
  • She would not be helped by being near a sick Mom

Yes, my husband would like me to fuss over him more, but I made him soup, brought him water, and took him to Urgent Care for diagnosis. Yes, despite his ‘flu shot’, he did catch the flu. In all fairness, some years it does reduce the incidence; this year, they are seeing a LOT of Influenza A.

I keep nagging him to drink more, and he is. But I’m not up to endless Fetch & Trot, so whatever he can do, I let him.

Tough love, that’s what they call it.

Give what you can, but don’t run yourself ragged in the process.

Personal Update:

I’m feeling, if not up to normal, at least breathing more easily, and able to stay on my feet for extended periods. I even manage to 1/2 empty the dishwasher.

I have another 10 days to complete my CEUs for renewal of my license, so I’m not going to sweat that.

I’ve been following one story that fascinates me – the use of the Presidential Autopen for just about ALL things needing a signature.

And, Sleepy Joe is pretty much ignorant about the use of it, which he admitted when asked about one Executive Order by the press.

Now, it has surfaced that there is a SECOND autopen with a Joseph R Biden signature.

Except it really doesn’t look like Joe’s normal signature. What it REALLY looks like is a middle school kid’s FORGERY of his mother’s signature. See below from The Gateway Pundit, and, please, read the whole story – worth your time.

Staffers, who claim to be ‘terrified’ to have opposed that person they know handled the autopen’s use, have leaked to Christina Laila at Gateway.

I can’t wait to see this story investigated fully. Among other things (like felony charges for the culprit), this might reasonably disallow many of those questionable pardons, including

Mar 16 2025

To Transfigure And Prefigure

     On the second Sunday of the Lenten season, we read of the episode called the Transfiguration:

     And it came to pass about eight days after these words, that he took Peter, and James, and John, and went up into a mountain to pray. And whilst he prayed, the shape of his countenance was altered, and his raiment became white and glittering. And behold two men were talking with him. And they were Moses and Elias, appearing in majesty. And they spoke of his decease that he should accomplish in Jerusalem.
     But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep. And waking, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him. And it came to pass, that as they were departing from him, Peter saith to Jesus: Master, it is good for us to be here; and let us make three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias; not knowing what he said.
     And as he spoke these things, there came a cloud, and overshadowed them; and they were afraid, when they entered into the cloud. And a voice came out of the cloud, saying: This is my beloved Son; hear him. And whilst the voice was uttered, Jesus was found alone. And they held their peace, and told no man in those days any of these things which they had seen.

     [Luke 9:28-36]

     The Transfiguration as related by Luke foretells the Passion: Jesus’s betrayal by Judas Iscariot, his arrest by the soldiers of the Sanhedrin, his presentation to Herod and then to Pilate, and his Crucifixion and death. Lent, of course, is the season during which Christians are bade to prepare for that mighty happening, and for the Resurrection to follow.

     There’s a great deal to be wrung out of that passage, but what strikes me this morning is how it underscores the importance of patience. Jesus knew what was to come. He didn’t seek to hide from it, nor to hurry it along. The three apostles with him were struck by two opposed emotions: exaltation, that their Master had been revealed plainly to be the Son of God; and terror, that he who had called them would be taken from them. But upon hearing the voice of God the Father they were stilled, and meekly followed Jesus down the mountain to his ultimate sacrifice.

     Much that’s related in the Gospels speaks, directly or otherwise, of the virtue of patience. But patience alone is less valuable than readiness: being prepared to cope with what’s coming. That’s emphatically so for one who knows what’s coming.

     Lent and Advent, the two seasons of preparation in the Christian liturgical calendar, are reminders that we know what’s coming… just as we know him who has come, and gone, and will come again.

     Life under the veil of Time is a compound of many things, including tests of several kinds. A test is a chance to establish that one is “good enough” by some measure. Tests of our abilities often come with metrics designed to tell us not only whether we’ve achieved a particular level of accomplishment but also whether we’re improving on our previous performances.

     But some of the most valuable “accomplishments” in life don’t have metrics. Friendship; love; happiness; serenity: these are not things to be graded on a scale. They’re yes / no conditions; either you have them or you don’t. So it is also with patience and the love of God.

     He who is patient with himself will also be patient with God. He won’t demand immediate answers to his prayers. He won’t try to schedule his accession to grace. He will think about his faith. He’ll study the Gospels and the preachments of Christ. None of the things Jesus said are one-dimensional. They reward patient reflection.

     Here’s one from the Gospel According to John:

     A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another. [John 13:34-35]

     “Love” is a heavily overloaded word. Its meaning is only made plain from the context of application. Certainly love as used above isn’t of the romantic sort. Jesus and the apostles worked together, traveled together, and suffered together until the time of his Passion arrived. To follow him, the apostles not only had to believe in him, but to be patient about their journeys, labors, and trials, confident that fulfillment was coming. Lesser men might have endured one or two years of ministry, said to themselves “That’s enough; I’m not going to wait forever,” and returned to their previous homes and pursuits. Even after his Resurrection and Ascension, they would require patience, for they all had labors and trials yet to endure as they set out on their various parts of the Great Commission. He told them so:

     Behold I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves. But beware of men. For they will deliver you up in councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues.
     And you shall be brought before governors, and before kings for my sake, for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles:
     But when they shall deliver you up, take no thought how or what to speak: for it shall be given you in that hour what to speak. For it is not you that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you.
     The brother also shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the son: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and shall put them to death. And you shall be hated by all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.

     [Matthew 10:16-22]

     Patience of that sort – patience “under the yoke,” trusting that all would be well if they could only remain faithful to their Master’s teachings – is inseparable from theological love. Each makes the other possible.

     Few things are known to us absolutely. The surest and most tragic of them is this: We shall all die. That knowledge is a great part of what propels us: to work, to advance, to excel, perhaps to leave a legacy by which some may remember us and others might know us. Yet though we know it, we don’t dwell on it. We certainly don’t try to hurry it along. It merely sits at some unknown future time, awaiting us.

     But we have been told:

     Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. [John 14:1-3]

     As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. [John 15:10-14]

     And just as it was with Peter, James, and John, we have the Transfiguration to reassure us: our patience will be rewarded.

     May God bless and keep you all!

Mar 16 2025

Concerning “Criticism”

About an hour ago, I saw a Facebook post that consisted of a single graphic. That graphic said:

     There are 194 other countries than the United States. If you hate America, just leave for one of the others.

     To which actor Kevin Sorbo replied that “Criticism is not hatred.” Now, Sorbo’s statement is accurate, and his heart is in the right place, but there’s a trap yawning here.

     Many who claim to love America but “criticize” her are America’s enemies. Their criticism amounts to a demand that the fundamental principles upon which this nation was based must be replaced by their diametric opposites. This is on a par with Muslims’ signature tactic of shouting “Peace! Peace! We are for peace!” while rampaging and slaughtering anyone who dares to criticize them.

     America was founded on fundamental principles set forth in both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States: individuals’ rights to life, liberty, and honestly acquired property. Those rights are to be respected and defended by a Constitutionally limited government. Anyone who opposes those things is not a “critic” but an enemy – and the enemies of the United States have no place within it!

Mar 15 2025

Causes And Rackets

     Eric Hoffer’s oft-misquoted gem:

     What starts out here as a mass movement ends up as a racket, a cult, or a corporation.

     …points to a dynamic propelled by greed. The greedy – i.e., they who seek wealth but shun effort – will strive to exploit any opening that might yield them what they want.

     Noble causes are particularly targeted by the greedy. (In this usage, a noble cause is one whose supporters are motivated by a conception of the greater good.) To gain their ends, they will do their utmost to appear righteous, which is necessary to allow them to hide themselves among the righteous. However, as I’ve written on other occasions, success begets emulation. Over time, exploiters will multiply in accordance with that law. And in the absence of externally applied correctives, they will come to outnumber the sincerely cause-minded.

     Causes particularly attractive to the greedy are those that shelter under the wings of governments.

     In the Sixties, public attention began to focus on a problem that had been growing slowly for several decades: pollution of the air and water, especially in urban zones. Several of the most prominent “environmental defense” organizations rose rapidly at that time. In 1970, President Richard Nixon established the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to address the pollution problem and to satisfy the rising demand for such a body. The EPA has grown in power and funding since that time.

     There’s no question that pollution had become a significant problem in America’s cities. Unrestricted emissions into the air and water were a threat to health and to the quality of urban life. The EPA did address some of those concerns, though the amelioration of air pollution in particular was better served by technological advances and economic influences on ordinary Americans. But exploiters were already at work, gaming out ways to use this new, nebulously chartered agency as a siphon for government funds.

     You may recall the scares about “a new ice age” and “acid rain.” Those were the most prominent sky-is-falling causes in the Seventies and Eighties. Not long afterward we were beset by crisis mongering about “deforestation,” with particular attention to the Amazon basin. Then there was “loss of habitat,” including “wetlands.” By the turn of the millennium, those causes had been found wanting. But the crisis-mongers were still at work. The stick they beat us with today, “global warming,” has been the environmental cause celebre ever since the Naughties.

     What has gone essentially unremarked until quite recently is that a number of “environmental defense” organizations profited substantially from each of those causes. There was plenty of money in the government feed-troughs, and they strove mightily to get their snouts into it. As they fattened, they inspired others of low morals and motives to “get in on the gravy.”

     Matters today are tawdrier than ever:

     When the Biden administration announced $27 billion in environmental grants last April, it set the clock ticking on a predicament: how to get the unprecedented sums for the President’s envisioned NetZero future out the door before the fiscal year ended on Sept. 30?
     The task was complicated by the fact most of the money – $20 billion – would go to just eight nonprofits that, like the Environmental Protection Agency itself, had never handled such gargantuan grants.
     In hindsight, it’s easy to suspect that corners were cut, or laws were broken, or, at the very least, extraordinary measures were taken.
     Those possibilities are clearly on the mind of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin as he tries to unravel what happened to Inflation Reduction Act spending that the Biden White House’s Office of Management and Budget and the EPA decided to expedite before the November election – an effort that included moving the roughly $20 billion to a private institution, Citibank, away from oversight of the Treasury Department.

     The whole article is worthy of reading and reflection. It’s hard to believe that anyone involved in the “gold bars off the side of the Titanic” scandal was nobly motivated. One of the relevant grants, $2 billion to a “non-profit” headed by Stacey Abrams, has commanded special attention:

     Many outlets have zeroed in on failed Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who was lead counsel for a group known as Rewiring America. That group, in turn, is one of the main components of a new group known as Power Forward Communities, an outfit with listed assets of $100 that obtained its tax-exempt status last March, just weeks before it was named the winner of a $2 billion grant.

     A number of Democrat Party insiders and supporters were enriched by such schemes. Though the $20 billion of the “gold bars” scandal appears to have been recovered, the stench of the thing has not been quenched. Attention is finally going to the use of environmental “causes” as grafting mechanisms. But there is danger of missing the bigger picture.

     The Constitution’s constraints on the federal government were intended to prevent the use of federal power for illegitimate undertakings. The Founding Fathers recognized very few subjects for Congressional attention. Nowhere in Article I, for example, is Congress empowered to do anything about “the environment.” Yet “the environment” is one of the central “causes” for federal action today. Grafting through the EPA, federal intrusions upon the extractive industries, and restrictions upon what goods can be offered to consumers make plain what such an expansion of federal authority has meant.

     They weren’t always correct – the Founders were men, and therefore fallible – but their vision was remarkable even so. By dismissing that vision and the constraints that flowed from it, we of today have allowed Washington to be used as a pipeline from our pockets to the clever sorts at the heads of “causes,” none of which pass muster under Constitutional scrutiny. They degenerate from “cause” to “racket” with remarkable speed, these days.

Mar 14 2025

Stupid Or Evil: The Only Possible Terminus

     Despite the dichotomy in the title, Leftist activists have all but uniformly decided that we in the Right are evil. And of course, when in combat with one who is evil, there are no rules. Anything is permissible. The most favored tactics are those that incite terror among the evil one’s supporters:

     Two family members of one of America’s top conservative voices were swatted last night.
     This morning, on “X,” Nick Sortor, who has over 900K followers on X, shared a chilling explanation of how his sister and his father could have both been killed last night during fake police reports that led to both of their homes being “swatted” by the police. “Swatting” happens when someone reports a made-up crime at a specific address. The police respond to the caller’s false crime with SWAT teams or Special Weapons and Tactics, placing the individuals inside the home in grave danger.
     When an individual or an individual’s family is “swatted,” it opens the door for an innocent person to be seriously harmed or even killed by law enforcement who have no reason to believe the caller has manufactured the crime.

     Please read the whole article.

     Such use of law enforcement against innocent persons, in a way calculated to get them maimed or killed, is a crime. (Much to my surprise, it’s not always a felony.) Yet it can prove difficult to discover and pursue the initiator. Leftists are themselves too cowardly to do violence themselves. They favor SWATting their ideological adversaries for those reasons and others.

     The whole conception of the “no-knock / explosive entry” SWAT raid is dubious. It violates the Constitutional protections found in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. And of course, a number of such raids have targeted mistaken addresses where wholly innocent persons abide. But the ability of political lunatics to use such raids against those they dislike seals the argument against them, the “exigent circumstances” rationale notwithstanding. They must end.

     Needless to say, there would be a hue and cry against any public figure who would make ending the SWAT raid his personal cause. Police chiefs would argue for retaining them, no matter how often they’d gone wrong in the past. Politicians would natter about “drug houses” and “kidnappings,” without bothering to calculate the risks of using heavily armed raids against even verifiable villains. And of course, the Left’s use of such raids as political terror weapons would go unremarked.

     So the abuses – which are inseparable from the SWAT raid as conceived and practiced – will continue. Sooner or later, innocent persons will die. Who will be blamed for those deaths? Will left-wing politicians, who’ve edged ever nearer to explicit advocacy of lethal violence against us in the Right, be held to account? Will any of them even deplore the tragedies?

     I wouldn’t bet on it.

Mar 13 2025

Stupid Or Evil: The Ongoing Saga

     Time was, politically engaged Americans generally understood that it’s possible for intelligent, well-meaning people to disagree about the merits of a proposed policy or policy change. They could dispute what it would bring about without either side being provably wrong. Indeed, they understood that even after the consequences of the change have arrived, some disagreement about what caused them would remain reasonable. Even if the term was absent from the exchange, they were aware that such disagreements could proceed from a difference in causal models: usually, a difference in the estimation of the power of particular incentives and disincentives. Such differences can’t always be resolved by looking at the evidence.

     Ah, those halcyon days of yore!

     But today things are different. My oh my, how different they are! Disagree with anyone on the Left and he’ll immediately classify you as either an idiot or a villain. You might even be both. The one thing you can’t be is correct.

     There’s a lot that could be said about this. I’ve said a lot myself, as the linked articles should make plain. But though it remains tragic in its effects, there appears to be no way around it. Please be patient; the reason is coming.

     I’m on this track this morning because Mike Hendrix has brought the following to my attention:

     Mr. Gobry is not quite on the mark, albeit for an interesting reason. A man can staunchly maintain a position even if he is personally convinced that it’s wrong. He can be fully aware that both logic and experience are against the position he defends, yet continue to maintain it. I’ve been a participant in exchanges where that was demonstrably the case. The question that bedevils us in the Right is Why? What reason can there be for insisting on a position that’s been disproved?

     It’s actually quite simple: The majority of people do not arrive at their political positions through reason or evidence.

     Smith may have adopted his stances because he feels they constitute a moral obligation. It’s natural to prioritize moral-ethical convictions over the observable consequences of a policy. A good example is support for an indiscriminate system of public welfare. If Smith believes such a policy to be morally obligatory, what issues from it will matter much less. He may advocate other measures to deal with its undesired consequences, but he’ll insist that the welfare system itself must not be touched.

     Jones may hold to particular positions because of the emotional impact they have on him. He recoils from certain ideas strictly because of the way they make him feel. That’s not uncommon, especially as regards questions such as an armed citizenry. You could present him with infinite evidence that an armed citizenry is safer and more orderly than a disarmed one, and it wouldn’t matter; all he cares about is the shudder he gets at the idea of people walking the streets with guns at their hips.

     Davis might speak vigorously for certain policies for a third reason: they’re essential to his acceptance into certain social or commercial circles. If everyone in the club he wants to join favors intensifying the War on Drugs, he will too. Otherwise, they won’t have him. That might cost him social or commercial opportunities he values more highly than a divergent opinion.

     Then there’s Green. His father was a liberal. His grandfather was a liberal. His mother, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, and cousins are liberals. The family would be shattered to hear Green voice a conservative opinion. They might cast him out. He simply can’t have that.

     Finally, we have Brown. Somehow, he’s become convinced that he’s superior to us in the Right because he’s on the Left. The Left is where the best people all hang out. They’ve told him that many times. They’ve made it plain that anyone not on the Left must be – drum roll, please – either stupid or evil. Brown wouldn’t want to be one of them! No, sir!

     No, I haven’t run out of notional people with five-letter names. That’s just the best I can do without going into the deeps of social and motivational psychology. But I’m sure that the above examples will suffice to answer the “How could anyone believe that?” plaints of the Right.

     If evidence and reason are ruled irrelevant, factors such as the ones enumerated above will hold the field. Mind you, here irrelevant applies only to one’s choice of policy or philosophy to maintain. Any of our five fictional characters might well accept the observations and arguments of the Right as sound and accurate. Other considerations simply matter more to them.

     Getting them to share their real reasons for their positions? That’s a separate subject. Perhaps I’ll tackle it later today.

Mar 12 2025

How Did These Guys Slip Past Me?

     Regular reader Abbe Faria has just introduced me to the most original and impressive musical combo I’ve encountered since I first stumbled over Glass Hammer: Future of Forestry:

This chest is full of memories, of gold and silver tears
I’ll give you more to own than all of this
And I’ll give you more than years
For you were once a child of innocence
And I see you just the same
Your burdens couldn’t win or lose a thing
Oh, I’d tell you once again
But you’re always on the run

Slow your breath down, just take it slow
Find your heart now, whoa
You can trust and love again, whoa
Slow your breath down, just take it slow
Find your smile now, whoa
You can trust and love again, whoa

If you leave I’ll still be close to you
When all your fears rain down
I’ll take you back a thousand times again
And I’ll take you as my own
I would sing you songs of innocence
‘Til the light of morning comes
‘Til the rays of gold and honey cover you
In the sweetness of the dawn
But you’re always on the run

Slow your breath down, just take it slow
Find your heart now, whoa
You can trust and love again, whoa
Slow your breath down, just take it slow
Find your smile now, whoa
You can trust and love again, whoa

You’re not alone
(Slow your breath down, just take it slow)
You’re now a part of me
(Find your heart now, oh)
You feel the cure
(You can trust and love again, oh)
I’ll feel the toil it brought you

[Music and Lyrics by Eric Owyoung.]

Load more