What a year. A once in a century pandemic, causing sickness and death, with a tremendous impact on people's livelihoods. As the coronavirus has been in the title of each post since March, allow me to start with some numbers. As of yesterday, worldwide it was reported that there were 66,832,925 cases and 1,533,741 deaths. In the US we have 14,981,761 cases and 287,825 deaths. I was looking at my 10/11/20 post, which reported 7,986,078 cases and 219,675 deaths. In the last two months, while we have had an 87% increase in the number of cases, we had a much lower increase, 31%, in the number of deaths. That is a positive sign, as is the development and production of multiple vaccines.
Another big news story this year was, of course, the presidential election. While Trump continues to fight the apparent outcome, it seems that Biden will be sworn in on 1/20/21. While the leadership of the Senate remains to be determined by the two Georgia run-off elections in January, the Democrats have kept the House. However, the latest numbers reported by the AP are 222 seats for the Democrats and 211 seats for the Republicans, with two seats not yet called. Recall that before last month's election, the Democrats held 232 House seats to 197 for the Republicans.
However, two Democratic losers are contesting their losses (by 6 votes and 12 votes), with one loss having been certified by the local election board. The loser will be asking the House to decide the winner, as the House gets to certify the winners. Imagine if a Democratic House were to overturn the election result certified by the state, after their vicious attacks on Trump for challenging his own apparent defeat. We now have 28 Republican women in the House and 8 in the Senate. I expect those numbers to increase in future elections. Of the 12 House seats that Republicans were able to flip this year, 9 were won by women, 2 by Latino men and 1 by a black man.
The third big story of the year was the killing of George Floyd, and others, at the hands of the police. For some, no killing by the police is ever justified. As a result, we have had a push to defund the police, with certain cities across the country cutting their own police department's budget. In Los Angeles, the second largest city in the country, we may have a back door approach to cutting the police force. Mayor Eric Garcetti has said that a projected budget shortfall of $675 million may lead to a lay-off of 1000 sworn officers and 700 non-officers. Los Angeles, with half the population of New York City, has almost 10,000 officers compared to New York's nearly 35,000. By New York's standards, Los Angeles is already severely understaffed, even absent any lay-offs.
As a result of the killing of George Floyd and others, we have seen "peaceful" protests throughout the country. At least, the mainstream media insisted that the protests were peaceful, or mostly peaceful. But never violent. No matter how many businesses were looted or burned or destroyed, the protests were never violent. As I have said multiple times, the Left is very good at the use of words in order to promote their agenda. As the mainstream media is all in for the Democrats, it will be interesting to see if there is ever a negative word said about Biden or Harris.
Shortly after Thanksgiving, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 to ban outdoor dining. Joining with the majority was Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, who told us: "It's a bit magical thinking on everyone's part to think that at any restaurant anywhere the server keeps a six foot distance from the table where he or she is taking an order...so the servers are not protected from us...so it is a most dangerous situation for them." Most dangerous. Except, hours after her vote to ban outside dining, she went to her favorite restaurant for a little outdoor dining. One could argue that the shutdown order did not take effect until midnight, and she was having dinner earlier. In light of her statement, however, claiming that such dining put the servers at much risk, why would she do that?
We need to ask that question of California Governor Gavin Newsom, who ate indoors without social distancing or masks, at the high end French Laundry restaurant. We need to ask San Francisco Mayor London Breed who also ate there. We need to ask D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser about her trip to Delaware to help celebrate Biden's victory, because, of course, the celebration was "essential." We need to ask Austin Mayor Steve Adler about his trip to Cabo San Lucas in Mexico. And Denver Mayor Michael Hancock about his trip to Mississippi for Thanksgiving. And San Joe Mayor Sam Liccardo who celebrated Thanksgiving with 7 or 8 relatives from 5 different households. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was going to have Thanksgiving dinner with his mother and two daughters, until the public reaction persuaded him to reconsider.
These politicians, promoting various lock downs, do share membership in a certain political party. I wonder which. Sheila Kuehl's only comment, when asked about her outdoor dining, was that it was a "non-story." Nice for her. Some restaurants have pushed back, refusing to close their outdoor dining. They risk fines, loss of their liquor license, and loss of their business license. In my own neighborhood, I have seen some of the comments on "Next Door" that made me think some of those people likely reported a nearby restaurant which refused to stop outdoor dining. A doctor friend suggested to me that outdoor dining, contrary to Supervisor Kuehl's comments, is generally low risk. However, if that risk is too great to tolerate, he asked why any part of the restaurant would be allowed to remain open. The cooks are indoors. The staff that bags up the orders and prepares the bill are indoors. How likely is it that all these employees are able to stay six feet apart from one another?
Personally, I think it was outrageous to ban outdoor dining. Many restaurants were barely holding on, aided by their ability to set up tables outside. Over the years, I have gotten to know some of the owners and many of the employees at my neighborhood restaurants. They need to work. They need to buy food, pay bills and pay the rent or mortgage. We allow people to assess the risk of getting behind the wheel of a car, even though over 30,000 people a year die in car accidents and many more are injured. And we allow it even though many times people cause death and injury to others. One restaurant owner in Sherman Oaks, an area of Los Angeles City that is in the San Fernando Valley, was quite disturbed that, after investing in her outdoor dining she had to close - while just a few yards from her outdoor dining area a television production company had set up a large number of tables for people on the set to be able to sit outdoors and dine.
Meanwhile, the California Restaurant Association was successful in getting a Judge to order LA County to provide the scientific evidence supporting the ban on outdoor dining. Even if the Judge overturns the County's ban on outdoor dining, there is another issue. California's Governor ordered a new lock down effective at 11:59 p.m. tonight for all of Southern California, not just LA County. That order is not in issue in the current case. That order mandates the closing of multiple types of businesses, and will be in effect through 12/20/20, although it may be extended. The order also bans all public and private gatherings, and "non-essential" travel. Both the LA County and Riverside County Sheriffs have said they will not enforce the Governor's order. The Riverside County Sheriff was not happy with the "dictatorial attitude" of the Governor, especially given the Governor's own violation of the rules. The Sheriff said his office would not be "blackmailed, bullied or used as muscle" against the people of his county. The LA County Sheriff said certain businesses had "bent over backwards to modify their entire operation to conform to these current health orders, and then they have the rug yanked from under them (with new health orders) - that's a disservice. I don't want to make their lives any more miserable." The Sheriff said his department would only target "super spreader" events.
There have been some interesting letters to the editor in a couple recent editions of the New York Times. Usually, the letters are pretty much the same - Democrats are good, Republicans are bad. In the 12/4/20 edition, were a number of letters discussing why so many Americans voted for Trump. Which is not something easily understood by the Left. Of course, one letter writer said that "white identity politics" was an important factor in the Trump vote. But some actually criticized the Democrats for their weak messaging. And one, speaking of friends who were Trump supporters, said this: "The friends of whom I speak are good honest people with strong values. They love their families and country. We must remember this if we are to overcome the division among us."
The 12/6/20 edition of the New York Times had more letters discussing whether or not there is any benefit to reaching out to Trump voters. Said one letter writer: "I no longer believe that it's my job - or even possible - to reach any meeting of the minds with such people (Trump supporters). I believe we simply have to oppose and defeat them so we can be true to who we are, trying to make life better for everyone." Said another: "Mutual understanding requires common ground. It has become increasingly clear that there is none." Either that hypothesis is absurd, or we are done as a country.
Here's another, more insightful, letter writer: "I'm grateful, in this polarized era, to remember that there is more to people than their politics." But for many on the Left (and I assume for some on the Right) it does not work like that. Rather, a vote for Trump allows those on the Left to make innumerable assumptions, negative assumptions, about one's character. I know that all too well. But then again, it is easier to assume the worst than to engage in an honest discussion.
