The Coronavirus 59 Weeks Later - The Aftermath of the George Floyd/Derek Chauvin Verdict

Derek Chauvin was found to be guilty on all counts for the death of George Floyd.  Prior to the verdict, President Biden proved that he is a race baiter with his comment that he was "praying" for the "right verdict."  Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Waters also spoke before the verdict, saying that if Chauvin was acquitted, people would need to "get more confrontational."  The Judge in the Chauvin case called such comments "abhorrent."  There is always the concern that such comments might dissuade the jury from even considering a finding of "not guilty," fearing widespread violence otherwise.  But Biden and Waters, like Obama before them, can get away with such comments, because they are Democrats.  

So, do we need to defund the police?  According to a Fox News poll, conducted from April 18 - 21, 62% oppose a reduction in police funding, with only 33% supporting it.  But, some cities have already reduced police funding.  Here is how well defunding is working in some cities.  According to Fox, year to date, Chicago has seen a 33% increase in homicides and 39% increase in shootings.  New York City, an 8% increase in homicides and 64% increase in shootings.  (Although the NYPD reports that March, 2020 vs March, 2021, there was a 36% increase in the murder rate.)  Los Angeles had a 186% increase in murders, and an 80% increase in shootings.  Portland had a 733% increase in murders and a 103% increase in shootings. 

Meanwhile, the US House of Representatives passed the "George Floyd Justice in Policing Act" by a vote of 220 to 212, with two Democrats voting with all the Republicans against the measure.  The bill bans no knock warrants in drug cases.  I understand - we don't want mistakes made resulting in innocent people being killed.  But it also bans chokeholds.  My friend, a retired police officer, has said that chokeholds can temporarily incapacitate a person resisting arrest, allowing the police to handcuff that person and place them in custody, without the risk of serious injury to either the police or the person being arrested.  During their training they practiced chokeholds on each other, without incident.  

The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act also puts an end to "qualified immunity."  Because of qualified immunity, police officers do not have to worry about paying for their own attorneys every time a citizen may decide to sue them and the city in which they work.  They need not worry that their personal assets are on the line.  My friend, the retired cop, tells me that an increasing number of street cops are already showing up at crime scenes after the fact.  They put up the yellow tape and wait for the detectives to arrive.  If we take away their qualified immunity why would they ever want to engage any suspect?  Would you risk all of your family's assets every single day in a job where split second life and death decisions may have to be made?  

Not surprisingly, cops are quitting.  Why would they risk their lives, liberty and pensions and family just for doing their jobs?  No, I am not defending bad cops or bad behavior.  But in 2020 560 police officers retired from the Chicago PD, an increase of 15% from 2019.  2600 left the NYPD, an increase of 75% from 2019.  And, between retirements and leaves of absence, the Minneapolis PD has lost 20% of their force. 

No one was celebrating the recent death of 16 year old Ma'khia Bryant in Columbus, Ohio.  As police arrived, they saw Bryant holding a knife and appearing to be ready to stab another young woman.  One of the officers shot Bryant, who died from her wounds.  Both Bryant and the other woman are black.  But some commentators, while understandably upset by the death of a such a young person, made ridiculous recommendations.  Joy Behar suggested firing a warning shot in the air.  Very dangerous - because what goes up also comes down.  She suggested using a taser, but tasers do not always work.  And she suggested shooting the person in the leg.  But police are trained to not fire their weapons unless there is a threat of death or serious injury to themselves or others.  And given such a threat, they are taught to fire at center mass, which has the greatest likelihood of hitting the intended target (and not an innocent bystander), and stopping an imminent attack on life.  

But the left, along with the left-wing mainstream media, constantly tells us that police are targeting black people.  Some have called it an "epidemic."  As Jason Riley recently noted in his 4/28/21 column in the WSJ:  "According to a Washington Post database, police shot and killed 999 people in 2019, including 424 whites and 252 blacks.  Twelve of the black victims were unarmed, versus 26 of the white victims.  In a country where annual arrests number more than 10 million, if those black death totals constitute an "epidemic" of police use of lethal force against blacks, then the word has lost all meaning." 

No one is happy that nearly 1000 people were shot and killed by the police in 2019.  We would all prefer to live in a society where no one breaks the law and certainly where no one commits violent crimes.  But there are bad guys out there, and some are very bad guys.  The left and the mainstream media do a great disservice when they scare every black person into resisting lawful police commands, because they are afraid of the police.  And I will continue to ask - can anyone name a single one of the 50 white people shot and killed by the police in the first quarter of this year?  If not, do you understand the role the media plays in only reporting police shootings that involve black victims, and painting a picture of a police war on blacks?            

The Coronavirus 59 Weeks Later - Biden Addresses A Joint Session Of Congress

President Biden spoke to a joint session of Congress this past Wednesday (the first speech to Congress by a new President not being considered a "State of the Union" address).  He told us that he took office with 3 crises hanging over the country - the worst pandemic in a century, the worst economy since the Great Depression, and the "worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War."  Let's start with that last assertion.  Yes, it appeared that hundreds stormed the Capitol on January 6.  Yes, there was extensive property damage.  Yes, a Capitol police officer died and over a hundred people were injured.  And some were armed with pepper spray, stun guns and bats, but few if any had guns.  So, to my thinking, 9/11 was a far greater attack on our democracy and way of life than was January 6 (which I already condemned in a prior post).  

Biden took credit for creating 1.3 million new jobs in his first 100 days.  And for providing for 220 million Covid shots.  Remember in his augural address Biden emphasized "unity?"  He mentioned "unity" numerous times.  If he meant it, he would have thanked President Trump for Operation Warp Speed, resulting in the development of vaccines in record time.  The economy was already beginning to expand last year as the country started to reopen.  The Wall Street Journal reported that GDP grew 33.4% in the third quarter, but contracted to 4.3% in the fourth quarter with the new lockdowns.  The economy was already growing, with that growth accelerated by increasing numbers of people now being vaccinated. 

Taken together, Biden's proposals for the expansion of government are estimated to have a cost of 6 trillion dollars.  Yes, the government can print more money; but at what point do we see inflation eating away at the value of the dollar?  And how will future generations ever be able to repay that debt?  And to what end?  Clearly, with the expansion of government benefits to the middle class, the Democrats hope to buy millions of votes for the foreseeable future.  The Wall Street Journal asked this question:  "Haven't we tried this before?"  They remind us that Head Start had already provided pre-school and child care.  They tell us we had Women, Infants and Children programs, food stamps, welfare, childcare subsidies, and public housing.  The Journal:  "Why did the trillions of dollars spent on those programs fail?  And if they didn't work, why do we need more?"  

As a conservative, I want to see everyone in the country succeed.  So, if there is one thing I can see as a worthwhile expenditure, it is community college for all.  I am not sure why it needs to free for everyone, even for those who can afford to pay.  But community colleges can provide the needed education and job skills to enable people to succeed.  Providing unlimited benefits to people discourages work; and, quoting the Journal, "work...is the real path to independence and self-respect."  

Biden's worst moments were when he was discussing race.  "We have all seen the knee on the neck of Black America."  What we saw was the knee of one white man on one black man.  Biden went on to assert that "systemic racism...plagues American life in many other ways."  No, I am not claiming that there is no racism anymore.  But I'll say it again - stop telling young people that the system is stacked against them.  That is an evil message.  Tell people that if they get an education and work hard they can succeed - because it is true.  But if the country can be defined by racism, I do wonder why so many brown and black people keep pouring in from all over the world.      

Senator Tim Scott gave the Republican rebuttal to Biden's speech.  For daring to say that "America is not a racist country," he was called an "Uncle Tim."  A sellout to his race (Scott is black).  But we know that the most biased, most intolerant people are on the left.  At least one left-wing commentator mocked the Republicans putting up a "token" black for the rebuttal, noting that Scott is the only black Republican Senator.  But let's hear it for the Democrats because they have two black Senators.  

Senator Scott said it best:  "Just before Covid, we had the most inclusive economy in my lifetime.  The lowest unemployment ever recorded for African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans.  The lowest for women in nearly 70 years.  Wages were growing faster for the bottom 25% than the top 25%.  That happened because Republicans focused on expanding opportunity for all Americans."  Expanding opportunity vs expanding dependency on government.  Which one do you think is better?         

      

The Coronavirus 57 Weeks Later - There Is No Crisis At The Border, But There Is At The Supreme Court

President Biden has established a 36 member commission, dominated by people on the left, to "study" the role of the Supreme Court.  The commission will look into "the Court's role in the Constitutional system; the length of service and turnover of justices on the Court; the membership and size of the Court;  and the Court's case selection, rules and practices."  The President has given the commission six months to issue their report.  Why the need for a such a commission now?  Because President Trump was able to fill 3 vacancies on the Court.  But the Democrats in Congress are not waiting for the commission's report.  Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Representative Mondaire Jones (D-NY) already have a bill that will add 4 justices to the Court; which if passed and signed into law, conveniently allows Biden to appoint 4 new justices.

Markey and Jones had an Op-Ed up on CNN online, explaining the need for this court-packing.  First, they start their article justifying the need for their proposed legislation.  "For decades, the GOP has trafficked in dog-whistle, white grievance politics to hold onto power without popular support for it policies."  Clear tactic - attack the GOP, and lie.  It is a lie to say that Republican policies have no popular support; just as it would be a lie to say that some Democrat policies do not have popular support.  Although, I fail to see the relevance of "popular support" in judicial decision making.  It is the legislative branch that considers popular support.  

Second, the need to explain the imminent danger if they don't act.  "This Supreme Court has the ability to repeal our reproductive and marriage rights.  To institute racist immigration policies that dehumanize those searching for a new life in the United States.  To ensure that Black and Brown and disenfranchised voters never get the opportunity to make their voices heard at the ballot box."  There is so much wrong here that it would take an entire blog post to adequately comment.  Suffice it to say that the same charge was made about the Court overturning Roe v. Wade.  Hasn't happened.  But the goal is to scare enough people to make them support this court-packing scheme.  And, of course, to scare the sitting justices into thinking twice about voting down the left-wing agenda.  Some say that Chief Justice Roberts has already voted with that threat in mind.

Third, change definitions, something at which the left excels.  Court packing was always understood as adding justices to the Court, as FDR proposed in 1937.  Although he failed, the threat alone was enough to make the Court start upholding some of FDR's New Deal legislation.  Markey and Jones:  "Expanding to 13 justices would undo the Republican court packing of the last five years."  Court packing of the last five years?  Trump filled 3 vacancies on the Court.  That is not court packing.  I am well aware of the failure of the Senate to act on Obama's nominee Merrick Garland.  (See the 9/21/20 post for a further discussion on that.)  But the Democrats are saying all of Trump's appointees constitute court packing.  A big lie.

Fourth, the truth slips out.  Markey and Jones:  "It (the proposed legislation) would restore our right to choose the world we want to live in..."  There it is:  "our right."  The Democrats believe they have the right to control all aspects of society in order to create the world that they want.  

Before she died, liberal member Ruth Bader Ginsburg opined that the current 9 members of the Court is a good number.  The Court has had 9 members since 1869.  Stephen Breyer, another liberal member of the Court, has also opposed the idea; and has expressed his concern that the Court would be viewed as being guided by politics rather than by legal principal.  Who else opposed court packing?  Joe Biden, as a US Senator.  As the Constitution does not designate the size of the Court, Biden acknowledged that FDR had the right to propose legislation expanding the Court.  But then Biden said this:  "But it was a bonehead idea.  It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make...it put in question...the most significant body, in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America."  

It is clear that Biden's position has shifted or else he would not have appointed the commission.  As to the justices length of service, that cannot be changed by simple legislation.  Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution provides:  "The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior."  That means that federal judges at all levels serve for life, unless they are impeached and convicted.  Or resign.  Therefore, a Constitutional amendment would be required to limit the terms of the justices.  But changing the size of the Court is definitely within the power of Congress. 

As I frequently say, let's look at the big picture.  Currently, the Democrats control the White House.  They control the Senate.  They control the House of Representatives.  And their allies (fellow left-wing Democrats) dominate the mainstream media, social media, academia and Hollywood.  But all that power is not enough.  They must control the Supreme Court as well.  They can not tolerate that conservatives dominate any institution in the country.  It is no wonder that also on their agenda is ending the filibuster, packing the Senate (with D.C. and Puerto Rico added as new states), and taking full control of all elections nationwide.  Maybe you think permanent one party rule is a good idea.  I do not.  A quote from John Dalberg-Acton best sums up the concern:  "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."    

The Coronavirus 55 Weeks Later - How Do You View The World?

Among my conservative friends, we have discussed on numerous occasions how our liberal friends and family seem unable to "connect the dots."  When we bring up some issue, we are told it is not that important, or it's just an isolated incident, and, of course, what about Trump and the Republicans.  Recently, a lifelong friend in New Jersey and I were exchanging political texts.  He has a self-described "center right" political viewpoint, although I tell him he is liberal.  This is what he thought of my telling him that he is unable to connect the dots:  "Poor, poor Pinhead.  He sees snakes under every rock, hears ghosts in every breeze, evil and danger lurking everywhere...provided of course that Democrats are (the) source.  Trump and the Republicans?  He sees no danger, only their wonderful 'values.'"  (As an aside, I take no offense from his comment.  It's a New Jersey thing.  Often, the language is far harsher.)

So who's right?  Am I not to make any connection between the Democratic push to defund the police with the rising crime rates across the country?  Should I not make any connection between the Democrats' open border policy, with the increase in human smuggling, and the huge surge in minors crossing our borders?  Should I not be concerned about the Democrats' belief that people should primarily be identified by the color of their skin, creating far more division than the hated President Trump did.  What about the Democrats push to take over all state election laws, in an effort to permanently ensure Democratic electoral victories?  Why do Democrats support socialism over capitalism, with their determination to spend unlimited amounts of money, and provide guaranteed incomes to people?  And, of course, we have the Democrats appeasement of terrorists, such as with Iran and the Palestinians.  Then, we have the "cancel culture," one of the biggest evils perpetrated by the Democratic left.  With Democratic policies, danger is always lurking.   

So how are the Democrats policies doing?  It was reported that the Los Angeles County District Attorney has decided to downsize his office's hardcore gang unit.  Why not?  Murders are up 28% in Los Angeles.  Violent crime overall is up 93% when compared with the same period in 2020.  Are other big cities run by Democrats doing well?  New York City's murder rate is up 12% and its violent crime rate is up 42%.  In Atlanta violent crime is up 43% and in Philadelphia it is up 49%.  In Minneapolis the murder rate is up 46%.  

Speaking of legal issues, remember when crossing the border illegally used to actually be illegal?  The Democrats tell us that no one is an "illegal."  We are all people.  That seems to mean that borders are illegal.  Having a sovereign country is just wrong.  Let the whole world in and let the whole world vote.  We were told that Trump had "kids in cages."  Now, we're told that the surge in kids coming is either a natural occurrence during wintertime (a Biden lie) or Trump's fault.  As of February 21, 2021, 9,457 unaccompanied minors were encountered at the border.  That was up 61% from January, 2021, and up 171% from February, 2020.  Biden invited people to come here illegally - and they came.  And they are continuing to come - in droves.  Only recently were United States Senators permitted access to border facilities.  One Senator said that a facility built for 80 people had 709 people.  And he said this:  "literally wall to wall in every one of the little plexiglass cells that they have, and people flooding out into the hallway."  This, in the era of Covid.

And, in the interest of fairness, allow me to point out that the evil way of viewing people through a racial lens, has even infected some Republicans.  Phil Scott is the Governor of Vermont.  And a Republican; although I will point out that the New England Republicans often lean quite left.  In any event, the Governor issued this declaration:  "If you or anyone in your household identifies as Black, Indigenous, or a person of color (BIPOC), including anyone with Abenaki or other First Nations heritage, all household members who are 16 years or older can sign up to get a vaccine."  That is racist, and undoubtedly unconstitutional.  It is extremely divisive.  And evil.  But this Governor has apparently accepted the left-wing concept of "equity"over "equality."  

What about Georgia's new election law?  If you only read, or listen to, the mainstream media, then you know only the lies told by Biden.  Biden said the law is "sick," and "un-American."  And he said the law is "Jim Crow on steroids."  All lies.  Here's Kamala Harris:  "It's all voter suppression by any other name."  Another liar.  How about the lie that voting is going to end at 5pm when people are just getting off of work?  Anyone in line by 7pm gets to vote.  The law actually provides an extra Saturday for voting, between 9am and 5pm, although the local county may extend the voting that day from 7am to 7pm.  But voters in line are not allowed to be given water or food?  Outrageous!  No, just another lie.  Georgia law already prohibited electioneering within a certain distance of the polling location.  This law makes sure that politically affiliated groups will not be showing up with free handouts to voters.  There is nothing to prevent people from bringing their own water bottles, or from having election officials provide a self-service dispenser.  

After Biden said he would support Major League Baseball moving their All Star game this year from Atlanta to another location because of Georgia's voting law, the MLB complied.  Much of Big Business fell in line.  (Does anyone still believe the lie that business is conservative.  Big Businesses are often run by cowards, afraid to stand up to the left-wing mob.)  Delta Airlines CEO said the law "is unacceptable and does not match Delta's values."  Of course, having flights to China is no problem for Delta, given China's stellar human rights record.  Other companies criticizing Georgia include Coca-Cola, American Express and Cisco.  Here's Cisco's CEO:  "Governments should be working to make it easier to vote, not harder."  But that's what Georgia did, while still trying to have some semblance of voter integrity.  

So Georgia has the same voting hours on election day as many other states.  And some blue states (New Jersey, Connecticut and Delaware - Biden's state) do not even allow early in-person voting as does Georgia.  Georgia allows no-excuse required for getting a mail-in ballot.  New York State does not.  Are they going to stop playing games in Yankee Stadium?  Growing up in New Jersey I became a New York Yankees fan.  And I have remained so - until now.  Unless Major League Baseball reverses course, I am done with them.  There is only so much abuse that I can tolerate from the left-wing tyrannical mob.  

But we are still left the question - why are Biden and Harris and other Democrats lying in order to make such a big issue of the Georgia voting law?  A couple of reasons.  Lying about the law in a Republican state gives the Democrats and the mainstream media yet another opportunity to claim how terrible the Republican Party is - racist, white-supremacist, supporters of voter suppression, and all the other "deplorable" characteristics one can apply to them.  But there is another reason.  And that is HR1, which passed in the House along a party line vote (one Democrat voted no) of 220 to 210.  Now, the bill is labeled SB1 in the Senate.  The filibuster may block the Democrats ability to get it passed in the Senate.  But, if they call the Republicans racists and white supremacists who want to suppress minority voting rights, then they can argue that all Democrats need to stand strong and united in order to abolish the filibuster and pass this bill. 

What about HR1 and SB1?  It makes federal law supersede state election laws.  Elections have historically been run by the states.  Why the need to change now?  Voter suppression!  Really?  Following an election in which more people voted than ever before?  Biden was the first candidate to get over 80 million votes (81,281,502).  Trump got 74,222,593 votes, more than any prior Republican candidate.  Exactly whose votes were being suppressed?  So why is this federal takeover of every state's election laws needed?  First, the Democrats always believe that the federal government should control all laws, and all aspects of our society.  The idea that the USA is a republic of 50 sovereign states does not sit well with them.  More importantly, HR1 and SB1 will mandate permanent mail-in ballots, lessen voter integrity, and indirectly have the effect of having people here illegally be able to vote, and have 16 year olds be able to vote.  

I'll end on this note.  We had another attack at the Capitol, with one police officer being killed by the driver, who intentionally ran into him and one other officer.  MSNBC originally reported that the driver was a "white male."  And why not?  The same was done with regards to the recent shooter in Boulder, Colorado.  Here was Kamala Harris' niece after the Boulder shooting:  "Violent white men are the greatest terrorist threat to our country."  Others gave similar statements.  Except the shooter in Boulder was from Syria.  And the driver killing the police officer at the Capitol was black, and an adherent of the Nation of Islam, led by anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan.  But the left-wing narrative is that white men are bad.  But just imagine if a prominent white man said this:  "Violent Black men are the greatest criminal threat to our country."  That person would not get a pass from the mainstream media and the Democrats.                 

The Coronavirus 53 Weeks Later - What Are Biden and the Democrats Up To?

The 3/5/21 Wall Street Journal told us that 115 House Democrats sent a letter to Miguel Cardona, the new Secretary of the Department of Education, seeking a reversal of a policy involving sexual misconduct on college campuses put into place by Betsy DeVos, Trump's Education Secretary.  As described by the Journal, the DeVos policy said that "Title IX can't be used to abridge constitutionally-protected speech; that colleges need to give notice of allegations; that accusers and accused have the right to an advocate and to appeal findings; that they have a right to a hearing on a reasonable timeline; and that witnesses can be cross-examined."  Sounds fair as it is.  Sounds like the way our justice system works.  But that is not how it was before Trump came into office.  Of course women should be heard.  But those accused of acts that may impact their entire lives should have the same due process rights that our criminal justice system provides.  Except, over one-half of House Democrats think otherwise.

How are we doing on immigration.  We know that Biden will not build any more of the border wall.  We know that during the campaign Biden said that the US could easily fit in another 2 million.  Is that the way our immigration system should work?  As long as the country has room for more people we should have open borders?  The Department of Homeland Security earlier this month reported on the number of "land border enforcement encounters" in the southwest US.  In fiscal year 2020, 33,239 unaccompanied alien children crossed the border.  The projection for fiscal year 2021: 117,000.  We now have children in cages, or very cramped quarters.  If Trump was still in the White House the mainstream media would be reporting about a humanitarian crisis of monumental proportions.  They would be talking about the cartels and human smuggling.  But not with Biden.  The Biden White House refuses to even call it a crisis, calling it instead a "challenge."   

This is good:  House Democrats actually blocked a measure that would have required illegal immigrants being released into the US to have a negative COVID-19 test.  As of March 8, 185 of those illegal immigrants tested positive.  If you tested COVID positive, however, you better self-quarantine. 

The Democratic controlled House passed H.R. 1, also known as the "For The People Act of 2021."  Its proper name should be "For The Democratic Party Act," as the Democrats seek to maintain permanent control of the Federal government through legislation.  The legislation federalizes state election laws.  Election laws are currently set by each state, with counties running the elections.  H.R. 1 would, among other things, void state I.D. requirements in order to be able to vote.  Mail-in voting would become permanent.  Young people age 16 and above would automatically be registered as long as their name is in any government database.  Such as the Department of Motor Vehicles.  

The bill requires all organizations participating in political activity to disclose the names of donors giving $10,000 or more.  The purpose of such a provision is NOT transparency.  It is to provide an opportunity for left-wing groups to harass and try to ruin the lives of big donors to the Republican Party.  It is not something that conservatives try to do to big Democrat donors, so the House Democrats have no concern about such a measure.  The bill provides for public financing of campaigns for Congress.  Raise $200 and receive 6 times that amount from the taxpayers.  Congressional districts would be drawn by an "independent" commission; although I cannot imagine any such commission being any more "independent" of political influence than the current system of state legislatures drawing the districts. 

In the area of foreign policy and the Middle East, Biden has restored diplomatic relations with the Palestinian Authority, something Trump halted until such time as the Palestinians agreed to halt their attacks on Israel.  Biden also restored hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to the Palestinians.  As did Obama, Biden believes the road to peace lies solely with the Palestinians.  Trump realized that the path to peace lies with the wider Arab world, and successfully negotiated the Abraham accords, resulting in the normalization of relations between Israel and four Arab Sunni countries.  

Biden recently signed the COVID relief bill passed by the Congress.  It passed in the Senate, 50-49, on a straight party vote.  Senator Dan Sullivan (Rep., Alaska) had to return home because of a family emergency.  Had he been present, the vote would have been 50-50, but VP Kamala Harris would have broken the tie and the bill would have passed anyway.  The House also voted along party lines, 220-211; although one Democrat voted against the bill.  Which brings me to another, albeit unrelated point.

I have a running disagreement with a reader who is also a life-long friend.  His approach to voting is to vote for the better candidate, regardless of party affiliation.  My approach is to vote straight party line.  I explained that nearly all rank and file members will vote how their party leadership wants them to vote.  Therefore, if you favor the progressive-left agenda you should vote Democrat, and if you favor a conservative agenda you should vote Republican.  Just look at the votes in the House and Senate on the COVID relief bill.  Virtually a straight party line vote.  Senator Joe Manchin (Dem., W.V.) is considered to be one of the most conservative Democratic Senators.  He said he would not vote in favor of the bill absent bipartisan support.  There was none.  He voted in favor anyway.  His excuse was that he got a few token changes to the bill that Republicans wanted.  Yet, there were not any significant changes such that a single Republican was willing to vote in favor.  So much for being a "conservative" Democrat.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki called the COVID relief bill the "most progressive bill in American history."  Republicans call it a Democratic wish-list.  In a rather interesting provision, $350 billion is is directed as federal aid to States and localities.  But here's the twist:  "A state or territory shall not use the funds to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in the net tax revenue."  In other words, the States are told they may not lower their taxes.  That provision is likely unconstitutional, not that the Democrats ever care about the Constitution.  As Chief Justice Roberts wrote in striking down Obama's mandatory Medicaid expansion, Congress may give fiscal incentives to States, but cannot use "economic dragooning that leaves the states with no real option but to acquiesce."  (As reported in the 3/19/21 Wall Street Journal.)

One part of the Covid bill provides for $86 billion to aid states that are, shall we say, short on funds for paying public employee pensions.  The Democratic states promise pension benefits to public employee unions, which return the favor with substantial campaign contributions to those Democrats.  Now the Federal government (we the taxpayers) are helping to bail out those states who are under-funded.  What a system.  

Allow me to end on this unrelated note.  The new Navy pledge/oath is perplexing, to say the least.  It reads as follows:  "I pledge to advocate for and acknowledge all lived experiences and intersectional identities of every sailor in the Navy.  I pledge to engage in ongoing self-reflection, education and knowledge sharing to better myself and my communities."  Sorry, but this is a bunch of woke psychobabble nonsense.  How about training to be the best sailor you can be, as we have some very real and dangerous enemies in the world.  Otherwise, treat all your fellow sailors with respect, because you're all on the same team.  

The Coronavirus 53 Weeks Later - A Tale of Two States

There are only three states with over 20 million people.  California is by far the biggest state with about 39 1/2 million people.  Texas is second with about 29 1/2 million people.  And Florida is third with nearly 22 million people.  An article out of the Associated Press told us this:  "Despite their differing approaches, California and Florida have experienced almost identical outcomes in COVID-19 case rates."  We are told both states have a rate of about 8,900 cases per 100,000 residents.  And death rates?  Florida ranked 27th with California at 28th.  Which leads to this question:  rather than shutting down states and destroying much of our economy, could we have achieved the same results with social distancing, the wearing of masks, and by encouraging people over 60 and other high-risk individuals to stay at home?  Did many of our Governors fail us? 

One online site shows the number of businesses that closed by metropolitan area.  In the top ten are 4 California metro areas.  The next ten (11-20) have 3 metro areas in California.  The next ten (21-30) has only one metro area in California.  So, California has 8 of the top 30.  Florida: 0, as in zero.  Another site shows California having permanently lost 14,050 businesses, with another 15,301 temporarily closed.  Florida shows 5,332 permanently closed and 3,331 temporarily closed.  So Florida has less than a third (29.5%) of the business closures that California has had, even though Florida's population is over half (55%) that of California's.     

The California State Board of Education just approved an amended course in Ethnic Studies.  It is a model curriculum; and while its use is not mandatory, the pressure to make it part of the new "equity" pedagogy will be tremendous.  The original Ethnic Studies program was so extreme, and so anti-Semitic, that it was even too much for Governor Newsom.  Although approved by the California legislature, Newsom vetoed it.  This past week, the Board approved the amended Ethnic Studies program, which the legislature will certainly pass.   

The Board of Education official site tells us this:  "The Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum is aimed at empowering students by illuminating the often untold struggles and contributions of Native Americans, African Americans, Latino/a/x Americans, and Asian Americans in California."  And we are told this:  "Today we made an important step toward confronting and ultimately transforming racism in our society and state...we are reminded daily that the racial injustice it reveals is not only a legacy of the past but a clear and present danger."  There it is - racism today is the same as it was 70 years ago.  And we are told by the Board:  "The fight for justice and human rights begins with education, and begins now."  

Right, there have not been any fights for justice and human rights before the Board came up with this nonsense.  We know how this subject matter will be taught.  America is bad.  America was founded on racism and slavery.  Nothing has changed for the better.  California is not teaching - they are indoctrinating young people with left-wing ideology.  One thing is for certain.  If my kids were of school age today, there is no way that I would agree to send them to public schools. 

Just to give you some idea of the left-wing slant of the drafters of this curriculum, the original draft looked favorably on the anti-Israel and anti-Semitic "Boycott, Divest and Sanction" movement - a movement that ultimately seeks the destruction of Israel.  The original draft also referred to Israel's War of Independence as the "Nakba," the Palestinian term for "catastrophe."  With much protest by Jewish groups, those offending provisions were removed.  But in a state with nearly 1.2 million Jews, the inclusion of those provisions in the original draft shows us that anti-Semitism is alive and well within the Democratic left.

An Op-Ed in the 3/17/21 Wall Street Journal makes the point that "a core tenet of ethnic studies is that a person's identity is determined first and foremost by group membership."  For those of you raised as I was, that we are to treat people as individuals, and never judge a person based on factors of race or ethnicity, you can forget that.  That idea is now considered racist.  The Journal:  "Ethnic studies wants to invert traditional American ideas of individual merit, opportunity and success."  To say that anyone who works hard can succeed in America is now racist also.  

I prefer the approach of Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis:  "Florida civics curriculum will incorporate foundational concepts with the best materials, and it will expressly exclude unsanctioned narratives like critical race theory..."  And DeSantis said that Florida has "...no room in our classrooms for things like critical race theory...teaching kids to hate their country and to hate each other is not worth one red cent of taxpayer money."  Of course, that is the goal of many of these programs, such as the "1619 Project," promulgated by the New York Times, teaching that the country was founded in 1619 when the first slaves were brought here.    

The path that California is on is one that will lead to greater animosity between races and ethnic groups.  The idea of "E Pluribus Unum" (out of many, one) is passe.  The teaching of civics, government and a sense of patriotism?  Probably on the way out.  Why would young students feel any sense of patriotism towards a country they are being told is racist and evil?  And what feelings will they have for their fellow Americans, especially white Americans, who will be seen as their oppressors.  I think Ronald Reagan said it best:  "Freedom is a fragile thing and it's never more than one generation away from extinction."  It need not be lost by war.  It can be lost from within.     

The Coronavirus One Year Later - And Other Stories in the News

It is hard to believe, but it has been one year of the coronavirus.  In my first post on the topic, 3/15/20, called simply "The Coronavirus," I discussed the numbers.  As I have done in virtually every post or email announcement ever since.  On 3/15/20 I wrote that there were over 3000 cases and 61 deaths in the USA.  Now, we have had 30,042,814 cases and 546,556 deaths, with 22,107,924 recovered cases.  Los Angeles County has had 1,210,351 cases and 22,488 deaths.  New York City has had 775,226 cases and 30,164 deaths.  By state, the number of cases and deaths are as follows:  California, 3,623,088 and 55,781; Texas, 2,731,560 and 46,779; Florida, 1,978,353 and 32,334; and New York 1,780,211 and 49,189.  Pennsylvania, Illinois and New Jersey have all had over 23,000 deaths.  

The number of new unemployment claims for the week ending March 6, fell to 712,000.  Still way too high compared to the year before the onset of the pandemic.  By 500,000.  On the good news front, states are starting to reopen.  Obviously, some businesses have been permanently lost.  Los Angeles County will be allowing indoor dining again as of this coming Monday, but only at 25% capacity.  In speaking with the owner's daughter at one of the restaurants I frequent, she said their capacity is 36 people, so 25% means they can only seat 9 people inside.  That will not make a difference for them, especially if they have to pay for clear plastic dividers between tables, and/or improve the restaurant's ventilation system.   

The City of the Angels thought it was a good idea to require grocery stores and pharmacies to pay "hero pay," of an additional five dollars an hour.  That prompted Kroger (which operates Ralph's and Food 4 Less), to announce the closure of 3 stores.  The company says they already pay $18 per hour, which comes to an effective rate of $24 per hour when health care and pension benefits are factored in.  They also say they have encouraged their employees to get vaccinated, offering a $100 incentive to do so.  But the government always knows better than private businesses. 

Speaking of the government knowing what's best, some Democrat legislators in California have proposed legislation that would ban certain toy stores and clothing stores from having separate sections for "boys" and "girls."  It would also apply to online sales; and there would be a $1000 fine for violations.  When I wrote the post called "My Ex-Wife" (posted on July 20,2014), I said this:  "...regardless of which side of the gay marriage debate you are on, nobody is thinking through to where this may ultimately lead."  But now we do know, as the party that claims to "follow the science" does not believe that there are two sexes.

Apparently, the Democrats in Congress are concerned that all the other nonsense they are doing in order to solidify their permanent control of the government is insufficient.  Things such as permitting an unlimited number of people (future Democrats) to enter the country illegally.  The latest proposal, pushed by Squad member Ayanna Pressley, would have lowered the voting age to 16.  Before you tell me that is just an extreme member of Congress pushing that - wrong!  When it came to a vote (as an Amendment to H.R. 1) the measure did fail 125 to 302.  However, the Democratic caucus voted 125 to 93 in favor of the Amendment.  That is a significant majority (over 57%) of the Democratic caucus.  Pressley:  "A sixteen year-old in 2021 possesses a wisdom and maturity that comes from 2021 challenges, 2021 hardships and 2021 threats."  What hardships did 16 year-olds face during the two Great Wars?  And wisdom?  That comes with age, hopefully.  Clearly, Pressley is not of sufficient age to have obtained that wisdom.  But here's a question - if her polling showed that the vast majority of 16 year-olds intended to become Republicans, would she still believe that they possessed "wisdom and maturity?" 

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and his wife both lack wisdom.  Notwithstanding the fact that shootings are up 75% in February, 2021 compared to February, 2020, de Blasio and his wife have pushed to defund the police.  But his wife has the perfect solution.  "...we're asking New Yorkers to show up for their neighbors and intervene when witnessing hateful violence or harassment."  I am curious - are unarmed citizens being asked to challenge very likely armed perpetrators?  Is Mrs. de Blasio saying she prefers vigilantism over a police force?  And is she prepared to personally confront violence as well?  

There was an interesting Op-Ed piece in the 3/8/21 Wall Street Journal by a parent of a student at the private Riverdale Country School in The Bronx, New York.  The writer tells us that at the first assembly of the school year, the school took a pass on performing their usual customs of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and singing America the Beautiful.  Instead, the head of the school announced a new theme for the year - "allyship."  For those not sufficiently "woke," allyship is a means of practicing "social justice" on behalf of oppressed and marginalized groups.  It is aligned with "anti-racist."  The head of the school advised that "it is essential that parents/caregivers and educators acknowledge racial differences (as opposed to a 'colorblind' stance)."  Is Martin Luther King turning in his grave yet?  Recommended reading includes Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility."  While, admittedly, I have not read the book, Ms. DiAngelo apparently divides the world into white people and everybody else.  Personally, I'm with Dennis Prager, who, quoting Holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl, says there are only two groups of people in the world - the decent and the indecent.  As kids we said good guys and bad guys.  But then again, back then our parents and teachers taught us well.  

In the same Op-Ed we are told that students ages 5 through 11 were instructed to "check each other's words and actions."  The writer's wife spent the first five years of her life in the former Soviet Union.  As a child, she too was taught "to keep tabs on friends and family."  At one point, his now wife turned in her own father for alleged "crimes against the state."  All of it is, quite frankly, scary.  And sick.  I am inclined to agree with two friends who refer to the Democratic Party as evil.  It is evil to teach children that skin color is more important than character and behavior.  It is evil to tell children to report on fellow students who may not use the accepted "woke" vernacular.  The writer also tells us of an article in the City Journal discussing a public school in Cupertino, California.  In that school, children in the third grade were told to "rank themselves according to their 'power and privilege.'"  Sick.  

As a Jew I understand all too well how group identification has been used throughout history to persecute us and even slaughter us.  I am a proud Jew.  But I still want others to judge me for me.  For who I am.  But I know that is not always going to happen.  And, as a Republican and a conservative, I know that I am not judged for me.  My affiliation with the Republican Party has, as I discussed in prior posts, has cost me decades long friendships.  Others stopped being friends with me because it was guilt by association.  My individual traits and character were of no significance to them.  I was no different from all the negative ideas they held about Donald Trump and Republicans; just as I am no different from whatever negative views neo-Nazis hold about Jews.  

Higher up in academia is news of a study done by Eric Kaufmann, a professor of politics at the University of London.  In an Op-Ed in the 3/1/2021 Wall Street Journal, he discusses the attitudes at universities in the US, Canada and Britain.  Kaufmann reports that in the US and Canada left-wing academics outnumber those on the right "by a ratio of 14 to 1."  He also reports that "Some 75% of American and British conservative academics in social sciences and humanities say their departments offer a hostile climate for their beliefs."  And 40% of American academics "indicated in a survey this (past) summer that they would not hire a known Trump supporter for a job."  If 40% are willing to actually admit to that bias, I cannot help but wonder how many more are too afraid to openly admit to it.  

Concluding with an additional article on education, there was yet another Op-Ed in the 3/2/21 Journal authored by 6 former Secretaries of Education.  They wrote:  "Following years of polarization and the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, the world's oldest constitutional democracy is in grave danger.  We stand at a crossroads, called to protect this democracy and to work toward unity."  They continue:  "A key part of our task is to reinvigorate teaching and learning of American history and civics in our nation's schools."  I know that when I was in high school I was able to name the President, Vice-President, and all the major cabinet secretaries (if not all the cabinet secretaries).  I could easily name the 3 branches of government, and discuss how proposed legislation came to be laws.  Yet, in a Pew Research poll from 2010, 41% of Americans were unable to name the Vice President.  And in a 2016 poll, a mere 25% of Americans were able to name all 3 branches of government.    

My father's high school diploma was quite detailed.  It actually listed each subject he took, and the number of units completed by my Dad.  Included in the list were the subjects of "Civics" and "Government."  Imagine that.  If there is any hope of holding this country together, we need to go back to teaching the basics, instead of all the nonsense (left-wing propaganda) being taught today.