The Coronavirus Forty-Two Weeks Later - New Year Reflections, Part I (A Look Back and a Look Ahead)

 A look back.  I want to thank President Trump for his successes of the last four years.  With "The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act," we saw lower taxes and deregulation, and we had great economic growth and very low unemployment numbers - at least until the pandemic hit.  Trump got 220 judges appointed to the federal courts, including 3 Justices to the Supreme Court.  With "The First Step Act," we had the first significant criminal justice reform in decades.  The law reduced mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses, and provided more rehab and job training.  With "Operation Warp Speed" we had multiple vaccines developed in under a year - a process that usually takes multiple years.

Trump established the US Space Force.  A lot is happening in the space around earth.  GPS, spying by the US and against us by our enemies, communications.  As more satellites are regularly being launched into space, the new Space Force is a forward looking initiative.  Trump helped deal a significant defeat to ISIS.  He pulled the US out of the weak and toothless Iran deal.  He moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.  He recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.  He stopped payments to the Palestinian Authority for as long as they fund the murder of Jews.  And, in a move that would have resulted in universal praise had it done by a democrat president, we had the Abraham Accords: the normalization of relations between Israel and Sunni Arab countries.  The UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco.  With more countries likely to follow.    

It is a number that is hard to believe.  But from March 14, 2020 through December 26, 2020, a total of 73,000,000 claims for unemployment benefits were filed.  Even if we factor in the 8,610,000 (estimated based on pre-pandemic numbers) claims that might have been filed anyway, that would still leave 64,390,000 new claims.  The other day we picked up some takeout from a neighborhood restaurant.  I asked how they were doing.  They laid off all but two of their cooks.  They laid off all the busboys but the one who also does deliveries.  They laid off a bunch of the servers.  The closing of outdoor dining was a big blow.  Meanwhile, recall that back in early December, a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge ordered the County to provide actual evidence - data - to support the Order closing outdoor dining.  But a California Appeals Court reversed that Order.  Therefore, without having to provide any reasonable basis for the Order closing outdoor dining, the County Order remains in effect until the next hearing on February 10. 

A look ahead.  Will the shift in population continue?  In the last decade, Texas grew by over 4,200,000 people.  Florida grew by just under 3,000,000.  North Carolina and Arizona each gained over 1,000,000.  While California is in the top five gainers, over 2,100,000 people, the state has actually been losing more people than are moving in.  California counts on immigrants (legal or otherwise) to increase population.  Recently, Elon Musk announced he will be building a new Tesla factory in Texas.  As reported in the Wall Street Journal, Apple, Oracle and Hewlitt Packard are also planning on moving to Texas.  It is no coincidence that people and businesses are moving from blue states to red states.  Lower taxes.  Less regulations.  Less politically damaging policies affecting the quality of life.  The only question is, will these former blue state residents bring left-wing politics with them.  Will they vote in Democrats, whose policies caused them to move to red states.  

California is a one party state.  Not just the governor and every top political office.  But the Democrats in the State Senate have a 31-9 super majority, and in the State Assembly there is a 60-19 Democrat super majority.  Maybe some are happy with one party rule.  Extremely high taxes.  Burdensome regulations.  A homeless problem in Los Angeles and San Francisco (two  cities also run by Democrats) that`is affecting the quality of life in those cities.  

Now the question is: will we have a one party country?  I am not just referring to just the next Congress in the event the two Democrats win both Georgia Senate seats on Tuesday.  If that happens, it could change in another two years.  Rather, I am referring to the promise by Democrats to change America - changes that are intended to make Democrat rule permanent in the entire country.  Just think, Democrats would be able to ruin the country the way they have done to California and other places.  With a Senate majority, along with the majority in the House and the White House, the Democrats intend to lock in permanent control.  They will make Washington, D.C. a state and Puerto Rico a state, adding four Democrats to the Senate, and another 7 to 8 House members.  They will pack the Supreme Court by adding maybe 4 new justices, in order to lessen the impact of the Trump appointees.  They will attempt to eliminate the electoral college. 

Democrats have done a great job in other places as well.  In this weekend's Wall Street Journal was an Op-Ed (by former Republican candidate for governor, Bob Stefanowski) discussing the significant decline in Hartford, Connecticut.  Noting that Hartford has been run almost exclusively by Democrats for 7 decades, the writer tells us:  "Hartford has been in decline for 30 years.  In the 1990s, Hartford's population hemorrhage made national news.  Today it is smaller still, less than 70% of what it was in 1950."  We also learn that Hartford needed the State to pick up its debt in order to avoid bankruptcy.  Public employee unions, along with their generous pensions, are apparently part of the problem.  But the Democrats and the unions have had what I consider to be a corrupt relationship for decades, throughout the country.  The unions help to fund the campaigns of Democrats, who then return the favor once in office by voting generous benefits for those same unions.  

Meanwhile, the propagandizing in our schools continues.  In San Francisco, they are considering renaming schools currently named after Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln, presumably because, well, you know - racist slave owners and whatever about Lincoln.  Maybe they will rename the schools after Mickey Mouse and Minnie Mouse.  Maybe Barney and Betty.  Meanwhile, there is a movement afoot to ban certain classics from the reading lists in schools, including works by Homer, F. Scott Fitzgerald and even Dr. Seuss.  Said one author: "It's a tragedy that this anti-intellectual movement of canceling the classics is gaining traction among educators and the mainstream publishing industry."  In San Diego, the school district wants to re-educate the teachers.  The training being offered is in regards to "white privilege."  The teachers will be told they are racist, and "upholding racist ideas, structures, and policies."  The teachers need to adopt the left-wing approach to being "anti-racist."  For those following critical race theory, the opposite of "racist" is not "not racist."  It is "anti-racist."  

The latest numbers.  The US has nearly 21,000,000 cases and over 358,000 deaths.  California has over 2.3 million cases and and over 26,000 deaths.  Texas has almost 1.8 million cases and over 28,500 deaths.  Florida has over 1.3 million cases and nearly 22,000 deaths.  New York has over one million cases and over 38,000 deaths.  Illinois has 975,000 cases and over 18,200 deaths.  Los Angeles County has over 790,000 cases and over 10,500 deaths.  New York City has over 436,000 cases and over 25,000 deaths.  

Thankfully, the vaccines have been rolled out.  I'm hoping that by summer or autumn the vast majority of Americans will have been vaccinated.  But, it's still unclear what "normal" will look like at that point.        

          

The Coronavirus Forty Weeks Later - Year End Reflections, Part II (Where Do We Go From Here?)

The Electoral College has voted.  In one month Joe Biden will be installed as the 46th President of the United States.  Rightly or wrongly, numerous courts demonstrated that they had little inclination to hear cases alleging voter fraud.  I was not surprised that the Supreme Court declined to hear the Texas case alleging voter fraud in several swing states, nor that the Trump appointees also voted not to hear the case.  It was a conservative decision - deferring to each state's officials to determine the legitimacy of their vote.  Then there is also the reluctance to get involved in political matters.  I'm old school.  I want to see Trump at Biden's inauguration, demonstrating once again a peaceful transition of power in the greatest country on earth.  

In one poll, 61% said they trusted the results of the election.  95% of Democrats agreed compared to only 24% of Republicans, and 67% of Independents.  Clearly not a healthy sign that so few believe the election results were legitimate.  Here was the 12/12/20 headline in the New York Times:  "JUSTICES DENY BID BY TEXAS TO SUBVERT VOTE."  Actually, Texas was using the court system to challenge the vote.  But the Times had no interest in allowing any possible validity to simply questioning the vote.  For the Times, it could be only be subversion.

In their editorial of the same day, the Times wrote:  "Questioning the integrity of an election is a matter of the utmost seriousness."  Then this:  "This new policy of election denialism, by contrast, is the latest manifestation of the Republican Party's increasingly anti-democratic tendencies."  As reluctant as I am to use the term "hypocrites" - what a bunch of hypocrites.  After the 2016 election, the Times editorial told us that the country was at the "precipice."  Losing candidate Hillary Clinton said this:  "I believe he knows he's an illegitimate president."  And:  "This wasn't on the level."  So many on the Left refused to accept Trump as a legitimate president - not just immediately following his election, but for the entire four years of his term.  So please, spare me the sanctimony.

For three years we heard non-stop about "Russian collusion."  Given the Hunter Biden investigation, and given the soon to be President's obvious lack of oversight over his son's involvement with China, I am sure that the Times and the rest of the mainstream media will be reporting daily about "Chinese collusion."  Just as I am sure that we will have a "special prosecutor" assigned to look into the Biden family's ties to China.  Right?  

Much has been made of Biden's recent call for "unity."  Would that be a "unity" that was never offered to Trump?  And just how serious is that call for unity?  Here is Biden's former campaign manager and soon to be deputy chief of staff, Jen O'Malley Dillon:  "I'm not saying they're (Republicans) not a bunch of fuckers.  Mitch McConnell is terrible."  Very unifying.  Then we have Representative Bill Pascrell, Dem-NJ, who wants Pelosi to bar the 126 Republican representatives who supported the Texas lawsuit challenging the vote, from being seated in the House.  Pascrell is relying on the 14th Amendment, a Civil War Amendment, barring the seating of anyone who engaged in rebellion against the United States.  For Pascrell, the filing of a lawsuit is the equivalent of engaging in rebellion.  Again, very "unifying."  

Expecting "unity" is unrealistic.  The two parties are simply too far apart on too many issues.  That will continue to be the case if the Democrats keep moving further to the Left and away from Classic Liberalism.  The best that might be hoped for is a return to a "loyal opposition."  Again, not something we saw in the last four years.   

In a lengthy article on 12/13/20 on the CNN website, we saw yet another manifestation of the lack of unity offered to Trump.  It was a further example of the one-sided reporting by another mainstream media outlet.  "Trump will leave office in January with a historically bad record on the economy..."  And:  "Trump will exit the White House with fewer Americans employed than when he started."  Later in the article, CNN did get around to mentioning the pandemic, but that was mostly Trump's fault also.  Of course, 50 different state governors controlled the extent to which their states shut down, resulting in significant unemployment.  But why say that when it is so much easier to blame Trump.  And, what of Trump's tremendous economic success before the pandemic started?  That, my friends, was simply a continuation of Obama's success.  Really nothing to do with Trump.  Unbelievable.  Over the years in the blog I have referred to this phenomenon as "media bias."  Trump has called it "fake news."  No difference.   

You want unity?  Then maybe give credit to Trump for the successes he has had.  Recall that when the President had tremendous success in brokering the initial Middle East peace deals, Speaker Pelosi said this:  "Good for him for having a distraction on a day when the numbers of people who are affected and the number of people who are dying from this virus only increases."  A distraction?  Trump has helped to remake the geopolitical reality of a very troubling area of the world - for the better.  The question is, will the Biden Administration seek to build upon that success, or to destroy it?

It is not a positive sign that former Secretary of State John Kerry will have a role in the new administration as Biden's climate envoy.  Kerry was one of the biggest fools to ever sit at the head of the State Department.  Kerry pushed the Iran nuclear deal.  Kerry insisted that peace with the Palestinians was the only path towards a broader peace between Israel and the Arab world.  In a word, Kerry was an "appeaser."  He believed he could buy peace with Iran by letting them have a ten year plan to getting a nuclear bomb.  Here is Kerry on the Middle East:  "There will be no advance and separate peace with the Arab world (and Israel) without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace.  Everybody needs to understand that.  That is a hard reality."  Thankfully, Trump was smarter than Kerry, and understood that appeasement is never the path to peace.  Trump understood that Kerry's "hard reality" was a fool's vision.  

In other news, a recent poll showed 73% of the people would support a national stay at home order.  I am not convinced that a president has the authority to issue such an order.  78% of Democrats would support such an order, with only 25% of Republicans agreeing.  Independents were split at 48% in favor and 48% opposed.  

And Fox News reported that the top five destinations where Americans are moving to are Austin, Phoenix, Nashville, Tampa and Jacksonville.  No surprise that Texas and Florida have three of the top five destinations.  Texas, for example, has a zero state income tax rate and a zero capital gains tax rate.  The property tax is only 1.69% and the sales tax is 6.25%.  Meanwhile, some in California seem to be intent on hastening the exodus of wealthy people and businesses.  One proposal would raise the top state income tax rate to 16.8%.  Another proposal would create a new "wealth tax" to be applied to anyone residing in the state for 60 days in a calendar year; and would continue to tax those same individuals for a decade thereafter, even if they no longer lived in the state.  Fox reported that the top three cities from which people are leaving are Hartford, New York City and San Francisco.  California now has more people leaving than moving in.

Here are the latest numbers.  For the last two weeks the number of new unemployment claims has continued to rise, with the week ending 12/5 having 862,000 claims and the following week having 885,000 claims.  Clearly, with new lock downs being ordered in various states the numbers are rising.  As of earlier today the US had 18,259,684 coronavirus cases and 324,844 deaths.  California has had over 1.8 million cases and 22,670 deaths.  Texas has had over 1.6 million cases and over 26,000 deaths.  Florida has had over 1.2 million cases and over 20,000 deaths.  Los Angeles County has had over 620,000 cases and 8,877 deaths.  New York City had over 385,000 cases and 24,677 deaths.

With the success of "Operation Warp Speed" we have two vaccines already approved, and others being developed.  I am confident in saying that after January 20, 2021, CNN will report that we have Biden to thank for the vaccines.

The Coronavirus Thirty-Eight Weeks Later - Year End Reflections, Part I

 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.      

The Coronavirus Thirty-Six Weeks Later - It Happened Again

On various occasions, I have discussed in the blog how I have been mistreated and "unfriended" for real (I'm not on Facebook) because I am a conservative and/or because I voted for Trump.  But this latest episode beats all the others.  Last week I called one of the two guys I am (was) still friendly with from my college days.  As I got his voicemail I left a message that I was calling to catch up.  We live on opposite coasts, so we would email, text and talk periodically, and upon trips back east we would get together.  Instead of a return phone call I received a text, telling me that he was bummed by my continued support of Trump and the Republicans because Trump is trying to overturn the election results.  Therefore, he simply did not feel good about talking to me.  Maybe sometime in the future that would change. 

I did send a reply by email (no, I did not tell him to f... off as 3 friends suggested, not my style) advising that in my one post-election blog post I never said Trump should litigate the issue of the election.  In fact, I said that on election night, days before any media outlet called the election, I had accepted that Biden had won.  This requires some further commentary.  One thing that I have noticed over the years is that people will read into my posts whatever their preexisting worldview tells them.  As the saying goes, people will see what they want to see.  On multiple occasions I have been accused of saying things that I never did. 

 Another thing.  It is quite clear that I (along with all Trump voters) am personally responsible for everything that Trump says or does.  This last point is important because every conservative I know has criticized the way Trump speaks.  But we overlooked that because of the policy differences between Trump/Republicans and Democrats.  I suppose that I could argue that any friend who voted for Obama is an anti-Semite, given Obama's attitude towards Israel.  After all, if every Trump utterance and policy is held against me, then why shouldn't I hold every one of Obama's words and deeds against those who voted for him. 

Here's another point.  Regardless of whatever evidence there may be of election fraud, some commentators have noted that state and federal judges have changed the deadlines for mail-in ballot submissions.  But the US Constitution is clear as to who gets to make election laws - "The Time, Places and Manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof," although Congress may change those state rules "except as to the Place of chusing Senators."  Trump choosing to challenge some of these lower court decisions is lawful.  It may not be wise, it may not produce the result he desires, but it is lawful.  And Biden has not technically won until each state's electors have voted, and those results have been certified by Congress.  

A couple more points.  I discussed in the last post how many Biden supporters seemed to be "sore winners."  Being unfriended post-election is yet another example of a sore winner.  Besides, these types of efforts to overturn apparent election results are rarely successful.  But let's say the Supreme Court did rule that lower court judges acted unconstitutionally in extending the voting deadlines in various key states.  Do the Democrats not care about the Constitution any more?  Also in the last post I discussed how Biden's call for unity needed to be heard more by Democrats than Republicans.  And my former friend's text is another example of the accuracy of that observation.  

In a November 12, 2017 post ("More Stories From My Youth"), I discussed my college buddies.  "While we shared similar views in college, I have undoubtedly moved further to the right than they have.  While some believe it is impossible to be friends with those who hold opposing views, I am not of that mind."  I was partly wrong.  Conservatives and liberals, classic liberals, can be friends.  Leftists refuse to be friends with anyone but other leftists.  My now ex-friend, like so many in the Democratic Party, went from being a liberal to a leftist, and could not tolerate opposing viewpoints - nor anyone who held such viewpoints. 

In that 11/12/17 post I continued:  "These two honorable men, of fine moral character, are men that I am proud to call 'friend.'"  My ex-friend and I spent much time together in college.  We both became attorneys.  We are both family men.  He and his family have stayed with us, and my family has stayed with them.  I believe he is religious, as am I.  When I say the prayer for those in need of healing, I have included him all the time for years, as he developed a number of health issues several years ago.  But now, I am a piece of garbage, just another deplorable.  But, he told me, maybe some day he will feel better about talking to me.  What self-righteous arrogance.  In my reply email I told him "good-bye."  I explained:  "I can't be friends with someone who can only be friends with me when he feels like it."  As if I should wait to see if he thinks I am good enough to talk to again.   

Also in the category of "sore winners" is the New York Times.  In their 11/22/20 Sunday magazine is a 10 page article on Trump's "potential criminal liability."  It is the cover story.  And the inside table of contents about it tells us that the article discusses:  "Financial Crimes, Election-Law Violations, Obstruction of Justice, Public Corruption and Partisan Coercion."  Having attacked Trump for over 5 years and having pushed his impeachment, it is still not enough.  As I said in the last post, there are those who want to see him and Jared and Ivanka "go to prison, rot in hell or worse."  Never have I wished that an ex-President go to prison.  When Ford pardoned Nixon I thought it was the right thing to do.  And yes, I cringed when people at Trump rallies, egged on by Trump, yelled "lock her up" about Clinton.  It is not the job of a presidential candidate to seek the imprisonment of an opponent.  It is up to our justice system to make decisions on criminal culpability.  I just cannot help but think that if we lived in a more repressive society, with more severe sanctions than our current "cancel culture," that this ex-friend would report me to the authorities for violating acceptable norms.  

So, another lost "friend."  This one of 50 years duration.  I've said it before, the intolerance of such people - the unfriending of me and others - says far more about their characters than that of ours, of those of us who have been unfriended.    

The Coronavirus Thirty-Five Weeks Later - Post Election Analysis

As I went to sleep on election night, even though the election had not yet been called by any media outlet, it seemed likely to me that Joe Biden had won.  I was definitely bummed the next day.  But upon awakening Thursday, I felt it was a new day.  Yes, my guy lost.  But being a natural optimist, and appreciating all that I have, I was not going to dwell on the defeat.  However, it appeared that there were many "sore winners" among those celebrating the Biden/Harris victory.

Actress Janelle Monae, from the movie "Hidden Figures," was one of many who could not be a gracious winner.  Monae:  "Fuck Donald Tromp (sic) and every American citizen, celebrity, white woman, black man, ETC who supported him burnnnnnnn."  There is so much hatred and racism in that one sentence, that I will let her comment speak for itself.  Michelle Obama was not much better:  "...let's remember that tens of millions of people voted for the status quo, even when it meant supporting lies, hate, chaos, and division."  Michelle Obama could not conceive of any positive reason to vote for Trump.  So allow me.  

In just a single term, Trump was one of the most consequential presidents in my lifetime.  With tax reform and deregulation, he was able to turn the economy around.  We had the lowest unemployment rate in decades, until the pandemic hit.  He allowed energy companies to increase production, making the US energy independent.  Trump nominated 3 conservatives to the Supreme Court, and "about 30% of the federal appellate bench" with conservative judges.  (Stat from the 11/1/20 Wall Street Journal.)  He was far better for blacks and other racial minorities than was his predecessor.  Trump signed prison reform legislation, created opportunity zones and supported school choice, allowing poor minorities to get the advantages other have.  

He was certainly the best president in dealing with the Middle East.  He backed out of the flawed Iran nuclear deal.  He moved the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Israel's capital city - Jerusalem.  He recognized Israeli sovereignty over the strategic Golan Heights.  And he stopped the flow of cash to Palestinians until such time as they stop funding terrorists who kill Jews.  And Trump understood that appeasement of the Palestinians is not the road to peace.  In helping to cement peace deals between Israel and the U.A.E. and Bahrain and now Sudan, Trump has enhanced the stability of a region sorely in need of stability.  While some critics say these are not peace deals as Israel was never at war with those countries, such criticism is not well stated.  So call it normalization of relations.  The significance is the same.  And now, some Sunni Arab leaders even openly criticize the Palestinian leadership for their intransigence.  Trump understood that there was a wider Arab world that wanted to move on, that did not constantly want to make their own interests subservient to the interests of an entrenched and intransigent Palestinian leadership.

Unfortunately, the Biden/Harris Administration is intent on taking us back to the failed Middle East policies of the Obama Administration.  Obama not only believed in appeasement, but he naturally aligned himself with radical Muslims.  Here is Kamala Harris, telling us that the Biden Administration will restore "humanitarian" aid to the Palestinians and Gaza.  The fact that such aid will be used to kill Jews is of no consequence to the Democrats.  She said the US would reopen the US consulate in so-called East Jerusalem, which means the US will treat the Palestinians as having a country with East Jerusalem as its capital.  They will also reopen the PLO mission in Washington, D.C.  The appeasement of the Palestinians under Obama did not bring the region one step closer to peace.  Trump's approach has - significantly.  

Trump may have lost the White House, but the Republicans won the election.  Prior to the election, the Democrats held 232 seats in the House of Representatives, and Republicans held 197 seats.  While the Democrats will maintain control of the House, and with 13 seats still not called, the Republicans have so far increased their numbers to 203 seats, with Democrats having 219.  218 is needed for control of the House.  Republicans lead in the Senate by 50-48, with the Democrats having picked up one seat.  The two seats from Georgia are still undecided and there will be a runoff election for each seat in early January.  If the Republicans pick up one of those they will maintain control of the Senate.  At the state level, Republicans held on to their majorities everywhere they already had them, and picked up the New Hampshire House and the New Hampshire Senate.  Republicans will continue to hold the advantage in the governorships, having picked up one new seat in Montana.  The final tally is 27 governor seats for Republicans and 23 for Democrats.  Overall, Republicans will control 23 state governments (governor, House and Senate) with Democrats having full control in 15 states.  12 states will have divided government.  

Clearly, all the pollsters predicting a big blue wave got it wrong.  By ignoring what has come to be called the "shy Trump voter," they grossly underestimated the turnout for Trump.  And this writer grossly overestimated the number of Californians who would vote for Trump.  I did not think that Biden would win in California by the same 3+ million votes that Hillary got in 2016.  I was way off.  Biden won here by 5 million votes - 10.7 million to 5.7 million.  My surprise at all the pro-Trump demonstrations throughout very liberal Southern California led me to miscalculate the extent of Trump's support.  While Trump supporters were clearly more animated and enthusiastic than Biden supporters, that did not translate into greater numbers for Trump. 

Here is one thing I feel confident in predicting.  After barely asking Biden a single tough question during the entire campaign, the mainstream media can be counted on to eliminate their "fact checking," a constant practice during the Trump years.  As Biden and the Dems never lie, there will be no need to fact check them.  But the mainstream media does have influence.  You may recall they told us that Trump was going to start wars with Iran and North Korea and everybody else.  In speaking with a young person post-election day, he told me that he and his friends were very happy that Biden won.  I asked what his biggest concern was with Trump.  It was that Trump was going to get us into war(s), even a nuclear war.  It did not matter that Trump ran in 2016 on a policy of avoiding foreign wars and bringing troops home.  It did not matter that Trump was the first president in decades to not get the US involved in any new war or military conflict.  He only knew what the mainstream media told him.  

Speaking of which, the mainstream media, and their allies in the Democratic Party, have told us for 4 years that Trump is a dictator, that he is like Hitler or even worse than Hitler.  That told us that he is immoral, evil, vile, unethical and on and on.  Given that, just how surprising would it be if Democratic officials tried to tilt the election to Biden?  I am not saying there was voter fraud, and certainly not to the extent sufficient to overturn a Biden victory.  But the mainstream media told us that in the era of Trump they could not remain neutral.  The Dems talked impeachment from the day Trump was inaugurated in January, 2017, and even before.  When that failed, they talked up the 25th Amendment.  If you believe a Hitler occupies the White House, then it would be rather easy to justify cheating to get him out.  In fact, it would be the moral thing to do. 

In left-wing California, again, where Biden won by 5 million votes, there was a well-financed measure on the ballot that would have reversed a state constitutional provision that prohibited state and local governments from giving preferential treatment based on race, national origin, ethnicity or sex.  Essentially, the measure would have restored affirmative action.  Yet, Prop 16 failed to pass, with 57% (9,300,733) voting "no" and only 43% (6,987,533) voting "yes."  (Some votes are still outstanding, but the outcome will not change.)  While the "woke" Americans tell us that to say society is or should be "color blind" is actually racist, even left-wing Californians seem to believe that people should be judged on their abilities and not on the color of their skin.

Recently, I was part of a group text in which someone sent a meme, with a picture of a bottle of wine.  The label read "Trump Whines" and underneath was "Made From Sour Grapes."  The hypocrisy is simply stunning.  After Hillary's defeat in 2016, she continued to call Trump an "illegitimate" president.  As did Rep. John Lewis.  As did other Democrats.  As did many in the mainstream media.  But now President-elect Joe Biden has called for unity, and has asked that the harsh rhetoric be put aside.  It is an appropriate request - as applied to his fellow Democrats.  But after 5 years of being abused - no, not just Trump, but all of us who voted for him in 2016 - now they say we need to be nice?  We have been called every nasty and insulting name imaginable.  Many of us have been unfriended, not just on social media, but in real life, by Democrats who look down on us, who think we are all deplorables.  Back on August 1, 2018 I wrote a post called "Trump Won.  Time For The Left To Get Over It."  But they hadn't gotten over it, as an Op-Ed writer for the LA Times was still calling Trump an "illegitimate" president.  The Democrats never got over it to this day.  Some want to see Trump, Jared and Ivanka go to prison, rot in hell or worse.  Some are keeping lists of those who worked for Trump; to what end I do not know.  

So, sure, I can drop the harsh rhetoric.  It is not my style anyway.  But I don't think the burden is on my fellow Republicans.  The Democrats have a long way to go to prove that they accept Trump supporters as fellow Americans.  And they need to stop thinking that they are better human beings than are Republicans - because their words and actions often reflect that they are worse.      

The Coronavirus Thirty-three Weeks Later - This is Biden's America

The recent debate between President Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden actually gave us some fairly good insight into Biden's view of the world.  Combined with the views of others in his party we get a pretty good insight into what to expect should the Democrats win.  

Mark Kelley is the Democratic candidate for the US Senate in Arizona.  A staffer of his referred to Chicago police officers as "worthless fucking pigs."  In Biden's America we can expect a huge push to defund the police.  Here is the Mayor of Flemington, New Jersey:  "This is day one of the new SCOTUS term - the religious zealots want to enact the Christian version of Sharia law.  If you voted for the orange monster with COVID, go fuck yourself.  If you plan on voting for him again, unfriend me and go fuck yourself again."  Aside from the utter contempt for the primary religion in this country, this quote is a good indicator of just how "unifying" we can expect the Democrats to be.  

At the debate, Trump said:  "I have to say we're learning to live with with it.  We have no choice.  We can't lock ourselves up in a basement like Joe does."  Biden's retort:  "He says 'We're learning to live with it.'  People are learning to die with it."  In case you are wondering whether Biden would shut the country down, during the 2009 Swine flu he said he would advise his family not to fly, or ride on subways, or be in classrooms or other confined spaces.  (See the second post, "The Vice President of the United States," written in May, 2009 and posted November 26,2009.)  The CDC estimated that from 4/12/09 to 4/10/10 there were 60.8 million cases and 12,469 deaths.  Any death is sad, but if Biden would basically shut the country down with less than 12,500 deaths, imagine what he will do with 250,000 deaths.

Although I do have a question.  If Biden could do such a better job with the coronavirus than Trump, then why during his second term as Vice President did we still have from 24 million to 34 million cases of flu per year, with between 23,000 and 51,000 deaths.  Why wasn't Biden pushing mask wearing and social distancing?  Why was Biden letting Americans to learn to die from the flu?

Biden at the debate:  "All you teachers out there, not that many of you are going to die, so don't worry about it.  Come on!"  At what point do we close schools and society down?  With one death?  10?  100?  1000?  During Biden's last two years as VP, 35,485 people died in auto accidents in 2015, with another 37,806 dying in 2016.  And 64,795 dying from unintentional poisoning.  Where was our Vice President?  It is not an answer to say coronavirus deaths are preventable.  I can prevent all auto accident deaths tomorrow by banning the use of motor vehicles.  The Democrats ignore the fact that we have 50 governors who shut down, or not, their states at different times and to different extents.  They also ignore the desire of people to work in order to support themselves and their families.

Biden also told us:  "I would transition from the oil industry, yes."  I have to imagine that Biden simply has no idea that thousands of products, not simply gasoline, rely on oil/petroleum.  Products such as ink, pens, tires, umbrellas, linoleum, rubber and even crayons, among other things.  Biden will put the US back in the Iran nuclear deal.  That will put an end to the Sunni Arabs willing to openly make peace with Israel, which increases stability in the dangerous Middle East.  And it will further the policy of appeasement towards the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

We can also expect increasing anti-Semitism under a Biden Administration.  Why?  Because the Democrats are blind to the anti-Semitism within their own party.  My fellow Jews can only see the threat of anti-Semitism from the Right.  75%, in a recent poll, said that there is a "very serious" or "moderate" threat of anti-Semitism from the Right.  53% saw the threat from Radical Islam.  But only 32% saw the threat from the far Left.  But when we isolate the Republican Jews, 71% see the threat from the Left.  

On Sunday, 10/26/20, there was a Jews for Trump caravan in New York City.  Anti-Trump protesters shouted obscenities at them, threw things at them, used pepper spray against them, and took US flags and Trump banners off their cars.  Typical was the giving of the middle finger, yelling "get the fuck out," and "fuck you."  And:  "New York hates you," and "we don't want you here."  I have no doubt that if the police were not there, we would have had some dead Jews.  Any doubt in anyone's mind who those anti-Trump "protesters" will vote for?  

We also know that anti-Semitism has been increasing on college campuses across the country.  But on 12/11/19 President Trump signed an "Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism."  "It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.  Let's be honest - the main perpetrators of anti-Semitism on college campuses are Democrats and Leftists.  And they hate Israel.  

Perhaps the most astonishing, the most unimaginable, is the desire of some Democrats to cede US sovereignty to the UN.  This group of Congress members, all Democrats and led by "the squad," has asked the UN to investigate United States officials, specifically those at the Department of Homeland Security.  After detailing their concerns, their letter to the UN advises that "these allegations illustrate a clear pattern of alleged human rights violations by DHS."  Sure, let's have countries such as Russia and China and Venezuela judge Americans.  The letter:  "When considered in the context of the United States' long and shameful history of forcibly sterilizing incarcerated women and the numerous human rights abuses already leveled against DHS, the necessity of an independent investigation is clear."  Next will be subjecting US troops to international tribunals - perhaps all those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.  

I could fill up this entire post with nothing but horrible things said by Democratic elected officials and commentators about how evil Republicans and the Republican Party are.  But here is the premier mainstream paper in the entire country, the New York Times, describing the G.O.P.:  "a hollowed-out shell devoid of ideas, values and integrity, committed solely to preserving its own power even at the expense of democratic norms, institutions and ideas."  See the last post for the party intent on permanently insuring their "right" to govern.  As for the rest, the Times' ad hominem mudslinging tells us just how low that paper has sunk, more than it says anything about Republicans.

Many people fear there will be violence after the election.  If Biden wins, there will likely be no violence.  It is not what conservatives and Republicans do.  But if Trump wins, expect more of what we've seen over the summer.  Here is Daniel Henninger's Op-Ed in the 10/29/20 Wall Street Journal:  "The concurrent protests in so many cities (following the death of George Floyd) and the individuals who spoke on their behalf revealed a darker side to the Democrats - a party whose most visible supporters see the United States as a failed nation, a country of irredeemable inequities and people with reflexively racist instincts."

You know, I actually agree with something Joe Biden said at the debate.  If he wins, "we're about to go into a dark winter, a dark winter."

  

  

    

The Coronavirus Thirty-one Weeks Later - The Mainstream Media Is All In For Biden

The Sunday edition of the New York Times has a separate opinion section, called "Sunday Review."  The weekday Op-Ed section covers two pages.  This past Sunday the Review was 10 pages, all dedicated to one topic - Donald Trump.  The first page above the fold has this:  "Lies, Anger, Corruption, Incompetence, Chaos, Decay."  Below the fold:  "End Our National Crisis.  The Case Against Donald Trump.  By The Editorial Board."  Each page has one or more issues discussing Trump's alleged failures.  In case you were wondering if the Times gave up any of those 10 pages for any pro-Trump voices, for a little balance...you're kidding, right?

Page 7 for example is titled "His Incompetent Statesmanship."  The sub-headline tells us "For all the sound and fury, Trump's foreign policy has few accomplishments."  The best (by which I mean most outrageous) line in the piece is this:  "The troubles of the world are not all Mr. Trump's doing."  Wow!  That is some concession.  So, maybe the Times blames the President for only 95% of the world's troubles?  The Times is particularly unimpressed with the President's efforts in the Middle East, calling it "...a bag of gifts for the Israeli right, effectively undermining America's potential as a mediator with the Palestinians."  There is simply no other way to put it - the editorial writers at the Times are sick!

Let's review.  Obama/Biden accomplished nothing, notwithstanding their appeasement of the Arab and Muslim world.  Obama/Biden asked Israel to forego developing settlements for 9 months, with the hope of forging peace talks.  Israel complied.  But Abbas and the Palestinians refused to negotiate during that time.  However, Obama/Biden rewarded them anyway, as lame ducks in December, 2016, and sold out Israel at the UN by refusing to veto a Security Council resolution that established a Palestinian state on the 1967 (which were the 1949) borders.  In other words, Obama/Biden punished our strong ally Israel, and rewarded the terrorist led Palestinian Authority, even though they refused to negotiate.  Very impressive.

And Trump?  Moved the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to the Israeli capital of Jerusalem, as every recent president promised to do but never did.  Trump recognized Israeli sovereignty over the strategic Golan Heights.  Trump stopped funding the PA with US taxpayer money until such time as they stop paying their people to kill Jews.  And, for the first time in over a quarter of a century, Trump brought about new peace deals in the Middle East, between Israel and the UAE and Israel and Bahrain.  But the Times editorial board was clearly not impressed by two Arab countries recognizing Israel and establishing normal relations, as they made no mention of it.  Apparently, peace is no good.  And not starting new wars is no good either.  See below.   

Of course, the Times criticized President Trump in his dealings with North Korea.  The President may not have been more successful than other presidents with North Korea, but he was no less successful either.  He tried though.  Ironically, the Times complains that, after promising to bring troops home from overseas, we still have troops in various locations.  This, of course, is criticism for the sake of criticism.  It is highly unlikely that the Times would like to see all US troops from everywhere around the globe come home.  And, no mention was made that Trump is the first president in a long time to not get the US involved in any new military conflict.  Because war is good? 

Needless to say, the Times was quite upset with Trump pulling the US out of various international agreements.  No, the editorial writers did not mention the new and better trade deal Trump negotiated with Mexico and Canada, replacing NAFTA.  They did complain that Trump backed out of the Obama/Biden Iran nuclear deal.  Yes, the NY Times favored giving Iran, the leading state sponsor of terror, 150 billion dollars.  Obama/Biden favored international organizations.  Obama/Biden put the US back in the UN Rights Council, after Bush took the US out.  Trump took us out again, but no fear, Biden promises to put us back in.  Why is that a problem?  Let's see - the 3 newest members of the Council are China, Russia and Cuba, all stellar paragons of protecting human rights.  And the anti-Semitic Council condemned Israel 85 times between 2006 and 2019 (as reported in the 10/19/20 Wall Street Journal) - which is more times than they condemned the 17 top leading human rights offenders, such as Iran, China, Russia, North Korea and 13 others combined.  

A brief comment on race.  Under the headline "Black Lives at Risk," the Times writes:  "One of the most consequential events of the Trump era has been the roughly eight minutes that a police officer knelt on George Floyd's neck, suffocating him."  What has Trump got to do with the officer kneeling on George Floyd's neck?  I'm willing to bet that the Times never said that "One of the most consequential events of the Obama/Biden era was the fatal shooting of 17 year old Trayvon Martin."  Or, "the fatal shooting of 18 year old Michael Brown."  Are not those two deaths part of the Obama/Biden era?  

Speaking of race, I believe it is fair to say that Biden's record on race is, at best, problematic.  Biden opposed busing in order to accomplish school integration, calling it "the most racist concept you can come up with."  He referred to Obama as "the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean."  In 1975, the Biden Amendment to a $36 billion education bill, stipulated that none of the money was to be used "to assign teachers or students to schools...for reasons of race."  It was, according to the NAACP "an anti-black amendment."  Edward Brooke, the Senate's only black member at the time, called it "the greatest symbolic defeat for civil rights since 1964."  

Let us not forget that Biden referred to Strom Thurmond as "one of my closest friends."  Thurmond opposed the major civil rights legislation of 1964.  Biden:  "poor kids are just as bright, just as talented, as white kids."  Biden, to a group of black and Hispanic journalists:  "...unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly different attitudes about different things."  And, further cementing his belief that blacks are unable to think for themselves, Biden told Charlamagne tha G-d, and his largely black audience, that "if you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black."  

At the Trump-Biden debate, Trump was given an easy, albeit obnoxious, question by Chris Wallace, asking him to denounce white supremacy.  In my opinion, Trump flubbed his answer.  He should have said:  "You know what, Chris, I've condemned white supremacists numerous times.  I've condemned the neo-Nazis.  I've condemned the Ku Klux Klan.  But I'm challenging you to ask Joe Biden if he will condemn all the racist, segregationist Senators he calls friends.  Will he condemn himself for his past stance on school integration?  Ask him about his obvious racist comments about Obama, and blacks not being able to think for themselves.  What about it, Chris?"

Incredibly, Biden recently told a reporter that the public did not deserve to know whether he would agree to expand the Supreme Court if he won - a scheme that is referred to as "packing the Court."  (An aside.  As the left is wont to do, the Democrats now define "court packing" to mean President Trump nominating someone to fill an actual vacancy, not expand the size of the Court.  Let's be clear, the phrase "court packing" never meant filling a vacancy.  And it definitely never meant trying to fill the Court with Justices who a president hopes will align with his own view of the world.)  

Anyway, at Biden's recent town hall with George Stephanopoulos (are we sure it's not Snuffleupagus?), Biden said that his position on packing the Court "depends on how this (the Barrett nomination) turns out, if there's actually real, live debate on the floor (of the Senate)."  Otherwise?  "I'm open to considering what happens from that point on."  Clearly, Biden is susceptible to pressure from his party to pack the Court.  The Democrats have made it very clear - if they take the White House and the Senate, and keep the House, the rules of the game will change.  They will pack the Court.  They will pack the Senate with 2 or 4 new Democratic Senators by adding Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico as states, hoping to guarantee Democratic control of the Senate for the foreseeable future.  If they cannot eliminate the electoral college directly, they will make an end run around it.  The structure of our government will change, and it will change for one reason only - to cement the Democrats' lock on the reigns of the federal government.  Remind me again - who is it that acts as a dictator?