They Have Known For Some Time

With Jimmy Carter's passing much praise has been heaped on his legacy. Much well deserved. One item of note is his elevation to the status of "climate warrior" because he had solar panels installed on the White House. Which he did. He also championed (beltway-speak for "spent money on") solar energy research, with quite a few GT-EES researchers on the job market when Reagan took office. But was he really a climate warrior? Did he know something? Yes he did. But so did most of his predecessors and all who came after. How did this happen?

A good place to start is around 200 years ago. That's right, the 1820's. This is when Fourier, better known for his transform, theorized about a process we now call the greenhouse effect. This became more concrete in the 1850's when a scientist determined, empirically, that CO2 and moisture had just the heat retention effect that Fourier predicted. These results were presented in the U.S., but roundly ignored in Europe. This particular scientist had three crippling qualities: she was female; she was an amateur; and she was American. Not until several years later, when her results were reproduced by a European male did this become generally accepted. So, before the United States was 100 years old. 

To be fair, at this point in time, most inquiry regarded where we were in the current Ice Age and where that was headed. Yes, we are still in an Ice Age. This was Tyndall's line of investigation in 1859 with a focus on identifying the specific gases involved in atmospheric heat retention. This was after Foote's work and she was never credited and yet he identified the same gas as she. In 1896, Arrhenius, a Swede, create the first of what we would now call a "climate model," which estimated our current global temperature rise with frightening accuracy. 

So. For well over 125 years we've known. Well, at least the best and brightest have. You know, like our scientists and world leaders. Creme de la creme. Teddy Roosevelt knew. So did Franklin. And Churchill. And Kennedy, who preferred a man on the moon over a stable climate. And Johnson. And Reagan. Eisenhower. Obama. Yes, even Jimmy Carter. They all knew. They all had other things on their to-do lists. 

Was there anything they could do? No, there really wasn't. So, has there really been a climate crisis? Not according to Mirriam-Webster, who defines a crisis  as an inflection point, where some action, some change is imminent. Things are indeed happening, but immediacy is not part of the conversation. Probably because there isn't much we can, and even less that we will, do. Not anything that will make a significant impact. Now that the issue has become a political bludgeon all that will happen is folks will beat their opponents over the head while spouting copious hot air. 

Now we all know.

Flailed Authority

Stephen Sackur, host of the BBC's Hard Talk, recently interviewed Martin Baron, the (fairly) recently retired editor of the Washington Post. Just when we thought the chicken littles had been served up as chicken dinner with media pundits pivoting towards the durability of our constitution and away from chimerical existential threats, Baron parrots the pre-election punditry served up by jurassic "journalists." Between decrying all the bad things the prez-elect will do, he belabored the loss of "authority" by the dying media that was his livelihood. And how does he know what T2 will do? Because Trump said he would. Anyone who's been paying attention for the past ten years has heard many prevarications, seen enormous amounts of "fact checking," and been told time and again, by dinosaurs like Baron, that "he's a liar." But Baron, and only those like Baron, can tell his truths from his lies. There, according to Baron, lies journalistic "authority" as in authoritative, not authoritarian. Yet.

But dino-media have lost this authority with many in the public no longer seeing them as purveyors of fact and objectivity, of truth. Critics of last generation media see them as politicized propagandists, but since almost no one under the age of forty even consumes legacy "output" their ability to move the needle has gone the way of their authority. Their transition to biased influence and prevarication is being "fact checked" in the courts. George Snuffleupagus stepped in it when he declared, on air, that Trump had been found guilty of rape. Fact: he was found, in a civil suit, liable of sexual abuse. As a "journalist" Snuffleupagus should, and probably did, know better. ABC, knowing the only defense against libel is the truth, wisely dodged their day in court by agreeing to pay up $15M. Of course this further convinced the public of ABC's devotion to the left at any cost. No authority, just politics. 

Now, tee up the Des Moines Register. And their recently retired pollster. Seems the pollster, in the week before the election, concluded that Iowa flipped from Trump to Harris with Harris commanding a three point lead. The Register dutifully printed it, after all it was what they wanted to believe. The pollster was only off by about fifteen points. Now she and the Register are facing their own fact checking. In court. Accused of election interference. By the winner. They didn't lose their authority, they threw it away. Of course Baron sees this as an illegitimate attack on the Fourth Estate, wants to hide behind the First Amendment and claims the court case is an existential threat to American democracy.  Almost as if he is crying lawfare.

Sackur challenged Baron on key points, but more importantly suggested that maybe, just maybe, the media empire of the previous millennium has fallen. And it can't get up. The cause of death? Suicide. Like the dinosaurs of yore, they did not adapt to a changing environment, they pretended that their business model would endure. It didn't. So what did they do? They doubled down. When that didn't work, they decided to pick a team, a political team, one they thought would align with them, support them, giving up a broad fan base for a smaller group of fervent followers. It isn't clear it ever did work, but it certainly has failed. Perhaps having a media star, like Snuffleupagus, lie about someone he has consistently called a liar, just doesn't play well in Peoria. The Fourth Estate had become accustomed to thinking of themselves as king makers, but they have not been very good at it. Had they been, we would be seeing the close out of Hillary's second term and not T2. The media not only gave up on facts and objectivity, they replaced introspection with arrogance. After all, they are the only ones claiming media authority is even a thing. They had no clue their transparent partisanship would backfire. Maybe telling voters that their candidate is in the lead isn't the best way to get out the vote, at least not for their candidate. 

They knew what they were doing, or wanted to do, they just didn't know how to do it.

Have We Gotten This Petty?

That appears to be the case. 

Torn Apart Over Trump

The sad thing is that it is likely the person who did this is old enough to vote but clearly not mature enough to make a reasonable choice. Of course that doesn't matter because we're not being offered a reasonable choice by either of the two major parties. Yes, yes, that statement will piss off the partisans, both red and blue, but about a third of voters don't drink either KoolAid and they're kinda pissed at the crap candidates curated by these parties. Vandals and vandalized, it doesn't matter. They both suck. 

Are Crazy People Happy?

The gut-check answer is "no." It's inconceivable that the crazies could possibly be happy. How could anyone be happy with being crazy? That would be crazy, right?

Well, Mr. Gallup tells us that over the last 12 months that 50-60% of folks have self-diagnosed as bat-crap crazy. Who are these people? Partisans, which really means hyper-partisans, because ordinary partisans have either drifted away or joined their thundering herd racing to the extremes. Left or right, it doesn't matter because they've gone so far they've wound up sharing the same cesspool. And what do they find in this hockey-chopper? Floaters? Sinkers? Both? Maybe, but what they are both smeared with is vitriolic hate speech, and one is doing it better than the other. 

The clear winner is, and has been for some time, the extremists on the left. Academics, who consistently bow their sheaves to the left, initially silenced dissent with boycotts and extensive use of the heckler's veto. They followed this up with extreme actions and speech, ultimately ending with blatant antisemitism. While there was some backlash, the extremists remain entrenched, catching their breath, ready to start again. 

Then we get the 2024 election cycle and rhetoric heats up as it simultaneously descends into crazy. And dangerous. That is what differentiates one side from the other. As we all know, Trump and his allies spout some pretty crazy shit. Sorry, but there is just no other word for it. But if you're one of those 40-50%, take a step back and look at the characteristics of what is being said. First, it is incredibly ludicrous. It is hard to believe that anyone believes this blather. Then if you mull it over, you'll realize these are ad hominem attacks. They are technically personal insults, but they are superficial insults based on things like appearance and how someone's name is pronounced. It is grade school humour and makes you wonder if they still tell, and laugh at, fart jokes. Yes, it is infantile, and yes, it is tiresome. But it is largely harmless.

Not so for the left, the Democrats and their allies. And they have many, many allies. They have cultivated homegrown crazies that have resorted to violence to advance The Cause. Shortly after Trump came on the scene, we had the attack against Republican congress members by a homegrown left lunatic. Remember, the left said that words matter. Then they proved it. They have been incessant in proclaiming Trump as an existential threat to democracy as we know it, as in, empowering unelected bureaucrats. So is it any surprise that two crazy lefties have made assassination plans and attempts? And they have help. Even the AJC grooms their letters to emphasize the leftist meme that Trump can only be believed when what he says can be twisted in support of their "existential threat" lies. They love to mention Trump and Hitler in the same rant, though it is highly unlikely any have read Mein Kampf. They've not read the Constitution either, at least not the part that comes before the amendments, or they'd know Trump is going to be no more, nor any less, of an autocrat than the current president. 

What is impressive is how entrenched the left is in media, academia and think tanks. It's not just the aforementioned grooming done by news outlets, or the antisemitism raging across academia, but a BBC interview with an employee of the Carnegie Institute was, frankly, brazen. Ostensibly the "expert" was given airtime to discuss the need for greater Secret Service security after the second assassin came after Trump. She, Rachel Kleinfeld, would have none of it, pivoting quickly to blaming Trump because he is the root cause of inflammatory rhetoric. So she says. It was like the scene from Jaws where the two boys get caught with the cardboard shark fin. You know the one, where one boy points to the other and says "he made me do it."  But it seems to be working, and they seem to be winning. How do we know? Just look at who's getting shot at.

Where Were You?

This is a party game: where were you when <fill in the blank> happened? You know, like 9/11, the shuttle disaster, the Kennedy assassinations, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, or the fall of Saigon (or Kabul). But that's not today's diatribe. Today's question is put to the Fourth Estate: where were you, where the hell have you been and what have you been doing?

The AJC, given cover by the Grey Lady, is spilling ink ostensibly editorializing that Biden should step aside because of sudden onset age. Yep, he's an overnight octagenarian. To hear these two pontificate you'd think Biden went from the vim and vinegar of a mid-life crisis (he does own a Corvette) to full blown old-age senility. And the Fourth Estate? Well, they didn't see that coming. Really? 

To be kind, the AJC opinion piece is filled with merde de cheval, and predictably so, as it is consistent with previous behavior. By headline this is billed as a call for Biden to step aside. For the good of the country, wink, wink. But, as they always have, they digressed into a hit piece on Trump. This harped on the only thing the debate offered: CNN fact checkers accuse Trump of thirty prevarications. Not noted by the AJC are Biden's nine lies or his long history of a strained relationship with the truth. Not that one liar is better than another, but in their partisanship it seems the editorial board would have you believe one, their one, is better. Their argument against Trump is nonsensical and arrogant. Nonsensical in that they characterize their enemy as a pathological liar yet quote him suggesting those quotes are gospel truths. Arrogant in that they believe, and expect us to believe, that they are somehow the sole arbiters of truth, when all they really have is what we all have: an opinion. 

But they simply could not leave bad enough alone, they had the chutzpah to bring up George Washington's "farewell address," specifically in regards to partisanship. The AJC editorial staff is unashamedly leftist, AKA Democrat, and they are unrelenting in bashing Republicans. Exclusively. This is an Orwellian level of propaganda born of intense hubris. They claim to be our source of real news, of objective information, yet their leftward tilt leads them into biased reporting replete with misleading language and disinformation. 

And if we are to believe they are so damned knowledgeable how could they be blindsided? How could it be that they were surprised? Or, maybe they weren't. Maybe they knew all along, after all, anyone watching the D-Day ceremonies witnessed this same senility on parade. If they didn't know they should have. Either way they have violated a public trust and maybe, just maybe, they are the ones who have finally stepped aside.

Me-Oh, My-Oh, What About Ohio?

Due to Biden's incredible debate performance, Democratic movers and shakers are doing more shaking than moving, and any movement is in the direction of "anyone but Biden." And they don't even know who to replace him with.

Then there are the actual logistics. This is where Ohio comes in. See, Ohio had a nomination deadline for a candidate to appear on the ballot, and that deadline was before the Democrat's convention where Biden would formally become the nominee. Now some are saying that if Biden drops out, the delegates would be able to vote their conscience for a replacement. Problem is, the Democrats have already held a virtual nominating convention to ordain Biden in advance of the Ohio deadline. This makes Biden the official, the legal nominee, making the convention itself a charade.

If, and it is a big if, the DNC plays by the rules, their rules, it would fall to the DNC to select Biden's replacement. How democratic is that?

Infant Mortality

HR 836 is likely to never make it out of committee, and is probably just flag waving by the resolution's sponsor, pandering to a specific constituency. It proposes to enshrine abortion rights into the state's constitution by way of an amendment. A well crafted amendment would probably pass, even in Georgia, but this resolution borders on nonsense. 

The language is politically correct avoiding any mention of female, male, woman or man, referring instead to "individuals," dodging the wrath of the biological science deniers but somehow making it appear as if some issue is being avoided. The sponsor takes the most extreme position of unrestricted abortion. This avoids the "viability" battle line, which is constantly moving against the abortion supporters, also avoiding the arbitrary "this many weeks" restrictions. It makes you wonder what limit would be acceptable. Crowning? Cut the cord? Pass the APGAR? Should the state set the minimum score? Sound extreme? So does avoiding the discussion altogether.

One topic absent from all abortion rights advocacy is the notion of "Y-Rights." He (let's be biologically correct rather than politically correct) gets no say, certainly no supremacy, for example no one supporting abortion supports the right for the man to unilaterally determine the pregnancy must be terminated. Where is the Equal Rights Amendment when you need it? Or, if that's a right not available to Y-Guys, how about allowing them to permanently, completely and irrevocably terminate the relationship, without cost, penalty, or responsibility. It is, after all, the woman's choice. 

Does this all sound ludicrous? Yes, it does. Why? Because it is. But right now that is where we are, with little but nonsense coming from pontificators on both sides of the issue, an issue that will not be resolved until they sit down, shut up and let adults discuss this like adults. Don't hold your breath.

Fighting Liberty

Nope. Did not forget a word in the title and certain not "for." This is about shenanigans under the gold dome, specifically a senate bill to impose an outright, state-wide ban on ranked-choice voting. Proposed by Republicans and passing on party lines, but only because it was paired with changes to undermine the office of the Secretary of State. Otherwise, it would have had overwhelming bi-partisan support. Why? Because ranked-choice threatens the power duopoly held by the Democrats and Republicans. What state senator wants that? The bill's sponsor claims, without any supporting evidence, that ranked-choice can lead to "danger and chaos." Clearly a politician, not a statesman.

What would a statesman say? Fortunately we have access to what a statesman actually did say, foretelling and forewarning, George Washington offered his guidance to those who came after.  

 In reference to political parties, Washington observes:

One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. 

And further:

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

Doesn't that seem prescient?

Back to ranked-choice voting, the bill's sponsor, a Republican who is clearly targeting Raffensperger, because the sponsor questions the integrity of the polls, intends to codify a run-off system that guarantees more exposure, rather than less, to that which he faults. 

Washington was right and we should take heed.

It's Working

Bidenomics. It is most certainly working. Just not the way Bidenphiles want.

Not A Dime's Worth Of Difference

Or just two sides of the same coin. 

From the senile side we get "just another way of saying restoring the American dream."  Sounds familiar in a bumper-sticker kind of way, now doesn't it? It's a lot like what we've been getting from the crazy side with "make America great again." Both rooted in nostalgia, looking back while claiming to move forward with one aligned with self-proclaimed "progressives." 

Do we really have two major political parties? Really? Is senile and crazy really the best they can put on offer? Outside of party extremists is there anyone who still thinks ranked voting is a bad idea?

Are You Ready For Some Football!??!

Watching the boob toob has become more confusing than ever. Scientists are cautioning against going normal with the head scientist over at the CDC over-riding her own scientists because her science is more potent. And yet...football, high school, college, pro-s, it doesn't matter are in full-bore, packed stadium, maskless, screaming hordes. Obviously football has a the Iron Dome of CoVid running at full power.

So what's up with that?

It IS odd. A year ago games were being cancelled. #COVID. Those that weren't played to cardboard cutouts. Restaurants were going away, or going curbside. All queues, indoors or out, were at six foot spacing. Masks for all. And that was just with CoVid which hit our shores in early 2020.

Fast forward. The Delta variant, more transmissible than the original and impacting younger cohorts more severely. Yes, there is a vaccine, but death rates are rising. Hospitals are filling again though the truth leaks out that it isn't ALL, or even a majority, CoVid. But by all measures, including the usual pockets of hysteria, all things CoVid are as bad as a year ago. But not for football. Stadia are packed. Popping the Mercedes Benz eyeball constitutes "ourdoor" and no one is mentioning the crowds at the restrooms or the concessionaires. 

So what's the REAL difference? Well, if you look to who is still screaming about the gloom and doom, of inadequate vaccination rates, or necessity of booster shots, that would be the same folks who last year were positioned on one side of the great political divide and well, inertia. Football, and football fans in particular, could care less about political posturing. THEY are ready for some football. And that is exactly what they're going to get. #RATINGS.

Follow The Facts

Really? Who needs facts when we have "science" to follow? Well that would be anyone who wants to remain in touch with reality. A reality comprised of facts.

For a powerful example we need look no further than the CDC hosted right here in DeKalb County. Don't wear masks. Wear masks. Wear two masks. Don't wear masks. Following the science seems to be a dodgy business.  And when it comes to dodgy the CDC is king of the hill.

We have them overstepping their bounds, their stated mission of research and scientific inquiry to become a policy engine issuing unauthorized regulations. Regulations now found to be illegal. 

And they've abandoned science in favor of politics. It seems the CDC now works for a union, the American Federation of Teachers and their union boss Randi Weingarten. Recently the AFT has called for the CDC to carve out special "science" for operating schools the way the AFT wants them operated, and no surprise at added cost. Before that the AFT was literally dictating to the CDC the specific language for CDC reports. 

If a rational creature were to follow the actual facts the conclusion would not be to defund the police but to defund the CDC which is clearly not doing science but is doing much public harm.

It Worked

You're probably wondering, what, if anything, during these trying times has worked. Fair enough. But it should come as no surprise that what has worked is a government deception, with a local news outlet declaring that a Sandy Springs restaurant had "opted out" of the local mask ordinance.  Now you're wondering how that is a deception. Well, it is the same as it was when Sandy Springs, and Dunwoody rolled out their local ordinance with a sign requirement if you did not opt in as required by the Governor's Executive Order. Driven by a desire to provide cover to profiteers it was crafted to mislead. 

But it was unadulterated crap from the get go. Just look at the signage requirements. Text, font and size are government diktat. But, whatever idiot came up with this dropped the ball. They did not diktat the color nor the color of the paper allowing anyone who wants to resist government over-reach to simply print the required signage in black ink on black paper, perhaps misleading some to think it is a BLM virtue signal. The sign ordinance from Dunwoody was nothing but political posturing, just like a mayor blathering on about CoVid and schools, or CoVid vaccines, neither of which are in her purview. And if there were any doubt masks are political one simply needs to note that after the election Democrats behave no differently than Republicans and have apparently stashed their masks in that junk drawer alongside their pussy hats. 

Snail Mail Voting

The only folks who think mail voting is a good idea are those made in the mold of Stacey Abrams who need fodder for their pontifications and lawsuits. Keep in mind that when voter registration was available using technology ensuring completion of the forms it was Abrams' groups that insisted on paper. Why? Because when these were incomplete and/or incorrect they immediately became evidence of malfeasance and voter suppression. At least in their minds. 

And so it will go with USPS mailed ballots. These are sure to get lost, misdirected or delivered too late. And the very same twits that advocate this mechanism will pounce, screaming discrimination and abuse. And how can we be certain? Easy. Even without the sudden flood of millions of ballots the USPS seems to be incompetent at their only job: delivery. Below is a screen capture of their tracking of a car part shipped from Jacksonville FL to Dunwoody GA. Somehow once arriving in the A-T-L it was routed by the twits' choice to San Francisco. Yep, that's right, the folks who invented the ZIP code apparently cannot figure out how to use them. 

San Fran: Shortest Distance Between ATL and Dunwoody

Now, given the current political climate and (non)support for the USPS coming out of DC it is entirely believable that some ballots might be more likely to get "misplaced" than others. But Abrams isn't likely to ever bring that up. No matter who wins, if the USPS is involved in ballot security the loser will claim a corruption that invalidates the vote.

Dereliction Of Duty

This is a sordid tale of politics over service, personal interest over common good with a healthy dose of negligence and incompetence. Despite having occurred over a brief time the telling takes a bit.

It all began with SARS-CoV2 and the (under/over)reactions by politicians to the spread of the virus and the impact of COVID19 which in Georgia quickly turned into a Blue vs Red pissing contest. Dunwoody's mayor just could not keep her nose to the grindstone and do her job.

When this started those knowledgeable in all things disease made policy recommendations suggesting actions the Dunwoody mayor chose NOT to take. Actions some would later characterize as "taking a stand" and one can guess this inaction was out of political considerations or perhaps standing with and listening to certain voices.

Bear in mind that at this point in time the Governor had deferred to local authorities, including this city, to take actions in their communities that would protect their community in the way they determine are best suited to local conditions. Sounds like "local control," doesn't it? Did Dunwoody's mayor take action? Exert local control? Show leadership?

Nope.

Instead, she had to join the political hashtag flash mob of mayors screaming for the state to step in, to take actions requiring courage and leadership lacking in these mayors.  And of course, take any associated political heat. Dunwoody's mayor took to media to disparage the governor because of, in her opinion, his reluctance to take a stand.

And then he did, relieving any political pressure she might receive from her business constituency. But the Governor, who is responsible to all of Georgia, made good on his promise to craft an executive order covering the state in its entirety and with uniformity. As city leaders had clearly demonstrated reluctance to act when given the chance, his executive order did not allow them to now that his order was in effect. And it remains in effect.

Some mayors, ours included, took issue with that, and free of political liability began advocating for the passage of local mandates exceeding the Governor's. Dunwoody passed an ordinance mandating masks and it is worth noting it was not a unanimous vote. Shortly after Dunwoody approved this illegal ordinance the Governor updated his executive order making it clear to even the densest local politicians that any city's ordinance not aligned with his executive order was illegal. Hard Stop.

Our mayor's reaction? Quick to twitter she proclaimed the Governor's action "incredibly sad for my community and Georgia." She then accused the Governor of politicizing your health, exhibiting hypocrisy that knows no bounds.

But there is a greater context than even a pandemic. This city is operationally in shambles. The police department is a public disgrace. The city openly, willingly violates its own ordinances. It has established agencies that serve not the public but are mere tools of powerful business interests. While Dunwoody's mayor was busying herself with issues beyond her ken she was ignoring her actual responsibilities. While she was distracted by her hashtag flash mobs she was supposed to be appointing a charter commission member as the city charter is up for review, and frankly given recent performance should be up for revocation. But the mayor was just too busy.

And how does this all stack up? Well, for the most part it is signalling and it is signalling something far from virtuous. Our mayor leads a city flagrantly ignoring city ordinances signally total disrespect for rule of their own law. Further undermining the rule of law, the mayor pitches a hissy fit when the Governor doesn't meet with her approval and then she advocates illegal and frankly unenforceable ordinances in a city known for lax enforcement of unprofitable infractions. Perhaps that is why she set her fines so high. And really, how would it be enforced? Skip through pages of "WHEREAS" and you'll find a definition of face covering you could comply with by wearing a bridal veil. Is she really claiming this is more important than delivering on a well-known, long standing deadline? Is this incompetence on display? Is it negligence? Regardless of the underlying pathology it is dereliction of duty.

So what should this mayor do? She would not lead; she will not follow; she must get out of the way. She must step down. Let someone with demonstrated intellect, exhibiting logical, rational thought and who has a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of governments step in and do the right thing and do that thing the right way.

The Best Sanitizer

Not Lysol. Not Purell. Not bleach. It's sunshine. In politics it is not just the best, it is often the only option. 

In DeKalb we are in a unique limbo. Voters approved a strong measure to establish an ethics commission to help eradicate long standing corruption in local government. With so many politicians imprisoned and indicted the need is clear but by the same token the corruption is deeply entrenched with no intention of going quietly. The legal limbo surrounding appointments offers the a chance to gut the commission effectively ensuring that past political hijinks continue unabated. That there weapon of choice is a lie, the labeling of the commission lead as "judge, jury and executioner," suggests that before sanitizing we will need a good hard scrubbing at the ballot box.

DeKalb Wins!

With the new taxes on the books DeKalb's tax reduction and Dunwoody's most recent in a never-ending series of tax hikes are in unflattering juxtaposition.  The unavoidable conclusion is that our taxes would be lower than they are now had a new city not been thrust upon us. And the natives are increasingly restless with more voices raised in a chorus of "this is not what we were promised when they asked for our vote."

A Problem With Higher Ed

Actually it is a problem with how folks, who pose as reasonably intelligent, view higher ed. Christopher Quinn of the AJC hits the nail on head with this pearl of wisdom:

There are many reasons people quit [college]. Personal and family problems interfere, an immediate need for money pushed back long-term goals, the fear of debt and lack of hope that the degree will pay off in more income discourages others. 

Notice anything missing? That's right. There is no mention whatsoever that some folk may not be capable of college-level work. But how could that happen? Why would any college or university offer entry to anyone who could not be reasonably expected to perform to a level required to complete the program?

Money. And if that is not enough, then there is political correctness around race and diversity. At then end of the day that really just boils down to money.

Academia has inflated quite the bubble. There are too many colleges and universities with far too many subscribing to a "grow or die" business model, driving towards tuition-driven models with little or no concern for anything resembling academic integrity. Or any other form of integrity for that matter. And as much as some like to make political hay from the HOPE program, injecting more government money is like putting out a tire fire with kerosene.

As long as colleges and universities have no skin in the game, and currently they are paid just as much to create academic failure as success, this problem will continue to grow. We could require that all public college and universities drop all remediation programs, forcing them to use tools, readily available, to ensure that those admitted earn a mortar board without the institution becoming a tax fueled diploma mill. While this will have immediate impact on their revenue, even that is not enough. The next step is ensure that academic institutions carry some financial risk associated with the "it's an investment" myth of higher ed. Such a restorative revolution could happen, just not in today's political climate and entitlement society.

New Censorship

The anger from last year's stunning electoral upset still resonates throughout parts of America with current aftershocks around the epicenter of "The Russians Are Coming!" The narrative suggests that Hillary lost because Russian operatives used new media to disseminate Russian propaganda intended to influence the election. In some bubbles it is the only acceptable explanation for the resounding defeat of the Democrats' Heir Apparent.

And they must be punished.

Some have taken a direct approach, calling for social media platforms to police users according to a provided agenda much like mainstream media curates letters to the editor. Vox Populi is lifeblood of populism who, with her sister nationalism, is not goose-stepping to the New World Order. Others have called for an end to anonymity, not because it unleashes inner angers but because it allows creation of false and apparently credible personas. That this comes from the political wing heavily supported by Hollywood actors and actresses is an irony (hypocrisy) lost on no one. A radical fringe has even suggested requiring proof of citizenship or national affiliation but was quickly squelched as this might silence the voices of illegal aliens. Well monied and left tilting Silicon Valley has generally said "No!" to all these efforts.

Saving face demands something be done, so the Coastals have found something politically, if not practically, possible. Restrict Russian Olde School Media, specifically RT, a Russia-based news outlet. This is a bit like limiting Al Jazeera, politically correct after Al Gore cut ties, in that it is basically political grandstanding. Having a news outlet "register as a foreign agent" is pretty meaningless since the only folks who do not know the background of RT are those who've never seen it or heard of it. Would that we had as much information about the "agency" of CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS as with RT. Would that these outlets provided news or sent their news staff to journalism school instead of clown school. [ed: different rant]

And this is a slippery slope. Who else is impacted? How about France 24? How about the BBC? After all, the dreaded disease of populism is sweeping Europe. What about Asian news outlets from India, China or Japan? They have certain unaligned nationalistic tendencies. And what are the triggers? What line must be crossed to get on their list or is that a secret? And what media? RT isn't broadcast over the air, it is streamed over the internet. Do these ivory tower elites not understand that a VPN bridges their moat? New world globalism except for the most global technology of all--the internet? Would it extend to media formats a bit newer than "television," even if streamed? What about podcasts? WSB is quite proud of theirs and make no mistake the content is well aligned with their philosophy and world view. But it is the BBC's Hard Talk podcast that offered the best, most insightful interview with Bernie Sanders, and some suggest Bernie's refusal to toe the Hillary/Party line was key in their failure.

At the end of the day we now live in a culture where the end justifies the means and when the end is popular and hash-tag fueled any means will do. Even censorship. 

Ossoff: Handel-ed

Though not nearly as bad as that fateful Wednesday when hordes of women queued up at Goodwill to drop off tear-stained blue pantsuits[1] this Tuesday's results have left them confused, angry and conflicted. Clintonistas whose argument inevitably devolved into "don't you think it is about time we had a woman president?" found themselves battling against sending the first female Republican to Congress instead supporting an ill-qualified rich white guy, a man who's money came from deceased relatives, a man who so loves the district he choses not to live here. But neither character nor logic has a place in personality, gender or party politics. Not then and certainly not now.

What of those who voted for Ossoff to "send a message"? These folks see our representative government as little more than an opportunity to raise the boy scout sign as they screech "read between the lines" to some far off unseeing, unhearing mythical foe. Are they of such an intellect or character that they can accept that a message has been sent? And that it has been sent to them? And what of the outside monied interests promoting an outsider for what is otherwise a local issue in the sovereign state of Georgia? Are they different in kind to the alleged Russian meddlers they blame for the bad press used to excuse their candidate's failure in November? Are the millions of dollars their establishment spent a projection? Does it say "Our votes in Congress are for sale, so we cannot comprehend how we cannot buy yours"? They tried. They failed. They will spin. But at least, for now, we can bask in the benign neglect these coastal elites afford the fly-overs.




[1] While you may have thought your Mexi-Maids had been issued new uniforms the fact is the second-hand market was flooded with blue pantsuits sporting only one wear, no wash and deep discounts.