Category: Current Events (Page 4 of 9)

I think I’ll weigh on the Brett Kavanaugh thing, okay? I wouldn’t do it unless I had something to say that is different from what I’ve heard in the media. It’s been talked to death, I know, but there’s something I think people are missing.

“He’s a good guy. That’s not the Brett I know,” said various classmates who have signed letters of support.

So what’s missing? Isn’t that the end of the story?

“He pushed me to the bed, placed his hand over my mouth and got on top of me, attempting to remove my clothes,” said Christine Blasey Ford. “His friend Mark Judge, kind of jumped on us knocking everybody to the floor and I was able to collect myself and escape.”

There’s a glaring difference between the two descriptions of Kavanaugh, and it’s not just one is bad and the other good.

Shifting gears a bit, I do these resume, job search, interviewing workshops for folks looking to better their job hunting skills. One of the tips I give them is to make sure your accomplishments are specific. “I was the best worker at my old job” isn’t as strong as, “I exceeded my sales quotas by 25% in four consecutive quarters” or “I was awarded with employee of the month among 40 employees for the month of July 2018.”

Those are specific achievements and tell us much more than, I was a hard worker, or I was liked, or I was a good guy.

Now do you see it?

A criminal can be a good guy. A criminal isn’t defined 24/7 by his criminal activity. Actions can be discrete. A person can rob a bank and still be a loving son and friend, a “good guy.” In fact, don’t we hear it a lot? He seemed like such a good guy, I never would have expected that type of behavior from him. It’s almost cliché.

Okay, so what’s the takeaway here? For starters, I want Mr. Kavanaugh’s resume to contain specifics. He needs to firm up his statements of “I’m a good guy” with something that demonstrates his good guyness. What are those actions that make him a good guy? Tell us more about his character? For example:

“Brett was the kind of guy that would always look out for others. Now, I know there was alcohol at these parties, and yes, Brett was there, but he was always looking out for others. If you had too much to drink, he’d make sure you were okay. Since he was on the football team and a respected leader, when he asked you for your keys, you didn’t refuse. That’s the kind of guy he was. There was this time I watched him charm the keys out of the hands of a much bigger boy. He just kind of disarmed him, didn’t embarrass him. The guy afterward acted like Brett had just done him a great favor, which he did, of course, but you know how these things can get problematic.”

Or

“I remember distinctly, this one time that Brett intervened with a girl that looked cornered by a drunk young man. He didn’t make a scene or get in a fight or anything, but just the force of his character was able to cut off the unwanted affections from the young man and usher the young woman away. He looked out for the girls, and I think he knew that some of the boys could be problematic. But that was not Brett.”

Or

“It wasn’t enough for Brett to achieve, he wanted to make sure that others did as well. In addition to the service hours that were required by the high school, he went out of his way to establish study sessions, giving of his limited free time between football and basketball practice to make sure that his classmates were not falling behind. When we say he was a good guy, that’s what we mean. He didn’t just stick to his achievements, he wanted everyone to achieve. If you look at the class as a whole, you will notice that Brett’s class had a higher average GPA than classes before and after. I can’t prove it, but I think it had something to do with Brett.”

But I ain’t heard none of that. Not even a peep, other than “That’s not the Brett I know” or “He’s a good guy.” All I hear is the stories of a paper tiger, an entitled douchbag who has managed to keep his head down and maintain the status quo for his entire life, checking the boxes, being a generically “good guy” in the same way that white men who occupy high positions have gotten passes for decades – just on the strength of their outwardly normative behavior.

Let’s be clear. There are specific allegations against him. Those specific allegations cannot be dismissed by “That’s not the Brett I know.” If you want to portray Brett’s character, you’re going to have to come up with some specific stories of that demonstrate that character.

UPDATE (Later this same day – I swear I’m not making this up): Well, shit, Brett, you don’t seem like a good guy AT ALL.

I’ll be offline probably for a couple of weeks if past hurricanes and storms are any indication. Maria looks to be heading directly for us like a freight train, and I don’t think we’re gonna be able to slip this one. We will probably have no water or electricity for a while.

I think we’ll be okay, though. The island will be mostly okay too. That is, the people are resilient and of good humor. When confronted with human need, I think most people rise to the occasion. The people of Puerto Rico seem to excel at having a generous spirit. Maybe it comes from not having a lot. I don’t know, exactly, but sometimes it’s the people with the least that are the most generous. I think it’s a learned thing.

Most everyone here has concrete houses and the topology is rather mountainous. We don’t get deep storm surge like in Florida or the Gulf Coast. It’s still super deadly near the water though, and tons of small businesses, mom and pop diners, stores, gas stations, hardware and furniture stores and assortments of small offices will probably go under. The crushing poverty in oppressed communities will get worse. The struggling owners of a small business that were probably just making do, will now throw in the towel, leaving their boarded up locale to collect mosquitos and rats.

But us personally? We’ll be okay, and I’ll check in again when things are less hectic.

*update note – haha, María was WAY worse than we thought. This post is laughable in hindsight 🙁

“It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all the wealth of the world was originally purchased; and its value, to those who possess it, and who want to exchange it for some new productions, is precisely equal to the quantity of labour which it can enable them to purchase or command.” – Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations

We all know that Adam Smith is the little darling of the fundamentalist right and their form of free market extreme capitalism, but isn’t it interesting that he sees people as the very embodiment of wealth.

When immigrants come to America’s shores, they do not belittle its stature, they raise it, magnify it, enrich it. It’s simple supply and demand, folks. You want a rich nation, you need people. They (the countries of the world) are practically giving them away at bargain basement prices. Snap them up while you can!

President Trump thinks that the Federal Government is too intrusive, that big projects can’t be done cheaply and rapidly in our modern era. He cited today, The Golden Gate Bridge, The Hoover Dam, and The Empire State Building as models for his new era of rapid, quality, and unencumbered by permits type of construction.

The Golden Gate Bridge – 11 fatalities in construction on an unknown quantity of workers – the rule of thumb in the 1930s was to expect 1 fatality for every $1 million spent.

The Hoover Dam – 96 fatalities in construction 3000+ workers for a rate of  3200/100,000 workers

Empire State Building – 6 fatalities in construction with 3000+ workers for a rate of 200/100,000 workers

By contrast in 2015 the industry average for construction was, 12.5 per 100,000.

But yeah, sure, let’s go back to the 1930s where we could throw up an environmental disaster like the Hoover Dam, pay poor wages to workers who risked life and limb and were killed at a rate of around 136x of what we enjoy with modern OSHA standards.

Let’s try an exercise. In this exercise, you are forbidden from engaging in a discussion with someone from an oppositional political viewpoint unless you can effectively make their argument using their logic (or better if you’re feeling generous).

I’ll start.

Headlines from today’s news cycle:

“The majority of Americans think Trump fired Comey to slow the Russia investigation”

This is a commonly used logical fallacy that makes an appeal to the people (argumentum ad populum), and has no bearing upon what the truth is. This headline would be made effective if it actually showed proof that Trump fired Comey because of an investigation. Until you have such proof, why don’t you shut your idiot mouth? The news media knows that this headline will whip people up and offers exactly zero substance. If you want to be the party of science, of rational thought, why don’t you lead with your actions? Shame on you, liberals.

How did I do? Okay next.

Comey Is Said to Have Become Unsettled by Interactions With Trump

Innuendo. Where is your proof? In the absence of proof, you are resorting to an implication without actually providing a definitive statement. Are you giving yourself wiggle-room for later denial? “Comey is said to have…” By whom? Some aide? Who is this aide? Credible source? If it’s a credible source, then say, “Credible source Provides Evidence of Improper Behavior by Trump.” As a detail, you can also provide evidence of Comey’s discomfort. Video of him avoiding eye contact? The awkward hug/handshake. haha.

I can’t believe the New York Times let’s its reporters get away with such a lazy piece.  And I’m just attacking the method, not actually trying to articulate the worldview of a Trump supporter or “scandal denier.” I think it comes from the same place as climate denial, so let me lay it out and see if I get some of it right.

Let’s assume Trump is a blowhard. We know he is. He comes from the tough New York real estate and construction world. Stuff gets done because you push, sometimes aggressively for your interests and your project at hand. Trump seems to have proven himself somewhat adept at this. By all accounts he is rich, and has built and developed some high end properties. He’s had some ups. He’s had some downs. But he keeps trying, and he’s come back from some pretty heavy blows.

America loves a tenacious scrapper who gets back up.

You voted for him because you perceived him as a tough guy who could get things done. You didn’t necessarily like him nor would you leave him alone with your daughter, but you thought he was YOUR tough guy and he would advocate for you and correct the perceived slouch of America toward being a global also ran.

People on the right, are you with me so far?

Now, Trump is in the White House, and there’s a guy Michael Flynn who is being investigated for some money ties to Russia. Yeah, Trump knew going in that this could be a problem, but he liked Flynn’s moxie. Here was a guy who also talked and acted tough and knew how to deal with the Russians. Let’s go forward. There is this holdover director of the FBI James Comey who is mucking about. You know the truth, and you don’t see the problem with Flynn’s ties to Russia. It’s not like he was a traitor or something. For Pete’s sake he was a lieutenant general (three stars, count ’em) in the U.S. Army. He didn’t get to that level for being a traitor. His resume is unimpeachable. He’s got the best interests of the U.S. at stake, and wouldn’t it be nice to deal effectively with the Russians? Trump thinks he’s a safe pick.

Obama didn’t like him? Even better.

Trump knows the facts, but the FBI director is still “investigating.” We’ve all seen how he “investigates” with leak after leak after innuendo all the while eroding confidence. Trump keeps him around to see if he shapes up, but he’s keeping watch. Comey did it to Hillary, and he will do it to Trump, because he’s only loyal to himself. He’s a grandstander, a showboater. Trump knows he’s done no wrong, so he assumes the “investigation” is only there to get him.

Let me ask you, those of you on the left, if you were being “investigated” or attacked for something you know you didn’t do, wouldn’t you shut it down if you could? If you knew the person doing the investigating was actively trying to undermine you, your cabinet, the American Government, and acting in all other ways in bad faith, wouldn’t you want to do something about it? From Trump’s point of view, he’s an innocent victim. Flynn too. Comey’s the enemy of the law and order, the very thing he pledged to uphold.

Now, those of you on the right, do you feel fairly represented by my take on your positions? I could tear it all down if I wanted, but I’d rather have you make the left’s case for why Trump is bad for America.

Only conservatives need reply.

Jimmy Kimmel is getting some flack from Republicans for his tearful plea to leave the Affordable Care Act alone. Here’s a choice quote. I’m not making this up:

Sorry Jimmy Kimmel: your sad story doesn’t obligate me or anybody else to pay for somebody else’s health care.

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) May 2, 2017

Do supposedly smart people know how the healthcare system worked/works in this country? Forget that. Do these people know how insurance works?

You all pay into a pot and then when somebody gets sick you draw from the pot. Everybody puts in a little, and that goes to pay for OTHER PEOPLE’S care. For God’s sake, folks, it’s not that hard. You don’t pay for your own healthcare – you never did – under the old system, under the new system. NEVER. You think your little monthly employee/employer health insurance deduction covers your cancer? Try doing the math. You’re not paying into your own personal fund.

Why would it better to pool our risk at the Federal Government level instead of with private companies? Well, now that’s a decent question. The best answer I can come up with is that profit has a tendency to distort the market for certain demand locked (inelastic) markets. Bottom line, you need some ER treatment, you can’t price shop. You need it when you need it, and with certain exceptions (like waiting until you’re critical to go to the hospital), you don’t really have much choice over where you go, how much you pay, and what care you get. Everybody wants the best. Everybody wants it now. It’s your life. If you let a private corporation enter into the equation with a profit motive, they have an incentive to reduce supply of quality healthcare and increase price. They try cheaper treatments before more effective ones. They limit what they cover (preexisting conditions), they raise prices and co-pays so that you will not select that treatment or perhaps not even go to the doctor.

That sounds like a bureaucracy run amok or even better, it sounds like a death panel – a private, monopolistic, beholden to no one except their shareholders death panel.

If, however, healthcare is run as a public service with the profit motive removed, we can at least see how it might reduce costs while still providing effective services.

And as a side benefit, do you have any idea how much of the healthcare industry is dedicated to billing? Let doctors and nurses do their work – the work they were trained to do, the work they like to do, and leave the billing, chasing invoices, collections, and dealing with insurance companies behind.

At the end of the day though, you have always been paying for other people’s healthcare. Wouldn’t you like to pay less?

It’s surprising how the Internet seems to be in the midst of beatifying Fidel Castro. “Oh, he brought justice to his people.” Or “He battled the American hegemony for 50 years! Good for him!” “He brought health care and literacy to his people while being oppressed by the U.S.” “He threw out the wretched oligarchs, and put the wealth of his nation into the hands of the common people!”

Oh, well, yeah, his people could read and write. They just couldn’t read or write what they wanted. Sarcasm mode on. But yeah sure the people were generally happy, because they had simple meaningful lives toiling in a worker’s paradise pulling together for national pride while waddling around in their 1950s era USSR sugar subsidized cars.

Oh please, Internet. Your hypocrisy is showing.

Aren’t you the same assholes who hate – no scratch that – loath Comcast, the same company that has the audacity to cap you at 1000 Gigabytes of data per MONTH!!! Oh, the humanity! Those bastards, those evil corporate scum, how dare they restrict my freedom to download porn 24/7. Comcast consistently finds itself at the top of most hated companies in America. The same company that brings broadband to your house so you can surf the web in your underwear and binge-watch House of Cards, is more hated than Fidel Castro?

What?

Fidel Castro wouldn’t even let his people access computers? He capped their connection at zero. No data for you. Only worker’s paradise.

The next four years will be marked with payback, purges, and bullying. That’s my take, anyway.

How could the US have had two elections since 2000 go against the popular vote?

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, please hang on for four more years. Please!

Please President Trump, do not guild the White House with gold.

…Or destroy the world in WWIII. Yeah, no destroying, please. That would be bad.