During the time of Covid, governments on all levels eagerly grasped powers far beyond any degree of reasonableness.  Governors acted like dictators, issuing edicts and executive actions unrestrained by any form of check and balances.  The result was a loss of personal freedom for the average citizen which can never be fully undone.  That abuse of power was a disaster and most often, not founded any “science” despite the claims of the politicians.

After the pandemic however, other politicians decided to test the limits of their power in ways that were often, far worse than the abuse by governors.  An example of this was a bill passed in California by the Democratic super-majority, which limited the ability of physicians and others to disagree with any form of “approved” science.  While claiming to “follow the science”, the State Assembly of California threatened to “unlicensed” any physician who did not adhere to the official line on science.  It was unclear who exactly determined what that official line was, what it was based on, or how it was to be communicated. 

Given the record of false science that we experienced during the time of Covid, and the harm that such false science inflicted on all levels to individuals and the economy, what safeguard was in place to insure that there would not be any repeat of the erroneous directives from the individual, individuals or group that was to decide and bless the sanctified, official science?  Would there at least be a grace period so that the soon to be neutered physicians, for example, could adjust their advice to their patients  and were they officially freed from their Hippocratic Oath?

The more one thinks on the subject, the more one must be in awe at the nerve, the sheer chutzpah of the body of legislatures who could pass such a law. Fortunately a recent court decision has deal a blow to the egos and inflated sense of intelligence possessed by the State of California legislatures and the State Governor who so enjoy issuing literally hundreds of proclamations during the time of Covid.  I invite you to use the link below to read the story of the Courts’ decision which is a decision of freedom of thought and action.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-loses-on-medical-censorship-gavin-newsom-doctors-coivd-misinformation-pandemic-medical-board-11675024552?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

I must admit that I am reluctant to post this link as the subject covers numerous actions by governmental officials which I find personally disgusting.  But, we need to be aware of the laws and the impact of the laws have on so many of our fellow citizens.  Thanks to the actions of our lawmakers, prostitution, sex trafficking, rape, drug dealing, pimping, and more will be easier to commit.  The first rule of any law should be: will it make the lives of our citizens better and easier? Somehow, this rule never seems to enter the minds of so many governmental officials.

Unfortunately, we have politicians who either are openly evil (yes, I did write that moral statement) or stupid which is easier to believe.  They either are more concerned about the 1-5% of the population they represent or simply do not give a damn about the other 95-99% of humanity.  While they may pass laws that seem to satisfy their perceived version of reality, they seem to remain woefully ignorant of the rest of society and humanity. 

How is it that single individuals can wield such power?  Is that individual amazingly brilliant or at least more intelligent than others?  Is their rhetoric so convincing?  Or are they simple surrounded by fools and buffoons who are so cut off from the realities of the concept of cause and effect that they have no concept of the consequences of their actions?  I have to say, that as we seem to have a professional political class which has little contact with those they claim to represent, it must be the latter.  Our politicians by and large, do not have any idea what it is like not to have a free car which has free fuel, who are provided security at no cost and who have little if any accountability. Seldom if ever do they deal as you in the everyday world without a staff of highly paid sycophants who commend their every utterance.  You, the average citizen are left to deal with the policies they create which cost you tax dollars, which lower the quality of your living, which degrade the city in which you live and which make your life more difficult.

The attached article is about the direction that California is going, but believe me, if history is any indicator, it may be the direction for your town, city, state, etc.

https://www.city-journal.org/predators-paradise

Above is the title of a column in the New York Times (really) by Jesse Singal, who has been labeled a “woke-skeptical progressive” by the editor of The American Conservative who published another of Mr. Singal’s articles, DEI Training: Harmful, Phony and Expensive.

In the two articles (sorry I cannot provide a link to the NYT article at this time), the author points out that there are no studies that show such “training” (otherwise known as propaganda) is of any value.  In effect, businesses are spending billions on useless classes while hoping to starve off lawsuits from activist and wishing that such dollars might buy them some good will.  Such classes have spawned lawsuits against the companies by some of the forced participants.

The problem with DEI is that it comes decades too late and is hardly equitable.  Firstly, by the time any rational human being enters the workspace, his/her family, educational, and social experiences have set them up with a certain mind set.  They may think of themselves as fair individuals or as victims, as openminded or as having a firm set of opinions on any given topic. Individuals may or may not change as they progress in life, as they interact with individuals with different backgrounds, religions, political views, etc. but few respond well to forced self-examination. It use to be called “brain-washing”.

Secondly, such courses do not foster equity for they are one sided.  They act as a gun aimed at one group of participants and any attempt by one of those participants to object or offer a counter opinion only leads for further accusations. In effect that individual is singled out as an example of someone who does not even realize how incorrect is their outlook on life. No one wants to be a poster boy for the negative whether deserved or not.

In effect, one group of people who have their lives guided by such ideals or rules like importance of being on time, or good spelling, believing one plus one always equals two, etc., are seen as the worse kind of individuals.  By respecting the yes, “rules” of a successful society, they are labeled as the worse type of person. Is there any wonder that they sit there, put in their required time, and then walk away perhaps being harder in their attitude than before?

Please right click on the block below and click on “open link in new window” for access to the article in The American Conservative. Here is a rational voice in the wilderness but let us hope they are only the first in what shall be a growing tide. 

The fact that this book was published in 2015 made it that much more attractive to me. Here was an opportunity to learn more about robots but more importantly, it was an opportunity to see how accurate an author and techie who has been involved in the computer industry for twenty years could be with his projections and forecasts.  I found unfortunately, that the field of robotics has moved in many areas, even faster than he predicted, while in other areas, he was right on target. 

In chapter and verse, Mr. Ford lays out specific areas of human industry and demonstrates how the robotic industry is developing answers as to how to replace humans with devastating effect. While we think of how the auto industry has been revolutionized by robots, we forget the lost jobs in the industry and don’t draw a conclusion about other industries. Think again!

While the initial reaction to a computer besting Garry Kasparov in chess was shock, after a while it seemed almost expected as people began to understand that it was a matter of programing the computer with a finate set of options.  What is more difficult for the human mind to accept however, is that we ourselves with our rational ability and physical dexterity might be replaceable.  Could a mundane yet physically demanding job which requires judgment on physical actions be done by a robot? Look at an Amazon warehouse; acres of shelving, reaching stories high hold thousands of items in different sizes, shapes, colors, etc.  Busy worker bees race around on scooters or roller skates, picking items for orders.  Each order might consist of one item or fifteen widely separated items, it is a bookkeeping and inventory bowl of spaghetti. Is it possible to replace a human who can make on the spot adjustments in stacking pulled items so that the pile of orders does not topple over in transit and create a roadblock to other workers.  The answer is yes; robots have been designed and are currently in use who can read the order, follow the map of the warehouse to the shelves for the goods, physically pick the correct item no matter its shape, size, or location, stack it the transportation vehicle, adjust each box so they fit the most efficient and take it to the next step.  Robots cannot only do the job, they can do it faster, more efficiently and at a lower cost than a human worker.  No more taking breaks, bathroom time, meals, vacations, etc. while not needing costly dental or medical coverage and they can work non-stop for a full twenty-four hours with minimal maintenance.

What other human jobs might robots be able to perform in the future?  How about fast food preparation, dispensing of medicines at pharmacies, operations on humans, medical diagnosis in a manner that is faster and based on more information than any doctor alive can possess, elder-care for the elderly, self-driving autos to replace manned taxi services, defending our nation by flying jets faster and in such a way that a human pilot would die, writing sports columns, etc., the list literally goes on and on.  Oh wait, those examples above are already being done by robots.  After all, why would you pay a pharmacist over one-hundred thousand dollars a year for eight hours of work when you can have a robot do the same job on a 24/7 basis?  In short, there are few jobs currently done by humans than cannot and will not be done by robots.

While there will be benefits to such a move, it will simply displace and make unemployable literally tens of millions of humans. A leader of China once said that his first though in the morning was “Today 60,000 new Chinese children will be born; what jobs will they have in eighteen years?”.  If he were to have that same thought today, his answer would give him more of a headache.  Where will tomorrows young people learn the basics of being on time, teamwork and a sense of self-worth when working at a fast-food restaurant, big-box store or the dog walking service will be taken over by robots?  Try to think of some job or profession which eventually cannot be replaced by robotics.  Car mechanic?  Autos today are run by computer and many times rather than repair a part, the old one is pulled out and the replacement can be plugged in. If that is the case today, imagine the mechanics job in five or ten years.  The list goes on and on.

In effect, much of this book is an argument for a guaranteed income.  With the withering of jobs, millions of humans will simply be useless.  How are they to live? What will be their value?  How will they be cared for and what will they do day in and day out?  In effect, the economy as we know it today, may very well disappear.  Robots produce, but they do not consume, so the cost of production may decrease but the ability to earn an income will decrease.  Since the Capitalistic system has created so much wealth, mobility and freedom, a decrease of Capitalism will lead to a top down, decreasing economy; it has been that way in every top-down society and the trend will only accelerate in the future. 

Will our future either be something as pictured in the movie Soylent Green or in The Time Machine?  Either option is not attractive, but will we have the will and strength to avoid those options and allow future generations an opportunity to fully experience the true human condition with all its joys and pains?

I don’t know anyone who is happy with the direction of the country.  Certainly not those on the woke left who are unhappy with everything, and certainly not those on the conservative right who see the nation going along a downward path.  The latest survey I saw showed that over seventh percent of Americans were unhappy with the direction of the country and my only question was, what do the other thirty per cent see that I am missing?

The attached article offers three ideas to turn our nation around.  I certainly do not see our national leaders taking them to heart, but I do believe that each of us in our own small way can put the three ideas into action.  Growing up, I was taught to believe that anything was possible in the United States.  Who taught me that?  Adults who had grown up during the Great Depression and who knew real poverty.  Those same adults had years taken from them by World War II and millions of the survivors saw horrors that defy description. Some of those adults were survivors of death camps and gulags where the very essence of their value as individuals was brutally stripped away from them.  As I look back now, if those adults could have faith in the future, what exactly is our problem?

You may agree, you may disagree, but if we don’t begin to take positive steps at the local level, don’t be surprised when our political leaders who play to our fears do not work to change our direction. 

As Nietzsche wrote: I was in darkness, but I took three steps and found myself in paradise. The first step was a good thought, the second, a good word; and the third, a good deed.

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2023/01/fun-trumps-fear

I must admit that prior to reading this book, I had mixed thoughts about Mr. Kushner.  Was he a case of nepotism, what was his background, did he have any thoughts of his own or was he merely a puppet of the President who was his father-in-law, did he marry into the Trump family in a bid for easy wealth, and so on.  By the end of the book, admitting that it may be at times self-serving (how unusual for a political memoir), my attitude toward him turned to admiration. 

Here was an individual from outside the belt way who took on tasks which were not easy, fought against individuals with their own agendas and who did not necessarily supporting the goals of the man they worked for, the President, entered into the very real dark and self-perpetuating deep state and came out with his love of country intact, his family intact and could realize that he helped to accomplish successes where “insiders” had failed for decades. 

How was he able to accomplish anything being an outsider in the Capital.  For one, he brought a level of expertise that was missing in the Capital and the hallways of power, for rather than trying to merge into the bureaucracy and traditional power games, he brought his business sense to the table.  This means that as every businessman knows, you cannot move ahead if you do not offer a good product and work at every level to provide that product to the market.  His approach was very often one of being willing to listen.  An example is the dogma given by John Kerry that “There will be no separate peach with the Arab world without the Palestinian process and Palestinian peace.  Everybody needs to understand that.  That is a hard reality.”  Kushner realized that the same old programs with ill-defined promises had been the bedrock of Middle East discussions for decades with the same result, failure.  Instead of doing the “same old, same old”, why not do something different. It was Henry Kissinger who advised him that the foreign policy of the nation had to be run by the White House as opposed to the State Department where ideas seem to go to die. 

While Trump may have been mocked by the Germans and others when he cautioned them about relying on cheap energy from Russia, in the Middle East he was respected for his openness and willingness to be bold and speak openly.  His image played well in the area as opposed to the apology tour concept and he was willing to listen to what Arab leaders had to say in very frank discussions, including when he told them that a deal could be made but that they had to handle the terrorists in their own countries who go out and murder Israelis. No action, no deals.  The Arab leaders also liked that Kushner was the President’s son-in-law which gave creditability to his voice.  Finally, he found by listening that a major stumbling block to Middle East movement was not necessarily the Palestinians who were getting to be a burden, but rather guaranteed and safe access to the al Aqsa Mosque which was under the control of Israel.  By finding the one thing that all the Arab leaders could agree on, it enabled him, by working hard and creating a strong team, to develop and close the Abraham Accords, an action that has led to greater trade and development in the area.

The book notes some of the personalities in the administration including Tillison, Kelly, Fauci, Bolton and others in a way that allows one to read between the lines and understand his opinion without being insulting.  In each encounter, Kusher seems to better realize the difference between the government game and that of business, but he absorbs each and uses the experience to better his results.

One of the finest sections is in the episode regarding the successful strike against Soleimani.  The Iranian general had been responsible for the deaths and wounding of thousands of U.S. military personnel and Trump felt that a message needed to be sent that there was no safe ground for those who attacked Americans. The killing of Soleimani sent a strong message to the Iranian leadership and despite the threats made by that leadership, their reaction was one that was feeble at best.

Other chapters cover Operation Warp Speed, the bi-partisan passage of the First Step Act, and of course, the wasted energy over the Russian collusion investigation. 

In the end, I believe most readers will put the book down and believe that Jared Kushner, a religious and strong family man, put his best efforts into projects during that four year period.  He is proud of his accomplishments and the service he provided to the country and at the same time, it is easy to understand why he has openly stated that he would not wish to go back to such service again.  Somehow, we need to create a system where good and honest individuals can enter government service, and not face the possibility of huge legal bills created by political gamesmanship, where new ideas can be put forth after decades of failed policies.  This is one of the best post-Administration memoirs I can remember and it does provide hope for the future.

It seems that we live in a world of panic; the oceans are rising, the fascists are about to take over our nation, the Russians are manipulating our elections, all Whites are racist, in fact, the entire society is racist, etc.  The list goes on and on.  It is almost as if there is a crisis de jour that can only be handled by an investigation, more funding for programs, a new set of rules and guidelines, etc. It goes on and on, week in and week out.

Much of this panic peddling comes from our politicians who we expect to be full of hot air.  They need to keep coming up with problems and causes to keep our eyes and minds off the terrible job they are doing with the economy.  After all, if you tried any of their budget tricks, you would end up in jail. But the pols are not alone for we have our friends in the press.  Hey, each problem sells papers so why should they act any more responsibly?  I bet the questions they ask the pols are not the ones you would ask as you probably have more common sense.  Can you believe the silly questions they ask?

Why is it that when an election goes smoothly, the cries of “democracy is in danger” are heard no more?  Why is it that when a climate report comes out stating that the “existential threat” to our future is not real, it is never splashed across the headlines or discussed by the “expert” talking heads?

We cannot, however, place all the blame on the pols and the special interest groups who need to keep the fires of silliness going to justify the money they want and receive.  No, we also need to look at ourselves. All of humanity seems to thrive on the crisis de jour and we don’t hold those who peddle and report on each crisis accountable for their theatrics and false concern. 

The attached article will, I hope, make you take a couple of extra breathes the next time a new “crisis” is proclaimed.  Maybe, just perhaps, you might also laugh and be a bit more disconcerting about what to believe and who to believe.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-year-in-exaggeration-media-bias-hysteria-election-voters-railroads-2022-fbi-investigation-democracy-11672783427?mod=opinion_featst_pos3

There seems to be some sort of rule that any government program, no matter how well intentioned or structured, ends up in creating more problems.  They seem to create winners and losers and if you are the latter and cannot take a joke then it is just your hard luck to get the short end of the stick.  Perhaps this happens because in an unaccountable bureaucratic state (or swamp if you prefer), there is a natural tendency to “make things better”, or “correct an historical wrong”.  After all, it is hard to image that any bureaucrat would ever say, “The program was a success, and we can all go home now”.  Instead, there is a constant need to show that the government can do more to make someone’s life better while at the same time, keeping oneself employed.

While the original intent of Title IX was fine, it immediately created losers; males who participated in certain sports which were deemed unnecessary or perhaps, did not create enough mass interest or even, hard to believe, generate enough income to the schools were cast aside in favor of female athletics.  Scholarships were lost by some to be shifted to those who were more deserving.  As time went on however, even simple sports programs became “politicized” as “Dear Colleague” letters were introduced during the Obama Administration.  Ah, a bureaucrat’s work is never done. The result of a “Dear Colleague” letter led to a cancellation of basic rights found within our Constitution.  Under Title IX and other Titles, the right to face an accuser, examine evidence, etc. were eliminated.  The result was numerous lawsuits and victories for those denied their rights although such victories came years after the ruination of one’s reputation, loss of scholarships, etc.

The problems continue to morph as now Title IX is used against those who were originally marked as the winners (biological women) in favor of males who for whatever reason, now decide they have found themselves to be non-biological women.  The result is that biological women are losing the very scholarships that were awarded to them thanks to Title IX. 

The link to the article below provides an overview and discussion of one possible answer: the repeal of Title IX.  I would enjoy seeing a rebuttal to the article.

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2023/01/repeal-title-ix

New York city has decided to go green with its buses; they will be purchasing 500 electric buses for a cost of $1.1 billion.  This is the first of a total of 5,800 electric buses (total cost of nearly $12 billion?).  The only problem is that the current 15 (fifteen) electric busses cost two to three times as much to operate as the diesel or natural gas buses in service.  In order to complete the deal, the NY MTA (Metropolitan Transportation Authority) is asking for a discount on its electrical cost.  Naturally, the energy department is balking at the request.

There are solutions such as put forth by California where commercial EV chargers were given a 100% discount on demand chargers for five years.  Presto!  EV are a cost savings to the public as it costs less to run them. (NY Post 12/26/2022, pp 2)

Another trick and this is was started during the Obama era; the bus drivers who drove diesel or natural gas buses and who were switched to EVs were consider “new green jobs”.  Same person, different vehicle, new title.  Government speak at its finest.

It is unfortunate that over the past several years we have seen a politicization of the Department of Justice.  Going back to the Obama administration and the notorious Lois Lerner episode, through the falsification of documents by the FBI in presentations to the FISA courts regarding the Steele documents, the manipulations of James Comey, into our current day with the raids on Project Veritas, the mobilization against parents who speak out at school board meetings, and more, the integrity of the DOJ is seriously in question.

These actions call into question the security of our foundations of freedom.  As pointed out in the article linked below, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “the most sacred of the duties of a government (is) to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens”.  We can be thankful that the head of the DOJ, Merrick Garland did not achieve a seat on the Supreme Court for his actions in his current position have shown him to be willing to bend to political winds.  Let us hope that future damage can be avoided and that a future administration will work to bring back integrity to the department.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Imprimis_Aug_9-22_8pgweb.pdf