powerlineblog--2020-11-29--Kevin Roche: Don’t blame us

Kevin Roche: Don’t blame us

My law school classmate Kevin Roche wrote the column DON ’ T BLAME MINNESOTANS FOR GOVERNMENT INCOMPETENCE for the opinion pages of the Star Tribune .
For whatever reason , it wasn ’ t accepted for publication .
The column makes important points of general applicability to the epidemic as it has manifested in current hotspots including the Upper Midwest .
Kevin is the former general counsel of UnitedHealth Group and former chief executive officer of its Ingenix division .
He writes daily at Healthy Skeptic , where he also posted this column .
It is posted here with Kevin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases have surged in the Upper Midwest and other parts of the country , a number of Governors have assigned blame to their citizens .
Our Governor has taken the same course , claiming with no support that failure to follow recommended mitigation measures is the cause of the case rise and that Minnesotans ’ behavior is at fault .
He has warned that if we don ’ t change our behavior , cases , hospitalizations and deaths will rise even further .
Let ’ s examine the truth of that assertion .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack of behavior to be associated with the case increase , the behavior would have to have changed before and along with the rise in cases .
It hasn ’ t .
In regard to mask wearing , for example , every survey shows that if anything mask wearing in the state has increased since the summer when cases were low .
Mobility patterns haven ’ t changed .
In fact , they have declined slightly in recent weeks , according to the CDC COVID Data Tracker .
There is no demonstration that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the opposite is almost certainly true when summer ends in Minnesota .
Since changes in behavior can ’ t account for the increase in cases , what does ?
The answer is obvious .
Seasonal coronaviruses are called seasonal for a reason—they have a very clear seasonal pattern which peaks in the winter , diminishes in late spring and reemerges in the fall .
This coronavirus is following that pattern .
The virus finds fall ’ s cooler , less humid weather and the much lower amount and intensity of sunshine a far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be enhanced by changes in human biochemistry , such as lower vitamin D levels .
What makes more sense , that a non-existent behavior change is responsible for more cases or that it is due to a well-documented seasonal pattern to coronaviruses ?
The likelihood of a renewed increase in cases in the fall has been apparent since the start of the epidemic and the Governor has even referenced it in the past .
Yet here we are , apparently completely unprepared for the extent of the case rise and in panic mode @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spring , but not now .
And once again , we see actions taken to limit spread with no analysis of all the consequences , or even the likelihood of effectiveness against a respiratory virus that has shown itself to be extremely resistant to mitigation measures .
The Governor ’ s repertoire of responses to this epidemic has been largely incompetent and ineffective .
He issued stay-at-home and business and school closure edicts with no analysis of the impact , including the effect on minorities and low-income persons , who always are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the citizens of the state as a result lost hundreds of thousands of jobs and thousands of businesses ; children have been deprived of a meaningful educational and social experience ; and thousands have missed needed health care .
Despite very early warning that this pathogen targeted the frail elderly , nothing was done to protect long-term care residents .
Then when the disproportionate toll on this group was apparent , we were graced with the “ battle plan.
” If that is a war , coronavirus has won .
We continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths , around 70 percent , occurring among residents of these facilities .
He has sent the state down a massive testing rabbit hole , with no real purpose , which merely adds to the work of our thousands of contact tracers who haven ’ t been able to find the source of transmission of even half of the state ’ s known cases , much less all the undetected ones .
Many of these tests result in false positives and low positives that don ’ t reflect infectious persons .
People are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out if they really are positive .
Despite claims of having the best data in the country and being very transparent , the state does not report on such basic issues as the actual date that deaths occur , not the date they are reported ; the number of supposed coronavirus hospitalizations that were for another purpose and the patient happens to test positive ; the number of hospitalizations in which the person acquired the infection in the hospital ; daily hospital census ; average length of stay ; how the positivity rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cycle numbers on supposedly positive PCR tests and on and on .
We get no reporting on the myriad health harms caused by his orders , including over 1500 Minnesotans over the average who have died of certain causes other than coronavirus .
These unfortunates include dementia patients who are subjected to lethal isolation , cancer patients who have missed treatments , and heart attack victims afraid to go to the emergency room .
Instead of leadership we get anecdotal appeals to emotion , such as dragging out coronavirus sufferers to shame us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Instead of rational reassurance , we have had a constant campaign of terrorization , which has led to people in the general population having an extremely exaggerated sense of the actual risk .
Not once have we heard from the family of one of those excess non-coronavirus deaths , from the parents of children whose lives are being irreparably harmed by missing real school , from the families of suicides or drug overdoses prompted by despair , or a business owner whose dream has been shattered .
Almost all Minnesotans have endured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life for over eight months .
And now we are told it is largely our fault .
The Governor might do well to look in the mirror before lecturing Minnesotans .

My law school classmate Kevin Roche wrote the column DON’T BLAME MINNESOTANS FOR GOVERNMENT INCOMPETENCE for the opinion pages of the Star Tribune. For whatever reason, it wasn’t accepted for publication. The column makes important points of general applicability to the epidemic as it has manifested in current hotspots including the Upper Midwest. Kevin is the former general counsel of UnitedHealth Group and former chief executive officer of its Ingenix division. He writes daily at Healthy Skeptic, where he also posted this column. It is posted here with Kevin’s kind permission:
As coronavirus cases have surged in the Upper Midwest and other parts of the country, a number of Governors have assigned blame to their citizens. Our Governor has taken the same course, claiming with no support that failure to follow recommended mitigation measures is the cause of the case rise and that Minnesotans’ behavior is at fault. He has warned that if we don’t change our behavior, cases, hospitalizations and deaths will rise even further.
Let’s examine the truth of that assertion. In order for some supposed behavior or lack of behavior to be associated with the case increase, the behavior would have to have changed before and along with the rise in cases. It hasn’t. In regard to mask wearing, for example, every survey shows that if anything mask wearing in the state has increased since the summer when cases were low. Mobility patterns haven’t changed. In fact, they have declined slightly in recent weeks, according to the CDC COVID Data Tracker. There is no demonstration that people are gathering more — in fact the opposite is almost certainly true when summer ends in Minnesota.
Since changes in behavior can’t account for the increase in cases, what does? The answer is obvious. Seasonal coronaviruses are called seasonal for a reason—they have a very clear seasonal pattern which peaks in the winter, diminishes in late spring and reemerges in the fall. This coronavirus is following that pattern. The virus finds fall’s cooler, less humid weather and the much lower amount and intensity of sunshine a far more hospitable environment. These factors may be enhanced by changes in human biochemistry, such as lower vitamin D levels. What makes more sense, that a non-existent behavior change is responsible for more cases or that it is due to a well-documented seasonal pattern to coronaviruses?
The likelihood of a renewed increase in cases in the fall has been apparent since the start of the epidemic and the Governor has even referenced it in the past. Yet here we are, apparently completely unprepared for the extent of the case rise and in panic mode again. That was somewhat understandable in the spring, but not now. And once again, we see actions taken to limit spread with no analysis of all the consequences, or even the likelihood of effectiveness against a respiratory virus that has shown itself to be extremely resistant to mitigation measures.
The Governor’s repertoire of responses to this epidemic has been largely incompetent and ineffective. He issued stay-at-home and business and school closure edicts with no analysis of the impact, including the effect on minorities and low-income persons, who always are the most hurt by such actions. And the citizens of the state as a result lost hundreds of thousands of jobs and thousands of businesses; children have been deprived of a meaningful educational and social experience; and thousands have missed needed health care.
Despite very early warning that this pathogen targeted the frail elderly, nothing was done to protect long-term care residents. Then when the disproportionate toll on this group was apparent, we were graced with the “battle plan.” If that is a war, coronavirus has won. We continue to see the vast majority of our deaths, around 70 percent, occurring among residents of these facilities.
He has sent the state down a massive testing rabbit hole, with no real purpose, which merely adds to the work of our thousands of contact tracers who haven’t been able to find the source of transmission of even half of the state’s known cases, much less all the undetected ones. Many of these tests result in false positives and low positives that don’t reflect infectious persons. People are put in quarantine limbo trying to figure out if they really are positive.
Despite claims of having the best data in the country and being very transparent, the state does not report on such basic issues as the actual date that deaths occur, not the date they are reported; the number of supposed coronavirus hospitalizations that were for another purpose and the patient happens to test positive; the number of hospitalizations in which the person acquired the infection in the hospital; daily hospital census; average length of stay; how the positivity rate is actually calculated; the distribution of cycle numbers on supposedly positive PCR tests and on and on. We get no reporting on the myriad health harms caused by his orders, including over 1500 Minnesotans over the average who have died of certain causes other than coronavirus. These unfortunates include dementia patients who are subjected to lethal isolation, cancer patients who have missed treatments, and heart attack victims afraid to go to the emergency room.
Instead of leadership we get anecdotal appeals to emotion, such as dragging out coronavirus sufferers to shame us all and finger-wagging at our irresponsible actions. Instead of rational reassurance, we have had a constant campaign of terrorization, which has led to people in the general population having an extremely exaggerated sense of the actual risk.
Not once have we heard from the family of one of those excess non-coronavirus deaths, from the parents of children whose lives are being irreparably harmed by missing real school, from the families of suicides or drug overdoses prompted by despair, or a business owner whose dream has been shattered. Almost all Minnesotans have endured a serious diminution of their quality of life for over eight months. And now we are told it is largely our fault. The Governor might do well to look in the mirror before lecturing Minnesotans.


powerlineblog--2020-11-29--No key to the keystone state

No key to the keystone state

I wrote yesterday about the state trial court injunction prohibiting the governor and secretary of state from taking any further steps to perfect certification of the election , including but not limited to appointment of electors and transmission of necessary paperwork to the Electoral College .
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court promptly vacated the trial court order and dismissed the case with prejudice .
Bill Jacobson comments : The question on everyone ’ s mind is whether the U.S. Supreme Court would take the case .
My first reaction is that it ’ s hard to see on what basis SCOTUS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the ruling and the posture of the case .
Unlike claims of fraud or other problems with voting that violated legislative enactments , here the mail-in provisions of the legislation itself is being challenged .
But it is only challenged after the vote has taken place , unlike the late-ballot and other provisions that were challenged in advance , and unlike claims of fraud or miscount .
Two things are possible : The mail-in procedures violated the PA Constitution , and the petitioners waited too long to raise that objection .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the Republican legal problems in these litigations is what the remedy would be .
Throwing the case to the legislature based on the mail-in procedure after the vote is asking a lot , perhaps too much .
In this circumstance , I think it will be hard for the petitioners to get four SCOTUS judges to hear the case , much less five to reverse .
Maybe I ’ ll be surprised , but that ’ s my initial reaction .

I wrote yesterday about the state trial court injunction prohibiting the governor and secretary of state from taking any further steps to perfect certification of the election, including but not limited to appointment of electors and transmission of necessary paperwork to the Electoral College. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court promptly vacated the trial court order and dismissed the case with prejudice. Bill Jacobson comments:
The question on everyone’s mind is whether the U.S. Supreme Court would take the case. My first reaction is that it’s hard to see on what basis SCOTUS would take the case given the nature of the ruling and the posture of the case. Unlike claims of fraud or other problems with voting that violated legislative enactments, here the mail-in provisions of the legislation itself is being challenged. But it is only challenged after the vote has taken place, unlike the late-ballot and other provisions that were challenged in advance, and unlike claims of fraud or miscount.
Two things are possible: The mail-in procedures violated the PA Constitution, and the petitioners waited too long to raise that objection. As I’ve written many times, one of the Republican legal problems in these litigations is what the remedy would be. Throwing the case to the legislature based on the mail-in procedure after the vote is asking a lot, perhaps too much.
In this circumstance, I think it will be hard for the petitioners to get four SCOTUS judges to hear the case, much less five to reverse. Maybe I’ll be surprised, but that’s my initial reaction.


Ain’t that peculiar

Spectator USA has posted Patrick Basham ’ s column “ Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling.
” Subhead : “ If only cranks find the tabulations strange , put me down as a crank.
” I ’ ve asked our friends at Spectator USA to make the column accessible , but at the moment it is behind their ( semipermeable ) paywall .
Basham is not a crank .
He is founding director of the Democracy Institute and was an adjunct scholar with Cato ’ s Center for Representative Government .
In his Spectator column Basham first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 2020 presidential election .
He observes , for example , “ President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection .
He got 11 million more votes than in 2016 , the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent .
By way of comparison , President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008.
” The anomalies may be just that , but Basham then turns to nine peculiarities that “ lack compelling explanations [ . ]
” Here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : 1 .
Late on election night , with Trump comfortably ahead , many swing states stopped counting ballots .
In most cases , observers were removed from the counting facilities .
Counting generally continued without the observers 2 .
Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed .
They were unusually large in size ( hundreds of thousands ) and had an unusually high ( 90 percent and above ) Biden-to-Trump ratio 3 .
Late arriving ballots were counted .
In Pennsylvania , 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions 4 .
The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots .
The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes , which must contain signatures 5 .
Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting .
Such is Biden ’ s narrow margin that , as political analyst Robert Barnes observes , ‘ If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles , then Trump wins the election ’ 6 .
Missing votes .
In Delaware County , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ USB cards are missing Basham ’ s “ peculiarities ” include a mix of phenomena differing in nature .
Some may be explicable , some may not be “ peculiar ” at all .
Each requires a citation of states ( as in number 6 ) and evidence beyond mere assertion , but what does Basham have wrong ?

Spectator USA has posted Patrick Basham’s column “Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling.” Subhead: “If only cranks find the tabulations strange, put me down as a crank.” I’ve asked our friends at Spectator USA to make the column accessible, but at the moment it is behind their (semipermeable) paywall. Basham is not a crank. He is founding director of the Democracy Institute and was an adjunct scholar with Cato’s Center for Representative Government.
In his Spectator column Basham first spells out anomalies in the stated results of the 2020 presidential election. He observes, for example, “President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008.”
The anomalies may be just that, but Basham then turns to nine peculiarities that “lack compelling explanations[.]” Here are the first six of the nine:
1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers 2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio 3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions 4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures 5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’ 6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing
Basham’s “peculiarities” include a mix of phenomena differing in nature. Some may be explicable, some may not be “peculiar” at all. Each requires a citation of states (as in number 6) and evidence beyond mere assertion, but what does Basham have wrong?


powerlineblog--2020-11-29--Return of the McBeeBee Twins

Return of the McBeeBee Twins

If you were ever a fan of the great Bob ( Elliott ) and Ray ( Goulding ) you may recall the non-identical twin band leaders Clyde and Claude McBeeBee , the McBeeBee Twins .
Interviewed by Elliott , the twins always spoke in near unison , just out of sync .
The twins appeared in a funny segment of the 1979 special Bob and Ray , Jane , Larraine and Gilda .
In that segment the twins go on a double date with Gilda Radner and Jane Curtin .
The clip of that segment used to be separately available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special in its entirety is posted here ( the McBeeBee Twins segment is at 11:10 ) .
Whitney Balliett perfectly described the comedy of Bob and Ray in his New Yorker profile of the duo : Bob & Ray invented , dreamed up the lines for , and then played , mainly on radio and television , a surrealistic Dickensian repertory company , which chastens the fools of the world with hyperbole , slapstick , parody , verbal nonsense , non sequitur , and sheer wit , all of it clean , subtle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turns on their faultless timing and on their infinite sense of the ridiculous .
It is also framed by that special sly , dry , wasteless vision of life perfected during the last couple of centuries by middle-class New Englanders… I went looking for that clip of the McBeeBee Twins on a double date this morning .
Instead , I came up with the twins closing out the encore of Bob and Ray ’ s 1970 show The Two and Only , preceded by “ Children ’ s Menu.
” Listen up only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need a laugh .

If you were ever a fan of the great Bob (Elliott) and Ray (Goulding) you may recall the non-identical twin band leaders Clyde and Claude McBeeBee, the McBeeBee Twins. Interviewed by Elliott, the twins always spoke in near unison, just out of sync.
The twins appeared in a funny segment of the 1979 special Bob and Ray, Jane, Larraine and Gilda. In that segment the twins go on a double date with Gilda Radner and Jane Curtin. The clip of that segment used to be separately available on YouTube. Now video of the special in its entirety is posted here (the McBeeBee Twins segment is at 11:10).
Whitney Balliett perfectly described the comedy of Bob and Ray in his New Yorker profile of the duo:
Bob & Ray invented, dreamed up the lines for, and then played, mainly on radio and television, a surrealistic Dickensian repertory company, which chastens the fools of the world with hyperbole, slapstick, parody, verbal nonsense, non sequitur, and sheer wit, all of it clean, subtle and gentle…Bob & Ray’s humor turns on their faultless timing and on their infinite sense of the ridiculous. It is also framed by that special sly, dry, wasteless vision of life perfected during the last couple of centuries by middle-class New Englanders…
I went looking for that clip of the McBeeBee Twins on a double date this morning. Instead, I came up with the twins closing out the encore of Bob and Ray’s 1970 show The Two and Only, preceded by “Children’s Menu.” Listen up only if you can tolerate brilliant silliness and need a laugh.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--Is remote schooling “leaving children sad and angry”?

The Washington Post says it is : Some children are doing fine with remote school ; some even prefer it .
But many others are .
.
.suffering emotionally , mentally and even physically from so many hours , often alone , in front of a computer screen .
To gauge the struggle , The Washington Post asked parents nationwide to share stories and artwork produced by youths participating in the mandatory home-school experiment , garnering more than 60 responses from families living in 18 states .
School-age children are losing interest in food .
They are complaining of back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developing feelings of depression .
It is unsurprising , even predictable , experts say , and likely to get worse the longer school campuses throughout the country remain shut down .
“ The strain on kids is enormous , ” said Matthew Biel , chief of the child and adolescent psychiatry division at Georgetown University School of Medicine .
“ Your 7-year-old wants to be recognized when they raise their hand .
Oftentimes doesn ’ t happen on Zoom .
They want to be able to make a comment , make a joke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that , no chatting allowed .
Wants to be able to get up and walk around the classroom and move — can ’ t do that , we need to see your face on screen.
” The Post lays it on thick in the anecdotes it serves up .
And there ’ s the question of the extent to which the sadness and anger of children who are learning remotely is tied to other limitations imposed on them during the pandemic .
However , I think it ’ s beyond dispute that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is far less effective than the real thing and that , for many , it takes an emotional toll .
If school closings were producing non-trivial public health benefits , it might be a close call whether , on balance , they are good public policy .
However , the experience in Europe , where lockdowns are common but schools are generally exempt from them , strongly suggests that schools can remain open with little if any health risk .
According to this report from NPR : Across Europe , schools and child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of the continent reports rising coronavirus cases , and even as many businesses and gathering places are shut or restricted .
Countries such as France , the United Kingdom , Germany and Italy appear to be following the emerging evidence that schools have not been major centers of transmission of the virus , especially for young children.. .
.
.
Johannes Huebner , the head of the pediatric infectious disease department at the Ludwig-Maximilians University Hospital in Munich , recently told NPR correspondent Rob Schmitz that scientific studies have not detected high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Most of the infections are brought into the schools by adults , by teachers , and then spread among kids .
But most of the time , it ’ s only single cases .
It ’ s two , three kids , five maybe that get positive.
” In France , the number of new reported coronavirus cases is decreasing sharply .
They are also declining in the UK .
In the U.S. , the number of new cases remains about where it has been ( so too in Italy and Germany ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Consider , as well , the experience of Rhode Island .
According to that state ’ s governor , a Democrat , only about 1,245 of the 98,000 students attending school at least partially in person have tested positive for the virus .
950 of the nearly 50,000 students learning remotely have tested positive .
The evidence that keeping schools open increases transmission of the virus is simply lacking , as far as I can tell .
The evidence that closing schools hurts children seems indisputable .
I was always told that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Maybe in Europe they are , but not here , it seems .

The Washington Post says it is:
Some children are doing fine with remote school; some even prefer it. But many others are. . .suffering emotionally, mentally and even physically from so many hours, often alone, in front of a computer screen. To gauge the struggle, The Washington Post asked parents nationwide to share stories and artwork produced by youths participating in the mandatory home-school experiment, garnering more than 60 responses from families living in 18 states. School-age children are losing interest in food. They are complaining of back pain and burning eyes. They are developing feelings of depression. It is unsurprising, even predictable, experts say, and likely to get worse the longer school campuses throughout the country remain shut down. “The strain on kids is enormous,” said Matthew Biel, chief of the child and adolescent psychiatry division at Georgetown University School of Medicine. “Your 7-year-old wants to be recognized when they raise their hand. Oftentimes doesn’t happen on Zoom. They want to be able to make a comment, make a joke with a peer — can’t do that, no chatting allowed. Wants to be able to get up and walk around the classroom and move — can’t do that, we need to see your face on screen.”
The Post lays it on thick in the anecdotes it serves up. And there’s the question of the extent to which the sadness and anger of children who are learning remotely is tied to other limitations imposed on them during the pandemic.
However, I think it’s beyond dispute that, for many students, remote schooling is far less effective than the real thing and that, for many, it takes an emotional toll.
If school closings were producing non-trivial public health benefits, it might be a close call whether, on balance, they are good public policy. However, the experience in Europe, where lockdowns are common but schools are generally exempt from them, strongly suggests that schools can remain open with little if any health risk.
According to this report from NPR:
Across Europe, schools and child care centers are staying open even as much of the continent reports rising coronavirus cases, and even as many businesses and gathering places are shut or restricted. Countries such as France, the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy appear to be following the emerging evidence that schools have not been major centers of transmission of the virus, especially for young children.. . . . Johannes Huebner, the head of the pediatric infectious disease department at the Ludwig-Maximilians University Hospital in Munich, recently told NPR correspondent Rob Schmitz that scientific studies have not detected high rates of transmission in schools. “Most of the infections are brought into the schools by adults, by teachers, and then spread among kids. But most of the time, it’s only single cases. It’s two, three kids, five maybe that get positive.”
(Emphasis added)
In France, the number of new reported coronavirus cases is decreasing sharply. They are also declining in the UK. In the U.S., the number of new cases remains about where it has been (so too in Italy and Germany), even though school shutdowns are widespread.
Consider, as well, the experience of Rhode Island. According to that state’s governor, a Democrat, only about 1,245 of the 98,000 students attending school at least partially in person have tested positive for the virus. 950 of the nearly 50,000 students learning remotely have tested positive.
The evidence that keeping schools open increases transmission of the virus is simply lacking, as far as I can tell. The evidence that closing schools hurts children seems indisputable.
I was always told that liberals are “all about the kids.” Maybe in Europe they are, but not here, it seems.


Steal the House?

Paul notes below several razor-close House races , including especially Iowa 2 , where the Republican candidate , Mariannette Miller-Meeks , is leading by six votes .
Prediction : if Miller-Meeks is certified as the winner , House Democrats will refuse to seat her in January , so desperate are they to secure every possible House seat they can .
Can they do this ?
Yes—because House Democrats have done this before .
Back in 1984 , in what became known as “ Indiana ’ s bloody eighth.
” This refers to Indiana ’ s 8th Congressional District , where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican candidate , Richard McIntyre , who was challenging a Democrat incumbent , trailed narrowly on election night but was certified as the winner by 34 votes after a recount ( and a second recount put him up by 400 votes ) .
But the House Democratic majority refused to seat McIntyre in January 1985 .
Democrats voted to keep the seat vacant pending further “ investigations ” into the vote count .
House Dems appointed a three-member select committee , consisting of two Democrats and one Republican , to look into it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the full House voted on party lines in April to seat the Democrat incumbent , despite Indiana ’ s official certification of the Republican McIntyre as the winner .
Democrats rejected Republican proposals to have a special election to settle the matter .
It was a naked partisan power grab , wholly unnecessary given the large Democratic House majority at the time ( 238-177 ) .
Does anyone think Democrats won ’ t resort to this again , with a majority so tiny that they won ’ t be able to pass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ P.S.—Yes , you might well ask yourself : Gee , if the House can refuse to seat the certified winner of an election because of voting “ irregularities , ” why shouldn ’ t some state legislators think similarly about the “ winner ” of the presidential vote in several states this year ?
You might very well think that ; I couldn ’ t possibly comment .

Paul notes below several razor-close House races, including especially Iowa 2, where the Republican candidate, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, is leading by six votes.
Prediction: if Miller-Meeks is certified as the winner, House Democrats will refuse to seat her in January, so desperate are they to secure every possible House seat they can. Can they do this? Yes—because House Democrats have done this before. Back in 1984, in what became known as “Indiana’s bloody eighth.”
This refers to Indiana’s 8th Congressional District, where, in the 1984 election, the Republican candidate, Richard McIntyre, who was challenging a Democrat incumbent, trailed narrowly on election night but was certified as the winner by 34 votes after a recount (and a second recount put him up by 400 votes). But the House Democratic majority refused to seat McIntyre in January 1985. Democrats voted to keep the seat vacant pending further “investigations” into the vote count. House Dems appointed a three-member select committee, consisting of two Democrats and one Republican, to look into it, and, citing “irregularities,” the full House voted on party lines in April to seat the Democrat incumbent, despite Indiana’s official certification of the Republican McIntyre as the winner. Democrats rejected Republican proposals to have a special election to settle the matter.
It was a naked partisan power grab, wholly unnecessary given the large Democratic House majority at the time (238-177). Does anyone think Democrats won’t resort to this again, with a majority so tiny that they won’t be able to pass resolutions memorializing National Orange Juice Week?
P.S.—Yes, you might well ask yourself: Gee, if the House can refuse to seat the certified winner of an election because of voting “irregularities,” why shouldn’t some state legislators think similarly about the “winner” of the presidential vote in several states this year? You might very well think that; I couldn’t possibly comment.


House updates

I want to update readers on three extremely close House races .
In California ’ s 25th congressional district , Republican incumbent Mike Garcia leads Democrat Christy Smith by 405 votes out of approximately 340,000 cast .
It appears from this account that , amazingly , there are still some votes that haven ’ t been counted .
No one seems to know how many .
The final canvass is supposed to be tomorrow ( Monday ) .
After that , I think the loser can demand a recount .
This seat traditionally has been held by Republicans .
Katie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 , but resigned due to a sex scandal .
Garcia then won the seat in a special election earlier this year .
He is on the verge of holding it for the GOP , but this race has gone back and forth since election night .
Who can say for certain that there won ’ t be another twist ?
In Iowa ’ s second district , there ’ s an even closer race between Democrat Rita Hart and Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks .
Milller-Meeks leads by only six votes .
I gather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counted and recounted in this race .
The state canvass board will meet tomorrow ( Monday ) and is expected to certify all Iowa results .
Assuming Miller-Weeks is declared the winner , this will represent a pickup for the GOP .
Democrat Dave Loebsack is stepping aside after seven terms .
Finally , there ’ s the race in New York ’ s 22nd district between the incumbent , Democrat Anthony Brindisi , and his GOP challenger Claudia Tenney , a former member of the House .
As of now , Brindisi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election night , leads by 13 votes .
This race is in court .
The Utica Observer-Dispatch reports : Contested ballots are undergoing judicial review by state Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte , who issued an injunction in the case on Tuesday .
A true picture of the results in the race won ’ t be available until DelConte makes a ruling on hundreds of contested ballots in the case , which resumes when motions are filed by the campaign legal teams Monday .
.
.
.
DelConte ’ s injunction prevents the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s eight counties — Broome , Chenango , Cortland , Herkimer , Madison , Oneida , Oswego and Tioga — from certifying results in the contest between Tenney and Brindisi .
Last ditch challenges to vote counts don ’ t usually succeed .
However , when the margin is only 13 votes it ’ s certainly possible that such a challenge will .
That ’ s particularly true in a case like this one , where , reportedly , many ballots are in dispute , and some election commissioners admit both that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totals and that they did not follow the state-mandated procedure for recording objections to ballots by the respective campaigns .
No wonder DelConte issued an injunction .
Tenney , the Republican , had this to say : Governor Cuomo ’ s unfair , unwise , and unilateral rules changes and administrative burdens overwhelmed our voting system and created this utter dysfunction .
As a result , the law was not followed when ballots were challenged and tabulated in this election .
.
.Hundreds of ineligible ballots were illegally or improperly cast including votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unregistered voters .
Those ballots should not – and must not – be counted .
The hearing in court has already established that the current tally includes invalid votes and that the process to review and count the massive amount of paper ballots is fractured .
Today ’ s misleading and inaccurate tally is rife with errors and mistakes that must be rectified before this election is certified .
It is far from final .

I want to update readers on three extremely close House races.
In California’s 25th congressional district, Republican incumbent Mike Garcia leads Democrat Christy Smith by 405 votes out of approximately 340,000 cast. It appears from this account that, amazingly, there are still some votes that haven’t been counted. No one seems to know how many.
The final canvass is supposed to be tomorrow (Monday). After that, I think the loser can demand a recount.
This seat traditionally has been held by Republicans. Katie Hill won it for the Democrats in 2018, but resigned due to a sex scandal. Garcia then won the seat in a special election earlier this year.
He is on the verge of holding it for the GOP, but this race has gone back and forth since election night. Who can say for certain that there won’t be another twist?
In Iowa’s second district, there’s an even closer race between Democrat Rita Hart and Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks. Milller-Meeks leads by only six votes.
I gather that all of the votes have been counted and recounted in this race. The state canvass board will meet tomorrow (Monday) and is expected to certify all Iowa results.
Assuming Miller-Weeks is declared the winner, this will represent a pickup for the GOP. Democrat Dave Loebsack is stepping aside after seven terms.
Finally, there’s the race in New York’s 22nd district between the incumbent, Democrat Anthony Brindisi, and his GOP challenger Claudia Tenney, a former member of the House. As of now, Brindisi, who trailed by 28,000 votes on election night, leads by 13 votes.
This race is in court. The Utica Observer-Dispatch reports:
Contested ballots are undergoing judicial review by state Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte, who issued an injunction in the case on Tuesday. A true picture of the results in the race won’t be available until DelConte makes a ruling on hundreds of contested ballots in the case, which resumes when motions are filed by the campaign legal teams Monday. . . . DelConte’s injunction prevents the board of elections in the congressional district’s eight counties — Broome, Chenango, Cortland, Herkimer, Madison, Oneida, Oswego and Tioga — from certifying results in the contest between Tenney and Brindisi.
Last ditch challenges to vote counts don’t usually succeed. However, when the margin is only 13 votes it’s certainly possible that such a challenge will.
That’s particularly true in a case like this one, where, reportedly, many ballots are in dispute, and some election commissioners admit both that they are not sure about their existing totals and that they did not follow the state-mandated procedure for recording objections to ballots by the respective campaigns.
No wonder DelConte issued an injunction.
Tenney, the Republican, had this to say :
Governor Cuomo’s unfair, unwise, and unilateral rules changes and administrative burdens overwhelmed our voting system and created this utter dysfunction. As a result, the law was not followed when ballots were challenged and tabulated in this election. . .Hundreds of ineligible ballots were illegally or improperly cast including votes by the dead, non-residents, or unregistered voters. Those ballots should not – and must not – be counted. The hearing in court has already established that the current tally includes invalid votes and that the process to review and count the massive amount of paper ballots is fractured. Today’s misleading and inaccurate tally is rife with errors and mistakes that must be rectified before this election is certified. It is far from final.
Stay tuned.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--Why Is All COVID News Bad?

Why Is All COVID News Bad?

Three professors , two from Dartmouth and one from Brown , have produced a paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research titled , “ Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News ?
” It focuses on the U.S. press , and its findings are disturbing : On February 18 , the Oxford Mail published a story that Professor Sarah Gilbert and her colleagues at Oxford ’ s Jenner Institute were working on a vaccine for the novel coronavirus and that rapid vaccine development could be possible given the scientists ’ existing work and experience with a possible MERS vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s reporting , the U.S. major media outlets of Fox News , CNN , The New York Times , and The Washington Post did not begin coverage of Professor Gilbert ’ s COVID-19 related work until late April .
The U.S. based stories emphasized caveats from health officials and experts downplaying the optimistic timeline and past success of the Oxford researchers .
The earliest available ( major outlet ) U.S. story is from CNN on April 23rd and begins with a quote from England ’ s Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty saying that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment “ anytime in the next calendar year ” is “ incredibly small.
” A prediction that turned out to be wrong .
But the pessimism of U.S. news outlets regarding the Wuhan virus has been consistent : That last is an interesting point .
It would be reasonable to assume that negative COVID coverage is part of the liberal media ’ s effort to drive President Trump from office , and to some degree I have no doubt that this is true .
But “ conservative ” news outlets have shown more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that seems to be what American news consumers want : A natural question is whether media negativity varies greatly by the specific news source and whether that variation is related to the political beliefs of the readership .
Our results are perhaps surprising .
COVID-19 stories from all the major U.S. outlets have high levels of negativity and the variation that does exist is not correlated with readers ’ political leanings .
*** The estimated probability that a COVID-19 article is negative varies from 70 percent to 100 percent among major U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the likelihood that conservative consumers of news trust the source .
COVID-19 stories from Fox News are about as negative as those from CNN.The estimated probability that a COVID-19 article is negative varies from 70 percent to 100 percent among major U.S. outlets .
These probabilities are not correlated with the likelihood that conservative consumers of news trust the source .
COVID-19 stories from Fox News are about as negative as those from CNN .
The authors suggest that this negativity is driven by demand from consumers of the news–i.e , us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news coverage , for example : One of the U.S. media ’ s prime goals has been to discourage anyone from prescribing or taking hydroxychloroquine .
In that , the press ’ s crusade has been successful , for better or worse .
Why are “ major ” U.S. news sources so massively more negative than their international counterparts ?
I think the widespread hostility toward President Trump is the obvious answer .
The fact that Fox isn ’ t much different from its left-wing competitors probably tells us more about Fox than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But that isn ’ t the whole story .
This NBER article suggests that the pessimism of major news outlets is a response to reader demand : So it may be that most Americans are behaving like sheep primarily because they are , in fact , sheep .

Three professors, two from Dartmouth and one from Brown, have produced a paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research titled, “Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News?” It focuses on the U.S. press, and its findings are disturbing:
On February 18, the Oxford Mail published a story that Professor Sarah Gilbert and her
colleagues at Oxford’s Jenner Institute were working on a vaccine for the novel coronavirus and that rapid vaccine development could be possible given the scientists’ existing work and experience with a possible MERS vaccine. In contrast with Oxford Mail’s reporting, the U.S. major media outlets of Fox News, CNN, The New York Times, and The Washington Post did not begin coverage of Professor Gilbert’s COVID-19 related work until late April. The U.S. based stories emphasized caveats from health officials and experts downplaying the optimistic timeline and past success of the Oxford researchers. The earliest available (major outlet) U.S. story is from CNN on April 23rd and begins with a quote from England’s Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty saying that the probability of having a vaccine or treatment “anytime in the next calendar year” is “incredibly small.”
A prediction that turned out to be wrong. But the pessimism of U.S. news outlets regarding the Wuhan virus has been consistent:
Ninety one percent of stories by U.S. major media outlets are negative in tone versus fifty four percent for non-U.S. major sources and sixty five percent for scientific journals. The negativity of the U.S. major media is notable even in areas with positive scientific developments including school re-openings and vaccine trials. Media negativity is unresponsive to changing trends in new COVID-19 cases or the political leanings of the audience.
That last is an interesting point. It would be reasonable to assume that negative COVID coverage is part of the liberal media’s effort to drive President Trump from office, and to some degree I have no doubt that this is true. But “conservative” news outlets have shown more or less the same pessimistic bias, and that seems to be what American news consumers want:
A natural question is whether media negativity varies greatly by the specific news source and whether that variation is related to the political beliefs of the readership. Our results are perhaps surprising. COVID-19 stories from all the major U.S. outlets have high levels of negativity and the variation that does exist is not correlated with readers’ political leanings.
***
The estimated probability that a COVID-19 article is negative varies from 70 percent to 100 percent among major U.S. outlets. These probabilities are not correlated with the likelihood that conservative consumers of news trust the source. COVID-19 stories from Fox News are about as negative as those from CNN.The estimated probability that a COVID-19 article is negative varies from 70 percent to 100 percent among major U.S. outlets. These probabilities are not correlated with the likelihood that conservative consumers of news trust the source. COVID-19 stories from Fox News are about as negative as those from CNN.
The authors suggest that this negativity is driven by demand from consumers of the news–i.e, us.
They also address specific topics of news coverage, for example:
Overall, we find that COVID-19 stories from U.S. major media outlets are much more negative than similar stories from other U.S. outlets and from non-U.S. sources. The negativity does not respond to changes in new cases. Potentially positive developments such as vaccine stories receive less attention from U.S. outlets than do negative stories about Trump and hydroxychloroquine.
One of the U.S. media’s prime goals has been to discourage anyone from prescribing or taking hydroxychloroquine. In that, the press’s crusade has been successful, for better or worse.
[T]he terms “Trump and hydroxychloroquine” receive more coverage than do all stories about companies and researchers developing vaccines.
Why are “major” U.S. news sources so massively more negative than their international counterparts? I think the widespread hostility toward President Trump is the obvious answer. The fact that Fox isn’t much different from its left-wing competitors probably tells us more about Fox than about the American press in general.
But that isn’t the whole story. This NBER article suggests that the pessimism of major news outlets is a response to reader demand:
Consistent with the existing literature (Gentzkow and Shapiro 2010 and Gentzkow, Glaeser and Goldin 2006), our results suggest that U.S. major outlets publish unusually negative COVID-19 stories in response to reader demand and interest.
***
Overall, we are unable to explain the variation in negativity with political affiliation of an outlet’s
audience, or U.S case count changes, but we do find that U.S. readers demand negative stories (as evidenced by article popularity).
So it may be that most Americans are behaving like sheep primarily because they are, in fact, sheep.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--Chicago Vs. Smith College

Chicago Vs. Smith College

As is well known , you aren ’ t allowed to criticize Black Lives Matter ( still less say anything as offensive as “ All Lives Matter ” ) , Critical Race Theory , or any aspect of transgenderism .
And it seems increasingly difficult to criticize the orthodoxy of “ diversity , equity , and inclusion ” ( DEI ) in any way .
Witness the case of Dorian Abbot , a professor of geology at the University of Chicago , who has criticized the DEI orthodoxy .
He ’ s spoken out about it , offering some presentations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find here , here , here , and here .
Here are four of them as a sample if you don ’ t have time to chase down these links : And Prof. Abbot ’ s three-page account of the matter is here .
You can guess what happened next : indignation that Prof. Abbot was making the campus “ unsafe.
” A statement denouncing Abbot garnered 162 signatures ( mostly from graduate students , and each one of them making sure to include their preferred pronouns ) , charging among other offenses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Abbot ’ s videos threaten the safety and belonging of all underrepresented groups within the department and serve to undermine Equity , Diversity , and Inclusion initiatives driven by the Equity , Diversity , and Inclusion Coordination Team ( EDICT ) .
” As a tenured professor , Abbot can ’ t be fired , but the statement demands that Abbot be subjected to numerous punishments , each couched as “ protections ” of students who now feel “ unsafe ” being around such a bigot .
Fortunately , the University of Chicago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t having any of this , and issued a statement , which reads in part : From time to time , faculty members at the University share opinions and scholarship that provoke spirited debate and disagreement , and in some cases offend members of the University community .
As articulated in the Chicago Principles , the University of Chicago is deeply committed to the values of academic freedom and the free expression of ideas , and these values have been consistent throughout our history .
We believe universities have an important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversial ideas can be proposed , tested and debated .
For this reason , the University does not limit the comments of faculty members , mandate apologies , or impose other disciplinary consequences for such comments , unless there has been a violation of University policy or the law .
Faculty are free to agree or disagree with any policy or approach of the University , its departments , schools or divisions without being subject to discipline , reprimand or other form of punishment .
In other words , lump it you whinny @ @ @ @ @ @ @ academic departments and businesses : keep this list of grad students handy as a short cut for identifying who you definitely don ’ t want to hire .
By contrast , Smith College in Massachusetts follows the usual pattern .
A Smith administrative staff member , Jodi Shaw , objected to the ideological fanaticism of the critical race theory-based “ sensitivity training ” required of all staff members .
Ms. Smith appeared on Tucker not long ago ; here ’ s the short segment : You can find several of Shaw ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here .
Aaaannnnd you can guess what happened next : the president of Smith College , Kathleen McCartney , unloaded on Shaw with a formal statement : This past week , an employee of the college posted a personal video to express their concerns about the college ’ s programming to promote racial justice .
Since the video was posted , members of the President ’ s Cabinet and I have heard from many in the Smith community who disagree strongly with the content of the post .
This employee does not speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the college .
Further , we believe the video mischaracterizes the college ’ s important , ongoing efforts to build a more equitable and inclusive living , learning and working environment .
You should know that the employee has not violated any college policies by sharing their personal views on a personal channel .
The National Labor Relations Act protects employees who engage in concerted activities , including speech , with respect to workplace conditions .
All members of any workplace , including Smith College , have the freedom to criticize the policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I am writing to affirm that the President ’ s Cabinet and I believe we have a moral responsibility to promote racial justice , equity and inclusion at Smith College .
To the people of color in our community , please know our commitment is steadfast .
And especially to our students of color , please know we are here for you always .
Translation : We can ’ t fire Shaw , but she should indeed be regarded as a pariah on campus .

As is well known, you aren’t allowed to criticize Black Lives Matter (still less say anything as offensive as “All Lives Matter”), Critical Race Theory, or any aspect of transgenderism. And it seems increasingly difficult to criticize the orthodoxy of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) in any way.
Witness the case of Dorian Abbot, a professor of geology at the University of Chicago, who has criticized the DEI orthodoxy. He’s spoken out about it, offering some presentations complete with slides, which you can find here, here, here, and here. Here are four of them as a sample if you don’t have time to chase down these links:
And Prof. Abbot’s three-page account of the matter is here.
You can guess what happened next: indignation that Prof. Abbot was making the campus “unsafe.” A statement denouncing Abbot garnered 162 signatures (mostly from graduate students, and each one of them making sure to include their preferred pronouns), charging among other offenses that “The contents of Professor Dorian Abbot’s videos threaten the safety and belonging of all underrepresented groups within the department and serve to undermine Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion initiatives driven by the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Coordination Team (EDICT).”
As a tenured professor, Abbot can’t be fired, but the statement demands that Abbot be subjected to numerous punishments, each couched as “protections” of students who now feel “unsafe” being around such a bigot.
Fortunately, the University of Chicago’s president, Robert Zimmer, isn’t having any of this, and issued a statement, which reads in part:
From time to time, faculty members at the University share opinions and scholarship that provoke spirited debate and disagreement, and in some cases offend members of the University community. As articulated in the Chicago Principles, the University of Chicago is deeply committed to the values of academic freedom and the free expression of ideas, and these values have been consistent throughout our history. We believe universities have an important role as places where novel and even controversial ideas can be proposed, tested and debated. For this reason, the University does not limit the comments of faculty members, mandate apologies, or impose other disciplinary consequences for such comments, unless there has been a violation of University policy or the law. Faculty are free to agree or disagree with any policy or approach of the University, its departments, schools or divisions without being subject to discipline, reprimand or other form of punishment.
In other words, lump it you whinny grad students. By the way—Memo to academic departments and businesses: keep this list of grad students handy as a short cut for identifying who you definitely don’t want to hire.
By contrast, Smith College in Massachusetts follows the usual pattern. A Smith administrative staff member, Jodi Shaw, objected to the ideological fanaticism of the critical race theory-based “sensitivity training” required of all staff members. Ms. Shaw appeared on Tucker not long ago; here’s the short segment:
You can find several of Shaw’s original YouTube videos that started this controversy here.
Aaaannnnd you can guess what happened next: the president of Smith College, Kathleen McCartney, unloaded on Shaw with a formal statement:
This past week, an employee of the college posted a personal video to express their concerns about the college’s programming to promote racial justice. Since the video was posted, members of the President’s Cabinet and I have heard from many in the Smith community who disagree strongly with the content of the post. This employee does not speak for the college or any part of the college. Further, we believe the video mischaracterizes the college’s important, ongoing efforts to build a more equitable and inclusive living, learning and working environment. You should know that the employee has not violated any college policies by sharing their personal views on a personal channel. The National Labor Relations Act protects employees who engage in concerted activities, including speech, with respect to workplace conditions. All members of any workplace, including Smith College, have the freedom to criticize the policies and practices of their employer. Nevertheless, I am writing to affirm that the President’s Cabinet and I believe we have a moral responsibility to promote racial justice, equity and inclusion at Smith College. To the people of color in our community, please know our commitment is steadfast. And especially to our students of color, please know we are here for you always.
Translation: We can’t fire Shaw, but she should indeed be regarded as a pariah on campus.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--School superintendent votes on remote learning with his kid’s feet

Everyone with an ounce of common sense knows that remote learning is generally inferior to learning in school , and that it ’ s emotionally harmful to some children .
Anyone who has studied the data is likely to conclude that keeping schools open doesn ’ t risk a harmful spread of the Wuhan coronavirus .
Alexandria ’ s public schools are closed .
But this doesn ’ t mean the system ’ s school superintendent , Gregory Hutchings , Jr , lacks common sense or is oblivious to the data .
It just means that he won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his family .
Hutchings has pulled one of his two children from the public school system he runs .
He is sending that child to Bishop Ireton High School , a Catholic school that remains open .
The superintendent confirmed this fact to an inquisitive reporter from the school newspaper of T.C .
Williams , an Alexandria high school that ’ s closed .
After doing so , he amended his bio and his Twitter profile .
Instead of saying that his two kids attend Alexandria City Public Schools , he now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Hutchings didn ’ t explain his decision to have his child transfer to a private school this year .
He said only : Right .
But his decision , in the wake of school closings , speaks to his lack of faith in remote learning .
And it shows that he has no fear that in-person learning will have an adverse impact on the health of his child or his family .
Hutchings draws a $ 236,000 base salary .
He can afford to enable his kid to escape from remote learning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Their kids are trapped in a learning environment that ’ s inferior for many students and emotionally harmful for some .
Hutchings reportedly has said , “ I have a goal of being the U.S. Secretary of Education.
” His decisions during the pandemic show demonstrate his ambition , but not his fitness .

Everyone with an ounce of common sense knows that remote learning is generally inferior to learning in school, and that it’s emotionally harmful to some children. Anyone who has studied the data is likely to conclude that keeping schools open doesn’t risk a harmful spread of the Wuhan coronavirus.
Alexandria’s public schools are closed. But this doesn’t mean the system’s school superintendent, Gregory Hutchings, Jr, lacks common sense or is oblivious to the data. It just means that he won’t apply what he knows beyond the confines of his family.
Hutchings has pulled one of his two children from the public school system he runs. He is sending that child to Bishop Ireton High School, a Catholic school that remains open.
The superintendent confirmed this fact to an inquisitive reporter from the school newspaper of T.C. Williams, an Alexandria high school that’s closed. After doing so, he amended his bio and his Twitter profile. Instead of saying that his two kids attend Alexandria City Public Schools, he now says only that he has two kids.
Hutchings didn’t explain his decision to have his child transfer to a private school this year. He said only:
Decisions like these are very personal family decisions and are not taken lightly. This in no way impacts my absolute lifelong, commitment to public education, to which I remain as personally dedicated as ever.
Right. But his decision, in the wake of school closings, speaks to his lack of faith in remote learning. And it shows that he has no fear that in-person learning will have an adverse impact on the health of his child or his family.
Hutchings draws a $236,000 base salary. He can afford to enable his kid to escape from remote learning. Other parents can’t. Their kids are trapped in a learning environment that’s inferior for many students and emotionally harmful for some.
Hutchings reportedly has said, “I have a goal of being the U.S. Secretary of Education.” His decisions during the pandemic show demonstrate his ambition, but not his fitness.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--David Horowitz: Where We Are, and What We Face

David Horowitz writes that today ’ s Left is the same as yesterday ’ s Left : irredeemably destructive and dishonest .
Hating America and working toward its demise is the Left ’ s pole star .
This piece is special to Power Line .
My first political demonstration was a May Day parade in 1948 .
I was nine years old .
We chanted in support of President Truman ’ s “ Fair Employment Practices Commission ” and his successful effort to integrate the civil service .
The May Day parade was organized by the Communist Party USA , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communist Russia to overthrow the United States government and create a “ Soviet America.
” Both my parents were members of the Party .
These two causes in a way defined the next seventy-odd years of my life : on the one hand , the fight for individual rights and equality ; on the other a lifelong struggle for – and then against – a treasonous movement that set out to change the world for the better but ended up making it worse – much worse .
As a young man , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Left , editing its largest magazine , Ramparts .
The New Left was a socialist movement that began as an attempt to rescue the “ Old ” Communist Left from the “ mistakes ” it had made in serving masters who murdered more than 100 million people .
In peace time .
“ Mistakes ” was our weasel term for the epic crimes our fellow Marxists committed against ordinary human beings who refused to go along with their utopian schemes .
Our goal was to revive the quest they had begun and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justice.
” I soon discovered that there was no new Left fundamentally different from its predecessor .
The evil the left did flowed directly from the noble ideal itself .
You can not create a world of perfect equality because people are not equal , and the attempt to make them so requires taking away the freedom of most for the benefit of what turns out to be a few .
You can not create a government that is socially “ just ” because the people who will run it are the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and greed created the unjust world you are attempting to leave behind .
The new rulers , corrupt as ever , will have more power than ever .
You can only make things worse .
Much worse .
I learned these truths first in my work with the Black Panther Party , a murderous street gang whom we regarded as “ the vanguard of the revolution.
” We did so because the Panthers were the only leftists with guns who were willing to use them .
The Panthers preyed mainly on vulnerable blacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was white .
My second awakening came with the success of the New Left ’ s “ antiwar movement , ” which forced America out of Vietnam .
The New Left ’ s claims to be “ anti-war ” in behalf of the Vietnamese were actually two dangerous lies .
When the movement succeeded in forcing America ’ s withdrawal from Indo-China , the Communists proceeded to slaughter two and a half million peasants in Cambodia and Vietnam .
There wasn ’ t a single demonstration against the slaughter .
Not one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never an “ anti-war ” movement .
It was an anti-American movement .
The Left wanted the Communists to win and didn ’ t care how many innocent Asians were murdered in the process .
I realized I was involved in a movement whose rhetoric was seductive and noble but whose deeds were evil .
And I left .
The “ social justice ” radicals still have the best slogans .
They call themselves progressives but are actually reactionaries .
They call themselves liberals but are actually bigots .
They say they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for war .
It is always the same war : to bring down the United States of America .
Thanks mainly to their growing influence , we live in extreme times , where things are not what they are made to seem , and monstrous accusations are leveled at individuals without restraint .
As a result , we live in an atmosphere of intimidation , where people can lose their livelihoods , their careers and even their lives if they get on the wrong side of leftist crusaders .
That is a terrible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once free country , but it is something that has become too obvious to deny .
For 30 years before he descended the famous escalator in Trump Tower to declare his candidacy for the White House , Donald Trump was a well-known public figure .
Everybody in America knew who he was .
In all those 30 years , no one ever referred to him as “ Donald Trump , host of ‘ The Apprentice ’ and white supremacist.
” Nobody ever said “ This is Donald Trump , New York builder and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ran against the Democrats .
In fact , all three of Trump ’ s predecessors as presidential candidates – Bush , McCain and even Romney were denounced as racists by the Democrats .
Vice President Joe Biden told an audience that included many black Americans that if elected , Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan , “ are gon na put y ’ all back in chains.
” Why do Democrats take such a low road as a matter of course ?
They do it because it is effective , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dirty secret to hide .
Democrats control 100 % of every major inner-city in America , and have for 50 to 100 years .
Every killing field — Detroit , Chicago , Baltimore , St. Louis – is 100 % in the hands of the Democrats .
Every injustice in these inner cities – real or imagined – that policy can affect , Democrats are 100 % responsible for .
Every rotten school system , which year in and year out fails to provide mainly black and Hispanic kids with the basic tools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlled by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions who without exception put the interests of the adults in the system in front of the kids .
Including keeping schools closed during the Covid-19 pandemic while demanding more money for themselves .
Trump represented a major threat to the Democrats ’ corrupt inner-city empires and – worse – to their electoral power base .
Consequently , when Trump asked inner city blacks “ What do you have to lose by voting for me ?
” the Democrats lost no time in demonizing him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dehumanizing terms possible – launching an all-out war to destroy him as a white nationalist , white supremacist , Hitler .
In this lethal atmosphere , which has lasted for four years , the first black President of the United States this week again called Trump – and by implication his seventy-three million supporters – racist .
Race is the Democrats ’ nuclear weapon , deployed to destroy their critics and protect every corrupt urban Tammany Hall they have built and profited from over the last 100 years .
This weapon was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democrat Party following their riot at the Convention in 1968 .
It is where the deep divisions that afflict us now began .
The absurd , racially poisonous term , “ white skin privilege , ” for example , was an invention of the hate America terrorists who called themselves “ Weathermen , ” and whose leaders , Bill Ayers and Eric Mann , advised Barack Obama ( Ayers actually ghosted his autobiography ) and mentored the insurrectionary founders of Black Lives Matter .
The stated goal of the Weathermen terrorists was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global race war against “ white supremacy , ” and to join it as a fifth column against white America .
Democrats embraced racial politics opportunistically at first , because it was an effective political weapon .
As a result of the radical ascendancy within the Democrat party and in the nation ’ s schools , the race card now features the ludicrous charge that white America is a white supremacist nation , and “ racism is in its DNA.
” This is a charge that is deadly because it will justify the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result of the Democrats ’ blitzkrieg against this imaginary scourge , large sections of the American public are now in the grip of a hysteria that has detached them from any semblance of reality .
In this atmosphere , a lifelong liberal like Trump can be miraculously transformed into a raving Nazi .
On the other end of the equation , black America is cast as a race of noble savages who can do no wrongs that are not attributable to “ systemic racism ” and white oppression .
In this fantasy world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though they are a “ marginal ” and “ under-represented ” people in our society .
This has become a required perspective for racially sensitive Americans eager to position themselves “ on the right side of history.
” And it is forced on millions of whites who are demonized by a multi-million-dollar industry of racist diversity trainers who lecture captive audiences in our universities , corporations , and even military academies , in the anti-white racism of “ critical race theory , ” a creed concocted by the hate America left .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and under-represented , and therefore oppressed is transparently ridiculous .
On the contrary , to anyone with eyes to see , Black America and its wounds are closer to being the center of the nation ’ s attention , and also the focus of its charitable largesse .
Otherwise , how explain the complacency of the nation and its civic authorities towards the epic lawlessness and destruction inspired by Black Lives Matter vigilantes in 600 American cities last summer without a single instigator being held accountable , and even the arrested perpetrators being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how such criminal violence could be justified as opposing “ police brutality ” in advance of a single trial or even investigation of an allegedly brutal police officer ?
Far from being marginal , under-represented , and oppressed , Black America is a community continually front and center in the nation ’ s consciousness .
They are a powerful and often dominant force in American culture .
Black athletes are the heroes of America ’ s youth .
Black comedians , entertainers , musicians and actors fill America ’ s TV , theater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – their lives , emotions , victories , losses – into America ’ s hearts .
Far from being denied access to the American dream , most black Americans are now comfortably in the middle class and part of it .
Oprah Winfrey is a self-made billionaire , the richest woman in America , and she is joined by increasing numbers of other blacks who are also self-made , having amassed multi-million-dollar fortunes in a single lifetime .
The reality is that far from oppressing black America , Americans have made blacks the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – of lavishly funded programs and benefits based on their skin color that are designed to give them a leg up in the world .
And these privileges come at the expense of opportunities for white and Asian Americans who are denied places they have earned at elite universities , and in all walks of professional life , also because of their skin color .
This is a systemic racism that Americans support because it benefits black Americans , and that self-anointed “ anti-racists ” will defend at all costs .
If the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the middle class , what accounts for the failure of other members of the black community to lift themselves out of poverty ?
This is a question that is now politically incorrect to ask .
It is “ blaming the victim.
” It is an affront to the skin privilege of an oppressed people .
It is racist .
In fact , it is an obvious sham , but the vast majority of Americans go along with it .
The rest of America doesn ’ t ask blacks who have fallen behind why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absent fathers , rampant drug use and off the charts crime rates – to mention three obvious factors .
Instead of holding these individuals in any way accountable for their plight , their failure is blamed on invisible white people , who are allegedly responsible for an always un-evidenced “ systemic racism ” against blacks .
Systemic racism is illegal under the 1964 Civil Rights Act .
If it were actually a problem in police departments and corporate institutions , as organizations like Black Lives Matter claim , there would be massive lawsuits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) attorneys , prosecutors and attorneys general .
There aren ’ t such lawsuits because the problem is invented .
Aside from affirmative action programs , the only systemic racism is to be found in the disgraceful inner-city public schools , whose oppression of black youngsters is protected by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions .
They will fight to the death to prevent poor minority kids from having the same choices in education as the children of Democrat teacher union members .
Taken together , the anti-white hysteria and the hysteria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Americans both black and white .
In the summer of 2020 , Black Lives Matter set in motion the largest , most violent , most destructive lynch mob in American history .
Arsonists , looters and street criminals laid siege to 633 cities , caused billions of dollars in damage , and killed scores of people , as it happens mainly black .
According to studies , ninety-five percent of the violent demonstrations were led by Black Lives Matter , and their fascist Antifa allies .
Like classic lynch mobs , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demands for verdicts in advance of trials or even investigations .
“ No Justice , No Peace !
” Thus , George Floyd ’ s death was called a racial murder in advance of the autopsy report , which showed there was no strangulation and that he died of a self-inflicted Fentanyl overdose .
One of the four officers indicted for Floyd ’ s “ murder , ” under pressure from the lynch mob , was an African American who had joined the police force to help institute reforms .
How was this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lies endlessly repeated describe the vast majority of Black Lives Matters ’ claims about racial injustices committed by police .
These lies obscure the fact that these incidents routinely involved black criminals resisting arrest by law enforcement officials whose chiefs – as in the Floyd case – were more often than not black themselves – and Democrats .
“ Hands Up Don ’ t Shoot ” an infamous Black Lives Matter lie that led to arson , destruction and general mayhem in Ferguson , Missouri was the invention of a black criminal accomplice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before a grand jury by six black eyewitnesses who testified that Brown was actually charging the officer with his head down when he was shot .
Yet this lie is now part of the deadly folklore of the Black Lives Matter lynch mob and is featured in a new Netflix film based on the writings of the racist black author Ta-Nehisi Coates .
Small wonder that the icon of the Black Lives Matter movement , Assata Shakur , is a cold-blooded cop killer .
Shakur is also a fugitive taken in by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adored by Black Lives Matters ’ Marxist founders .
Black Lives Matter leads a coalition of roughly fifty vigilante organizations claiming to be pursuing “ social justice.
” Vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris , who has raised bail funds for Black Lives Matter arsonists and street criminals , calls them “ A Coalition of Conscience.
” Hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in its efforts by George Soros , the Ford Foundation and major U.S. corporations , helping to make it the most powerful political movement in America today .
The coalition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , maliciously called “ The Breathe Act ” after two notorious Black Lives Matter lies claiming that Eric Garner and George Floyd were strangled by police .
( The autopsy reports in both cases showed that neither man was strangled .
Both were resisting arrest . )
“ The Breathe Act ” is not about “ choke holds ” or other possible causes of strangulation .
Its goals are to defund the police , abolish prisons , and eliminate border enforcement .
In other words , to make America as vulnerable to domestic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Forty years ago , I left the left when I saw that it was a destructive force that would never change .
Leftists do not tolerate dissenters in their ranks .
They suppress politically incorrect ideas and cast out their perpetrators , demonizing them in the process .
As a result , leftists never learn from their “ mistakes ” or take responsibility for their crimes .
Thus , in every generation a new destructive crusade for “ social justice ” is launched , oblivious of the disasters previous radical campaigns left in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lives Matter proclaim “ We are trained Marxists , ” as though that were a badge of honor rather than a confession of dangerous ignorance and a kiss of death .
Every successful Marxist revolution without exception has established a ruthless police state , which more often than not conducts genocidal persecutions of ethnic minorities .
In other words , social injustice on an epic scale .
Yet that is the prospect we face in a reactionary left that has learned nothing from the past and is intent on destroying the most tolerant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The good news is that a patriotic movement has risen , rededicated to the propositions that all men are created equal and endowed with God-given rights to life and liberty , and is prepared to defend them .
David Horowitz is the author of Blitz : Trump Will Smash the Left & Win , and The Enemy Within : How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America , published in hardcover this past June and forthcoming in paperback next spring .

David Horowitz writes that today’s Left is the same as yesterday’s Left: irredeemably destructive and dishonest. Hating America and working toward its demise is the Left’s pole star. This piece is special to Power Line.
My first political demonstration was a May Day parade in 1948. I was nine years old. We chanted in support of President Truman’s “Fair Employment Practices Commission” and his successful effort to integrate the civil service. The May Day parade was organized by the Communist Party USA, a conspiratorial organization working in league with Communist Russia to overthrow the United States government and create a “Soviet America.” Both my parents were members of the Party.
These two causes in a way defined the next seventy-odd years of my life: on the one hand, the fight for individual rights and equality; on the other a lifelong struggle for – and then against – a treasonous movement that set out to change the world for the better but ended up making it worse – much worse.
As a young man, I was present at the creation of the New Left, editing its largest magazine, Ramparts. The New Left was a socialist movement that began as an attempt to rescue the “Old” Communist Left from the “mistakes” it had made in serving masters who murdered more than 100 million people. In peace time. “Mistakes” was our weasel term for the epic crimes our fellow Marxists committed against ordinary human beings who refused to go along with their utopian schemes. Our goal was to revive the quest they had begun and finally create a world of “social justice.”
I soon discovered that there was no new Left fundamentally different from its predecessor. The evil the left did flowed directly from the noble ideal itself. You cannot create a world of perfect equality because people are not equal, and the attempt to make them so requires taking away the freedom of most for the benefit of what turns out to be a few. You cannot create a government that is socially “just” because the people who will run it are the same people whose lies, bigotries, selfishness and greed created the unjust world you are attempting to leave behind. The new rulers, corrupt as ever, will have more power than ever. You can only make things worse. Much worse.
I learned these truths first in my work with the Black Panther Party, a murderous street gang whom we regarded as “the vanguard of the revolution.” We did so because the Panthers were the only leftists with guns who were willing to use them. The Panthers preyed mainly on vulnerable blacks but also murdered a friend of mine who was white.
My second awakening came with the success of the New Left’s “antiwar movement,” which forced America out of Vietnam. The New Left’s claims to be “anti-war” in behalf of the Vietnamese were actually two dangerous lies. When the movement succeeded in forcing America’s withdrawal from Indo-China, the Communists proceeded to slaughter two and a half million peasants in Cambodia and Vietnam. There wasn’t a single demonstration against the slaughter. Not one. I realized then that it was never an “anti-war” movement. It was an anti-American movement. The Left wanted the Communists to win and didn’t care how many innocent Asians were murdered in the process. I realized I was involved in a movement whose rhetoric was seductive and noble but whose deeds were evil. And I left.
The “social justice” radicals still have the best slogans. They call themselves progressives but are actually reactionaries. They call themselves liberals but are actually bigots. They say they’re for peace when they are organized for war. It is always the same war: to bring down the United States of America.
Thanks mainly to their growing influence, we live in extreme times, where things are not what they are made to seem, and monstrous accusations are leveled at individuals without restraint. As a result, we live in an atmosphere of intimidation, where people can lose their livelihoods, their careers and even their lives if they get on the wrong side of leftist crusaders. That is a terrible thing to have to say in this once free country, but it is something that has become too obvious to deny.
For 30 years before he descended the famous escalator in Trump Tower to declare his candidacy for the White House, Donald Trump was a well-known public figure. Everybody in America knew who he was. In all those 30 years, no one ever referred to him as “Donald Trump, host of ‘The Apprentice’ and white supremacist.” Nobody ever said “This is Donald Trump, New York builder and white nationalist.” That only happened when he ran against the Democrats.
In fact, all three of Trump’s predecessors as presidential candidates – Bush, McCain and even Romney were denounced as racists by the Democrats. Vice President Joe Biden told an audience that included many black Americans that if elected, Mitt Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan, “are gonna put y’all back in chains.”
Why do Democrats take such a low road as a matter of course? They do it because it is effective, and because the Democrat Party has a dirty secret to hide. Democrats control 100% of every major inner-city in America, and have for 50 to 100 years. Every killing field — Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis – is 100% in the hands of the Democrats. Every injustice in these inner cities – real or imagined – that policy can affect, Democrats are 100% responsible for. Every rotten school system, which year in and year out fails to provide mainly black and Hispanic kids with the basic tools they need to succeed is 100% controlled by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions who without exception put the interests of the adults in the system in front of the kids. Including keeping schools closed during the Covid-19 pandemic while demanding more money for themselves.
Trump represented a major threat to the Democrats’ corrupt inner-city empires and – worse – to their electoral power base. Consequently, when Trump asked inner city blacks “What do you have to lose by voting for me?” the Democrats lost no time in demonizing him. They did so in the most dehumanizing terms possible – launching an all-out war to destroy him as a white nationalist, white supremacist, Hitler. In this lethal atmosphere, which has lasted for four years, the first black President of the United States this week again called Trump – and by implication his seventy-three million supporters – racist.
Race is the Democrats’ nuclear weapon, deployed to destroy their critics and protect every corrupt urban Tammany Hall they have built and profited from over the last 100 years. This weapon was a gift from the radicals who successfully infiltrated the Democrat Party following their riot at the Convention in 1968. It is where the deep divisions that afflict us now began.
The absurd, racially poisonous term, “white skin privilege,” for example, was an invention of the hate America terrorists who called themselves “Weathermen,” and whose leaders, Bill Ayers and Eric Mann, advised Barack Obama (Ayers actually ghosted his autobiography) and mentored the insurrectionary founders of Black Lives Matter. The stated goal of the Weathermen terrorists was to join what they saw as a global race war against “white supremacy,” and to join it as a fifth column against white America.
Democrats embraced racial politics opportunistically at first, because it was an effective political weapon. As a result of the radical ascendancy within the Democrat party and in the nation’s schools, the race card now features the ludicrous charge that white America is a white supremacist nation, and “racism is in its DNA.” This is a charge that is deadly because it will justify the most radical anti-American measures. As a result of the Democrats’ blitzkrieg against this imaginary scourge, large sections of the American public are now in the grip of a hysteria that has detached them from any semblance of reality. In this atmosphere, a lifelong liberal like Trump can be miraculously transformed into a raving Nazi. On the other end of the equation, black America is cast as a race of noble savages who can do no wrongs that are not attributable to “systemic racism” and white oppression.
In this fantasy world, black Americans are routinely portrayed as though they are a “marginal” and “under-represented” people in our society. This has become a required perspective for racially sensitive Americans eager to position themselves “on the right side of history.” And it is forced on millions of whites who are demonized by a multi-million-dollar industry of racist diversity trainers who lecture captive audiences in our universities, corporations, and even military academies, in the anti-white racism of “critical race theory,” a creed concocted by the hate America left.
The notion that black Americans are marginal, and under-represented, and therefore oppressed is transparently ridiculous. On the contrary, to anyone with eyes to see, Black America and its wounds are closer to being the center of the nation’s attention, and also the focus of its charitable largesse. Otherwise, how explain the complacency of the nation and its civic authorities towards the epic lawlessness and destruction inspired by Black Lives Matter vigilantes in 600 American cities last summer without a single instigator being held accountable, and even the arrested perpetrators being immediately released from jail? How explain how such criminal violence could be justified as opposing “police brutality” in advance of a single trial or even investigation of an allegedly brutal police officer?
Far from being marginal, under-represented, and oppressed, Black America is a community continually front and center in the nation’s consciousness. They are a powerful and often dominant force in American culture. Black athletes are the heroes of America’s youth. Black comedians, entertainers, musicians and actors fill America’s TV, theater and Internet screens, bringing their stories – their lives, emotions, victories, losses – into America’s hearts. Far from being denied access to the American dream, most black Americans are now comfortably in the middle class and part of it.
Oprah Winfrey is a self-made billionaire, the richest woman in America, and she is joined by increasing numbers of other blacks who are also self-made, having amassed multi-million-dollar fortunes in a single lifetime. The reality is that far from oppressing black America, Americans have made blacks the recipients of a cornucopia of special privileges – of lavishly funded programs and benefits based on their skin color that are designed to give them a leg up in the world. And these privileges come at the expense of opportunities for white and Asian Americans who are denied places they have earned at elite universities, and in all walks of professional life, also because of their skin color. This is a systemic racism that Americans support because it benefits black Americans, and that self-anointed “anti-racists” will defend at all costs.
If the majority of black Americans are comfortably in the middle class, what accounts for the failure of other members of the black community to lift themselves out of poverty? This is a question that is now politically incorrect to ask. It is “blaming the victim.” It is an affront to the skin privilege of an oppressed people. It is racist. In fact, it is an obvious sham, but the vast majority of Americans go along with it. The rest of America doesn’t ask blacks who have fallen behind why that is so. For example, absent fathers, rampant drug use and off the charts crime rates – to mention three obvious factors. Instead of holding these individuals in any way accountable for their plight, their failure is blamed on invisible white people, who are allegedly responsible for an always un-evidenced “systemic racism” against blacks.
Systemic racism is illegal under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. If it were actually a problem in police departments and corporate institutions, as organizations like Black Lives Matter claim, there would be massive lawsuits by legions of black (and white) attorneys, prosecutors and attorneys general. There aren’t such lawsuits because the problem is invented. Aside from affirmative action programs, the only systemic racism is to be found in the disgraceful inner-city public schools, whose oppression of black youngsters is protected by the Democrat Party and its teacher unions. They will fight to the death to prevent poor minority kids from having the same choices in education as the children of Democrat teacher union members.
Taken together, the anti-white hysteria and the hysteria of black victimhood have had terrible consequences for Americans both black and white. In the summer of 2020, Black Lives Matter set in motion the largest, most violent, most destructive lynch mob in American history. Arsonists, looters and street criminals laid siege to 633 cities, caused billions of dollars in damage, and killed scores of people, as it happens mainly black. According to studies, ninety-five percent of the violent demonstrations were led by Black Lives Matter, and their fascist Antifa allies.
Like classic lynch mobs, the Black Lives Matter attacks were inspired by demands for verdicts in advance of trials or even investigations. “No Justice, No Peace!” Thus, George Floyd’s death was called a racial murder in advance of the autopsy report, which showed there was no strangulation and that he died of a self-inflicted Fentanyl overdose. One of the four officers indicted for Floyd’s “murder,” under pressure from the lynch mob, was an African American who had joined the police force to help institute reforms. How was this even a racial incident?
The same lies endlessly repeated describe the vast majority of Black Lives Matters’ claims about racial injustices committed by police. These lies obscure the fact that these incidents routinely involved black criminals resisting arrest by law enforcement officials whose chiefs – as in the Floyd case – were more often than not black themselves – and Democrats. “Hands Up Don’t Shoot” an infamous Black Lives Matter lie that led to arson, destruction and general mayhem in Ferguson, Missouri was the invention of a black criminal accomplice of Michael Brown. It was refuted before a grand jury by six black eyewitnesses who testified that Brown was actually charging the officer with his head down when he was shot.
Yet this lie is now part of the deadly folklore of the Black Lives Matter lynch mob and is featured in a new Netflix film based on the writings of the racist black author Ta-Nehisi Coates. Small wonder that the icon of the Black Lives Matter movement, Assata Shakur, is a cold-blooded cop killer. Shakur is also a fugitive taken in by the sadistic dictator Fidel Castro, a figure adored by Black Lives Matters’ Marxist founders.
Black Lives Matter leads a coalition of roughly fifty vigilante organizations claiming to be pursuing “social justice.” Vice-presidential candidate Kamala Harris, who has raised bail funds for Black Lives Matter arsonists and street criminals, calls them “A Coalition of Conscience.” Hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in its efforts by George Soros, the Ford Foundation and major U.S. corporations, helping to make it the most powerful political movement in America today.
The coalition has already presented its first legislative proposal, maliciously called “The Breathe Act” after two notorious Black Lives Matter lies claiming that Eric Garner and George Floyd were strangled by police. (The autopsy reports in both cases showed that neither man was strangled. Both were resisting arrest.) “The Breathe Act” is not about “choke holds” or other possible causes of strangulation. Its goals are to defund the police, abolish prisons, and eliminate border enforcement. In other words, to make America as vulnerable to domestic criminals and international enemies as possible.
Forty years ago, I left the left when I saw that it was a destructive force that would never change. Leftists do not tolerate dissenters in their ranks. They suppress politically incorrect ideas and cast out their perpetrators, demonizing them in the process. As a result, leftists never learn from their “mistakes” or take responsibility for their crimes. Thus, in every generation a new destructive crusade for “social justice” is launched, oblivious of the disasters previous radical campaigns left in their wakes.
The leaders of Black Lives Matter proclaim “We are trained Marxists,” as though that were a badge of honor rather than a confession of dangerous ignorance and a kiss of death. Every successful Marxist revolution without exception has established a ruthless police state, which more often than not conducts genocidal persecutions of ethnic minorities. In other words, social injustice on an epic scale. Yet that is the prospect we face in a reactionary left that has learned nothing from the past and is intent on destroying the most tolerant, inclusive, egalitarian society ever created. The good news is that a patriotic movement has risen, rededicated to the propositions that all men are created equal and endowed with God-given rights to life and liberty, and is prepared to defend them.
David Horowitz is the author of Blitz: Trump Will Smash the Left & Win, and The Enemy Within: How a Totalitarian Movement is Destroying America, published in hardcover this past June and forthcoming in paperback next spring.