powerlineblog--2020-12-27--Coronavirus in one state (145)

Coronavirus in one state (145)

Minnesota state Rep. May Franson has compiled her own review of COVID-19 death data in Minnesota .
She discussed her review with retiring state Sen. and Dr. Scott Jensen in the video at the bottom of this post .
Anthony Gockowski of Alpha News ( on whose board I sit ) posted the video and reported on it on December 19 in “ State lawmakers call for audit of COVID-19 death certificates.
” Rep. Franson ’ s findings are difficult to reconcile with the the response I received earlier this week from the Minnesota Department of Health .
I posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this series as follows : Question : In how many of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 is COVID-19 shown on part 1 of the death certificate as an underlying cause and in how many is it shown on part 2 as a contributory cause ?
Response : The National Center for Health Statistics ( NCHS ) assigns the ICD-10 codes and adheres to the WHO Nomenclature Regulations specified in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems .
NCHS also uses the ICD international rules for selecting the underlying cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accordance with the international rules .
There are several separate set of rules applied when assigning multiple and underlying cause of death ( COD ) ICD-10 codes .
One can not determine the underlying cause of death just based on the disease condition literals reported on the death records .
Therefore , it is important the cause of death be reported in the correct format as the ICD-10 codes strictly depend on how the certifiers report the cause of death .
The figures below indicate the total number of cases with COVID or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Part I and/or Part II .
There could be cases where these literals are reported in both sections .
Even if COVID-19 is listed as a secondary cause , our experience indicates almost all of the persons listed below would not have died if they were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 .
For the case definition that we use for COVID deaths ( the CDC/CSTE case definition for deaths ) , it is not significant if COVID is listed in Part 1 or Part 2 .
• There are 3,408 death records where COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CORONAVIRUS , SARS ) or coded as COVID-19 ( U07.1 ) are reported in Part I .
• There are 463 death records where COVID or related terms ( CORONA VIRUS , CORONAVIRUS , SARS ) or coded as COVID-19 ( U07.1 ) are reported in Part II .
Kevin Roche commented on this response and others here .
Rep. Franson has not yet made her analysis of the death data available for public consumption , but she kindly shared it with me this morning .
Her analysis appears to cover a slightly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s above .
As I say , however , I find it difficult to reconcile her compilation of the data with the answer MDH provided to me .
Rep. Franson comments : “ What I find very interesting — not one [ member of the ] MN mainstream media has reached out to me .
Not .
One .
”

Minnesota state Rep. May Franson has compiled her own review of COVID-19 death data in Minnesota. She discussed her review with retiring state Sen. and Dr. Scott Jensen in the video at the bottom of this post. Anthony Gockowski of Alpha News (on whose board I sit) posted the video and reported on it on December 19 in “State lawmakers call for audit of COVID-19 death certificates.”
Rep. Franson’s findings are difficult to reconcile with the the response I received earlier this week from the Minnesota Department of Health. I posted my question and response in part 143 of this series as follows:
Question: In how many of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 is COVID-19 shown on part 1 of the death certificate as an underlying cause and in how many is it shown on part 2 as a contributory cause? Response: The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) assigns the ICD-10 codes and adheres to the WHO Nomenclature Regulations specified in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. NCHS also uses the ICD international rules for selecting the underlying cause of death for primary mortality tabulation in accordance with the international rules. There are several separate set of rules applied when assigning multiple and underlying cause of death (COD) ICD-10 codes. One cannot determine the underlying cause of death just based on the disease condition literals reported on the death records. Therefore, it is important the cause of death be reported in the correct format as the ICD-10 codes strictly depend on how the certifiers report the cause of death. The figures below indicate the total number of cases with COVID or related terms reported by the certifiers in Part I and/or Part II. There could be cases where these literals are reported in both sections. Even if COVID-19 is listed as a secondary cause, our experience indicates almost all of the persons listed below would not have died if they were not infected with SARS-CoV-2. For the case definition that we use for COVID deaths (the CDC/CSTE case definition for deaths), it is not significant if COVID is listed in Part 1 or Part 2. As of December 7: • There are 3,408 death records where COVID or related terms (CORONA VIRUS, CORONAVIRUS, SARS) or coded as COVID-19 (U07.1) are reported in Part I. • There are 463 death records where COVID or related terms (CORONA VIRUS, CORONAVIRUS, SARS) or coded as COVID-19 (U07.1) are reported in Part II.
Kevin Roche commented on this response and others here.
Rep. Franson has not yet made her analysis of the death data available for public consumption, but she kindly shared it with me this morning. Her analysis appears to cover a slightly different period of time than MDH’s above. As I say, however, I find it difficult to reconcile her compilation of the data with the answer MDH provided to me. Rep. Franson comments: “What I find very interesting — not one [member of the] MN mainstream media has reached out to me. Not. One.”


powerlineblog--2020-12-27--Warnock’s gospel  of hate

Warnock’s gospel  of hate

The most important elections of 2021 take place on January 5 in Georgia .
Control of the Senate hinges on the outcome of the Georgia Senate runoff elections pitting Democrat Raphael Warnock against incumbent Repubilcan Kelly Loeffler and Democrat Jon Ossoff against incumbent Republican David Perdue .
Ossoff is a glorified nullity whom we have mostly ignored this time around .
We have attended to Warnock .
Warnock is something else again .
I nevertheless think it likely that these races will stand or fall together .
Warnock is a voluble hater of the Jeremiah Wright variety .
Unfortunately , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party .
Barack Obama had everything going for him in 2008 and still had to to go into his big time BS artist mode to distance himself from Wright .
Running for office statewide in Georgia , Warnock now seeks to distance himself from himself .
That should be a task with a high degree of difficulty , though he is aided in his efforts by left-wing rabbis whose true religion is in my opinion state-of-the-art liberalism .
On December 14 , however , the Coalition for Jewish Values responded with a rebuttal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that partisan clergy sign a letter does not , unfortunately , mean its words are true.
” The six officers who set policy for the CJV are traditional Orthodox Rabbis ; I ’ m with them .
( More here and here . )
The politicaL arm of Christians United for Israel now turns the degree of difficulty confronting Warnock ’ s self-distancing gymnastics up a notch .
They have produced a 30-second truth bomb ( tweet below ) .
The Washington Free Beacon reports that a spokesman for the group said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ digital and social media investment targeting pro-Israel voters in Georgia , where the organization has approximately 500,000 members .
The Free Beacon quotes CUFI Georgia state director Pastor Jay Bailey criticizing Warnock ’ s “ condemnations of Israel ” as “ disgusting ” ( bravo ! )
.

The most important elections of 2021 take place on January 5 in Georgia. Control of the Senate hinges on the outcome of the Georgia Senate runoff elections pitting Democrat Raphael Warnock against incumbent Repubilcan Kelly Loeffler and Democrat Jon Ossoff against incumbent Republican David Perdue. Ossoff is a glorified nullity whom we have mostly ignored this time around. We have attended to Warnock. Warnock is something else again. I nevertheless think it likely that these races will stand or fall together.
Warnock is a voluble hater of the Jeremiah Wright variety. Unfortunately, he represents the drift of the Democratic Party. Barack Obama had everything going for him in 2008 and still had to to go into his big time BS artist mode to distance himself from Wright. Running for office statewide in Georgia, Warnock now seeks to distance himself from himself.
That should be a task with a high degree of difficulty, though he is aided in his efforts by left-wing rabbis whose true religion is in my opinion state-of-the-art liberalism. On December 14, however, the Coalition for Jewish Values responded with a rebuttal making the irrefutable observation that “the fact that partisan clergy sign a letter does not, unfortunately, mean its words are true.” The six officers who set policy for the CJV are traditional Orthodox Rabbis; I’m with them. (More here and here.)
The politicaL arm of Christians United for Israel now turns the degree of difficulty confronting Warnock’s self-distancing gymnastics up a notch. They have produced a 30-second truth bomb (tweet below). The Washington Free Beacon reports that a spokesman for the group said the ad is backed by a significant digital and social media investment targeting pro-Israel voters in Georgia, where the organization has approximately 500,000 members. The Free Beacon quotes CUFI Georgia state director Pastor Jay Bailey criticizing Warnock’s “condemnations of Israel” as “disgusting” (bravo!).


powerlineblog--2020-12-28--Coronavirus numbers, an update

Coronavirus numbers, an update

The other day , a friend remarked that I haven ’ t written about the Wuhan coronavirus numbers lately .
He ’ s right .
I haven ’ t , for various reasons .
I will in this post .
( Numbers cited are from Worldometer . )
In the U.S. , more than 340,000 deaths are now attributed to the virus .
That ’ s many more deaths than most experts expected earlier this year .
However , it ’ s commensurate with the per capita death toll in the countries it makes most sense to compare with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,028 per one million people .
In the UK , the per capita number is almost the same — 1,040 .
In Italy and Spain , it ’ s higher — 1,190 and 1,065 , respectively .
In France , it ’ s 940 .
Among the major European nations , only Germany has broken the pattern .
Per capita deaths there are only 363 .
I ’ m still not sure why the number is so low .
Thus , the Democrats and their allies in the media are lying when they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , President Trump bungled the U.S. response to the virus .
In fact , it doesn ’ t make much sense to say that Trump dictated the U.S. response , by and large .
In our system , governors determined the response in their states .
( However , Trump was responsible for pushing resources towards the development of a vaccine , and he deserves high marks in that department . )
Indeed , Democrats and their media allies were apoplectic at the thought that Trump might dictate to the nation ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formulated the response in their states .
As a group , they did about as well ( or as badly ) as the leaders of the UK , France , Italy , and Spain .
As to the performance of the various states , New Jersey leads the nation in per capital deaths at 2,113 , twice the national number .
New York comes in second at 1,920 .
Connecticut and Massachusetts also have a considerably higher number of per capita deaths than the national number — 1,624 and 1,757 , respectively .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worst performing states are North and South Dakota .
In North Dakota , 1,661 deaths are attributed to the virus .
In South Dakota , 1,635 deaths are .
Neighboring Minnesota comes in below the national number at 923 .
Throughout the year , I have kept track of the numbers in Scandinavia , especially in Norway and Sweden .
That ’ s because these two countries adopted different approaches to the virus .
Norway went with most of the rest of Europe and locked down tight .
Sweden did not .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ number is 817 .
In Norway , it ’ s 77 .
In Denmark , which also locked down , the number is 202 .
In Sweden , some hoped that its more less drastic approach to stopping the virus ’ spread would produce herd immunity .
So far , it hasn ’ t .
Sweden has been hard hit by a second wave of the virus , with about 7,500 new reported cases per day and about 50 deaths per day during the last six weeks or so of the year .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the numbers are about 500 new cases per day and about ten deaths per day on average attributed to the virus .
Sweden ’ s population is about twice the size of Norway ’ s .
Any way you slice them , the numbers , both in the U.S. and worldwide , are depressing .
I suppose this is the main reason why I stopped writing regularly about them .

The other day, a friend remarked that I haven’t written about the Wuhan coronavirus numbers lately. He’s right. I haven’t, for various reasons. I will in this post. (Numbers cited are from Worldometer.)
In the U.S., more than 340,000 deaths are now attributed to the virus. That’s many more deaths than most experts expected earlier this year. However, it’s commensurate with the per capita death toll in the countries it makes most sense to compare with the U.S.
The U.S. number translates to 1,028 per one million people. In the UK, the per capita number is almost the same — 1,040. In Italy and Spain, it’s higher — 1,190 and 1,065, respectively. In France, it’s 940.
Among the major European nations, only Germany has broken the pattern. Per capita deaths there are only 363. I’m still not sure why the number is so low.
Thus, the Democrats and their allies in the media are lying when they claim that, in a comparative sense, President Trump bungled the U.S. response to the virus. In fact, it doesn’t make much sense to say that Trump dictated the U.S. response, by and large. In our system, governors determined the response in their states. (However, Trump was responsible for pushing resources towards the development of a vaccine, and he deserves high marks in that department.)
Indeed, Democrats and their media allies were apoplectic at the thought that Trump might dictate to the nation’s governors. He did not. Governors formulated the response in their states. As a group, they did about as well (or as badly) as the leaders of the UK, France, Italy, and Spain.
As to the performance of the various states, New Jersey leads the nation in per capita deaths at 2,113, twice the national number. New York comes in second at 1,920. Connecticut and Massachusetts also have a considerably higher number of per capita deaths than the national number — 1,624 and 1,757, respectively.
Outside of the northeast, two of the worst performing states are North and South Dakota. In North Dakota, 1,661 deaths are attributed to the virus. In South Dakota, 1,635 deaths are. Neighboring Minnesota comes in below the national number at 923.
Throughout the year, I have kept track of the numbers in Scandinavia, especially in Norway and Sweden. That’s because these two countries adopted different approaches to the virus. Norway went with most of the rest of Europe and locked down tight. Sweden did not.
In Sweden, the per capita deaths number is 817. In Norway, it’s 77. In Denmark, which also locked down, the number is 202.
In Sweden, some hoped that its more less drastic approach to stopping the virus’ spread would produce herd immunity. So far, it hasn’t.
Sweden has been hard hit by a second wave of the virus, with about 7,500 new reported cases per day and about 50 deaths per day during the last six weeks or so of the year. In Norway during the same period, the numbers are about 500 new cases per day and about ten deaths per day on average attributed to the virus.
Sweden’s population is about twice the size of Norway’s.
Any way you slice them, the numbers, both in the U.S. and worldwide, are depressing. I suppose this is the main reason why I stopped writing regularly about them.


powerlineblog--2020-12-28--“Stimulus” Bill Includes Green Giveaways

The pork bill that Congress passed on Monday has been criticized on many appropriate grounds , but I haven ’ t seen much comment on the fact that it betrays taxpayers and users of electricity ( all of us ) by perpetuating and expanding “ green ” energy mandates .
The bill includes : * A two-year extension of the investment tax credit ( ITC ) used by solar power generators ( keeping the ITC at 26 % through year-end 2022 instead of falling to 22 % in calendar year 2021 ) * A one-year extender for the production tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developers , and a NEW 30 % ITC for offshore wind projects that commence construction by the end of 2025 .
* Re-authorization the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy and the Weatherization Assistance Program through fiscal year 2025 , and a requirement that the Secretary of the Interior seek to permit at least 25,000 MW of wind , solar and geothermal projects by 2025 .
Wind and solar energy are a bad joke .
They are obsolete , unreliable , and ridiculously expensive if all costs are included–something that “ green ” advocates never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could not exist without government mandates and subsidies .
Which means , in turn , that they are lavish contributors to politicians .
There are people getting rich on wind and solar projects , and they owe it all to government .
Of course , those people aren ’ t you , me , or the hundreds of millions of Americans who buy electricity and pay taxes .
Once again , the politicians and a handful of well-connected operators benefit , and the rest of us pay the tab .

The pork bill that Congress passed on Monday has been criticized on many appropriate grounds, but I haven’t seen much comment on the fact that it betrays taxpayers and users of electricity (all of us) by perpetuating and expanding “green” energy mandates. The bill includes:
* A two-year extension of the investment tax credit (ITC) used by solar power generators (keeping the ITC at 26% through year-end 2022 instead of falling to 22% in calendar year 2021) * A one-year extender for the production tax credit (PTC) used by wind developers, and a NEW 30% ITC for offshore wind projects that commence construction by the end of 2025. * Re-authorization the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy and the Weatherization Assistance Program through fiscal year 2025, and a requirement that the Secretary of the Interior seek to permit at least 25,000 MW of wind, solar and geothermal projects by 2025.
Wind and solar energy are a bad joke. They are obsolete, unreliable, and ridiculously expensive if all costs are included–something that “green” advocates never do. These industries, therefore, could not exist without government mandates and subsidies. Which means, in turn, that they are lavish contributors to politicians.
There are people getting rich on wind and solar projects, and they owe it all to government. Of course, those people aren’t you, me, or the hundreds of millions of Americans who buy electricity and pay taxes. Once again, the politicians and a handful of well-connected operators benefit, and the rest of us pay the tab.


Homer Canceled

In the Wall Street Journal , Meghan Gurdon documents the latest stage of our culture ’ s devolution toward utter stupidity : the cancellation of Homer .
A sustained effort is under way to deny children access to literature .
Under the slogan # DisruptTexts , critical-theory ideologues , schoolteachers and Twitter agitators are purging and propagandizing against classic texts—everything from Homer to F. Scott Fitzgerald to Dr. Seuss .
Their ethos holds that children shouldn ’ t have to read stories written in anything other than the present-day vernacular—especially those “ in which racism , sexism , ableism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are the norm , ” as young-adult novelist Padma Venkatraman writes in School Library Journal .
No author is valuable enough to spare , Ms. Venkatraman instructs : “ Absolving Shakespeare of responsibility by mentioning that he lived at a time when hate-ridden sentiments prevailed , risks sending a subliminal message that academic excellence outweighs hateful rhetoric.
” It seems pretty clear that Ms. Venkagraman is far more filled with hate than the Bard ever was .
The demands for censorship appear to be getting results .
“ Be like Odysseus and embrace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then take the Odyssey out of your curriculum because it ’ s trash ) , ” tweeted Shea Martin in June .
“ Hahaha , ” replied Heather Levine , an English teacher at Lawrence ( Mass . )
High School .
“ Very proud to say we got the Odyssey removed from the curriculum this year !
” When I contacted Ms. Levine to confirm this , she replied that she found the inquiry “ invasive.
” Much more at the link , if you can access it , including the cancellation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scarlet Letter .
Outsiders got a glimpse of the intensity of the # DisruptTexts campaign recently when self-described “ antiracist teacher ” Lorena Germán complained that many classics were written more than 70 years ago : “ Think of US society before then & the values that shaped this nation afterwards .
THAT is what is in those books.
” Jessica Cluess , an author of young-adult fiction , shot back : “ If you think Hawthorne was on the side of the judgmental Puritans .
.
.
then you are an absolute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of educator in your twitter bio.
” That was the end of Ms. Cluess ’ s career , apparently .
Despite her recantation .
An online horde descended , accused Ms. Cluess of racism and “ violence , ” and demanded that Penguin Random House cancel her contract .
The publisher hasn ’ t complied , perhaps because Ms. Cluess tweeted a ritual self-denunciation : “ I take full responsibility for my unprovoked anger toward Lorena Germán .
.
.
.
I am committed to learning more about Ms. Germán ’ s important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I will strive to do better.
” That didn ’ t stop Ms. Cluess ’ s literary agent , Brooks Sherman , from denouncing her “ racist and unacceptable ” opinions and terminating their professional relationship .
Briefly put , the morons are on the march .
They can ’ t possibly represent a majority , but at the moment hardly anyone is standing in their way .
That is how it seems , anyway .

In the Wall Street Journal, Meghan Gurdon documents the latest stage of our culture’s devolution toward utter stupidity: the cancellation of Homer.
A sustained effort is under way to deny children access to literature. Under the slogan #DisruptTexts, critical-theory ideologues, schoolteachers and Twitter agitators are purging and propagandizing against classic texts—everything from Homer to F. Scott Fitzgerald to Dr. Seuss. Their ethos holds that children shouldn’t have to read stories written in anything other than the present-day vernacular—especially those “in which racism, sexism, ableism, anti-Semitism, and other forms of hate are the norm,” as young-adult novelist Padma Venkatraman writes in School Library Journal. No author is valuable enough to spare, Ms. Venkatraman instructs: “Absolving Shakespeare of responsibility by mentioning that he lived at a time when hate-ridden sentiments prevailed, risks sending a subliminal message that academic excellence outweighs hateful rhetoric.”
It seems pretty clear that Ms. Venkagraman is far more filled with hate than the Bard ever was.
The demands for censorship appear to be getting results. “Be like Odysseus and embrace the long haul to liberation (and then take the Odyssey out of your curriculum because it’s trash),” tweeted Shea Martin in June. “Hahaha,” replied Heather Levine, an English teacher at Lawrence (Mass.) High School. “Very proud to say we got the Odyssey removed from the curriculum this year!” When I contacted Ms. Levine to confirm this, she replied that she found the inquiry “invasive.”
Much more at the link, if you can access it, including the cancellation of a brave woman who defended The Scarlet Letter.
Outsiders got a glimpse of the intensity of the #DisruptTexts campaign recently when self-described “antiracist teacher” Lorena Germán complained that many classics were written more than 70 years ago: “Think of US society before then & the values that shaped this nation afterwards. THAT is what is in those books.”
The horror! Seventy years ago! Life just began, apparently, circa 2018.
Jessica Cluess, an author of young-adult fiction, shot back: “If you think Hawthorne was on the side of the judgmental Puritans . . . then you are an absolute idiot and should not have the title of educator in your twitter bio.”
That was the end of Ms. Cluess’s career, apparently. Despite her recantation.
An online horde descended, accused Ms. Cluess of racism and “violence,” and demanded that Penguin Random House cancel her contract. The publisher hasn’t complied, perhaps because Ms. Cluess tweeted a ritual self-denunciation: “I take full responsibility for my unprovoked anger toward Lorena Germán. . . . I am committed to learning more about Ms. Germán’s important work with #DisruptTexts. . . . I will strive to do better.” That didn’t stop Ms. Cluess’s literary agent, Brooks Sherman, from denouncing her “racist and unacceptable” opinions and terminating their professional relationship.
Briefly put, the morons are on the march. They can’t possibly represent a majority, but at the moment hardly anyone is standing in their way. That is how it seems, anyway.


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--What did President Trump gain by delaying by coronavirus relief? [UPDATED]

Nothing .
The legislation he described as a disgrace has been signed into law in exactly the form Congress passed it .
It does not include the $ 2,000 handouts Trump wanted .
It includes all of the wasteful spending he decried .
The president tried to save face with a “ signing statement.
” He declared , “ the Senate will start the process for a vote that increases checks to $ 2,000 , repeals Section 230 , and starts an investigation into voter fraud.
” But Trump ’ s statement has no binding power on Congress .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but see the update below ) .
If there ’ s an investigation into voter fraud , it will be because Senate Republicans want to conduct that investigation , not because Trump delayed signing the relief legislation .
It ’ s no accident that when Majority Leader McConnell praised Trump for signing the legislation , he said nothing about the president ’ s demands .
McConnell stated simply : “ The compromise bill is not perfect , but it will do an enormous amount of good for struggling Kentuckians and Americans across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Trump ’ s holdout , it would have started doing that good earlier .
What did Trump lose by holding out ?
He lost the opportunity to make Nancy Pelosi the villain of the piece , if he still cares about that .
Issac Schorr explains : The situation can be summed up thus : The president delayed signing a much-needed COVID-relief and spending bill because it did not include something he had not requested , and did include items that his administration had asked for in its proposed budget for 2021 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trouble of being blamed for delaying the passage of a relief bill in a transparent effort to hurt his reelection campaign , something that she is guilty of and that Republicans would be talking about were they not being forced to convince the president not to “ pocket veto ” the bill .
This marks the second time that the president has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on this issue alone .
In October , he announced that he was instructing his administration ’ s negotiators to halt discussions with Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking the gun Pelosi had pointed at her own head out of her hands and aiming it at his own .
If President Trump ever were a master of the art of the deal , that time has long since passed .
Maybe the time has also passed for claiming that Trump is playing five-dimensional chess in cases where all he ’ s really doing is lashing out or behaving petulantly .
UPDATE : Nancy Pelosi pounced on Trump ’ s backing for $ 2,000 stimulus checks .
The House promptly passed legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitch McConnell will now have to decide whether to bring the House measure to the floor in the Senate , as Chuck Schumer is calling on him to do .
Many Senate Republicans wisely oppose the Trump-Pelosi untargeted giveaway as too expensive .
Given the split within the GOP caucus and the split between Trump and many GOP Senators , I hope McConnell will let Pelosi ’ s measure die a quiet and well deserved death .
However , I must admit that Trump might have been playing chess , after all .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this plays out .

Nothing. The legislation he described as a disgrace has been signed into law in exactly the form Congress passed it. It does not include the $2,000 handouts Trump wanted. It includes all of the wasteful spending he decried.
The president tried to save face with a “signing statement.” He declared, “the Senate will start the process for a vote that increases checks to $2,000, repeals Section 230, and starts an investigation into voter fraud.”
But Trump’s statement has no binding power on Congress. There will be no $2,000 checks (but see the update below). If there’s an investigation into voter fraud, it will be because Senate Republicans want to conduct that investigation, not because Trump delayed signing the relief legislation.
It’s no accident that when Majority Leader McConnell praised Trump for signing the legislation, he said nothing about the president’s demands. McConnell stated simply: “The compromise bill is not perfect, but it will do an enormous amount of good for struggling Kentuckians and Americans across the country who need help now.” But for Trump’s holdout, it would have started doing that good earlier.
What did Trump lose by holding out? He lost the opportunity to make Nancy Pelosi the villain of the piece, if he still cares about that. Issac Schorr explains:
The situation can be summed up thus: The president delayed signing a much-needed COVID-relief and spending bill because it did not include something he had not requested, and did include items that his administration had asked for in its proposed budget for 2021. This saved Speaker Nancy Pelosi the trouble of being blamed for delaying the passage of a relief bill in a transparent effort to hurt his reelection campaign, something that she is guilty of and that Republicans would be talking about were they not being forced to convince the president not to “pocket veto” the bill.
Schorr continues:
This marks the second time that the president has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory on this issue alone. In October, he announced that he was instructing his administration’s negotiators to halt discussions with Pelosi because she was being unreasonable, thereby taking the gun Pelosi had pointed at her own head out of her hands and aiming it at his own. If President Trump ever were a master of the art of the deal, that time has long since passed.
Maybe the time has also passed for claiming that Trump is playing five-dimensional chess in cases where all he’s really doing is lashing out or behaving petulantly.
UPDATE: Nancy Pelosi pounced on Trump’s backing for $2,000 stimulus checks. The House promptly passed legislation upping the checks to that amount.
Mitch McConnell will now have to decide whether to bring the House measure to the floor in the Senate, as Chuck Schumer is calling on him to do. Many Senate Republicans wisely oppose the Trump-Pelosi untargeted giveaway as too expensive. Given the split within the GOP caucus and the split between Trump and many GOP Senators, I hope McConnell will let Pelosi’s measure die a quiet and well deserved death.
However, I must admit that Trump might have been playing chess, after all. We’ll have to see how this plays out.


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--Lockdowns Have Been a Disaster

Lockdowns Have Been a Disaster

By any sensible calculation , the principal worldwide covid damage has come not from the virus , but from governments ’ efforts to suppress it , principally through lockdowns .
Dr. Ari Joffe attempts to quantify that disproportion .
Joffe is a distinguished Canadian pediatrician , having recently been named one of the ten most influential researchers in the field of pediatric critical care .
Dr. Joffe itemizes some of the adverse consequences of shutdowns : Public health leaders are medical experts and are necessary advisors in formulating a response to the pandemic .
However , their expertise is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are trade-offs to any decision made , and preventing COVID-19 cases , deaths , and overwhelmed hospital capacity are not the only factors to consider .
Unfortunately , the response perspective of controlling a single disease has had devastating , often unequally distributed , collateral effects .
Lockdowns have put many sustainable development goals out of reach .
In many parts of the world there have been interruptions in childhood vaccinations , education , detection and treatment of infectious diseases ( for example , tuberculosis , malaria , and HIV ) , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , projected to cost many millions of lives in the coming years .
These interruptions in economic activity and supply chains are estimated to cause more than 83 million people to become food insecure , and over 70 million people to enter severe poverty ( living on less than US $ 1.90/day ) , both likely to cost many more millions of lives in the coming years .
Violence against women , including intimate partner violence , female genital mutilation , and child marriage are projected to also increase by many millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage from lockdowns is occurring .
Fear of attending hospitals resulted in 50 percent declines in visits for heart attacks and strokes , meaning missed opportunity for time-critical treatments .
‘ Non-urgent ’ surgery and cancer diagnosis/treatment were delayed , with backlogs that will take years of catch-up and untold effects on prognoses .
Of excess mortality during the pandemic , 20-50 percent has not been due to COVID-19 ( see Kontis et al .
2020 ; Docherty et all 2020 ; and Postill et al 2020 ) ; much of that excess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
An unexplained increase in deaths of people with dementia in the US and UK also likely arose from deterioration due to loneliness .
Over time , suicide , depression , alcohol use disorder , childhood trauma due to domestic violence , changes in marital status , and social isolation are projected to cause millions of years of life lost in Canada alone .
Dr. Joffe uses an approach that quantifies “ Quality Adjusted Life Years ” to weigh the benefits and costs of global covid shutdowns .
Using that methodology , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exceeded the benefits by at least ten to one .
He also notes that “ Various cost-benefit analyses from different countries , including some of these costs , have consistently estimated the cost in lives from lockdowns to be at least five to 10 times higher than the benefit , and likely far higher.
” This kind of calculation is by no means an exact science , but I think it is fair to say that a scientific consensus is emerging to the effect that shutdowns do vastly more harm than good .

By any sensible calculation, the principal worldwide covid damage has come not from the virus, but from governments’ efforts to suppress it, principally through lockdowns. Dr. Ari Joffe attempts to quantify that disproportion. Joffe is a distinguished Canadian pediatrician, having recently been named one of the ten most influential researchers in the field of pediatric critical care.
Dr. Joffe itemizes some of the adverse consequences of shutdowns:
Public health leaders are medical experts and are necessary advisors in formulating a response to the pandemic. However, their expertise is not sufficient to make policy decisions. There are trade-offs to any decision made, and preventing COVID-19 cases, deaths, and overwhelmed hospital capacity are not the only factors to consider. Unfortunately, the response perspective of controlling a single disease has had devastating, often unequally distributed, collateral effects. Lockdowns have put many sustainable development goals out of reach. In many parts of the world there have been interruptions in childhood vaccinations, education, detection and treatment of infectious diseases (for example, tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV), and prevention of under 5-year-old and maternal mortality, projected to cost many millions of lives in the coming years. These interruptions in economic activity and supply chains are estimated to cause more than 83 million people to become food insecure, and over 70 million people to enter severe poverty (living on less than US$1.90/day), both likely to cost many more millions of lives in the coming years. Violence against women, including intimate partner violence, female genital mutilation, and child marriage are projected to also increase by many millions of cases. In high-income countries other collateral damage from lockdowns is occurring. Fear of attending hospitals resulted in 50 percent declines in visits for heart attacks and strokes, meaning missed opportunity for time-critical treatments. ‘Non-urgent’ surgery and cancer diagnosis/treatment were delayed, with backlogs that will take years of catch-up and untold effects on prognoses. Of excess mortality during the pandemic, 20-50 percent has not been due to COVID-19 (see Kontis et al. 2020; Docherty et all 2020; and Postill et al 2020); much of that excess is likely attributable to these collateral effects. An unexplained increase in deaths of people with dementia in the US and UK also likely arose from deterioration due to loneliness. Over time, suicide, depression, alcohol use disorder, childhood trauma due to domestic violence, changes in marital status, and social isolation are projected to cause millions of years of life lost in Canada alone.
Dr. Joffe uses an approach that quantifies “Quality Adjusted Life Years” to weigh the benefits and costs of global covid shutdowns. Using that methodology, he concludes that the costs of shutdowns have exceeded the benefits by at least ten to one. He also notes that “Various cost-benefit analyses from different countries, including some of these costs, have consistently estimated the cost in lives from lockdowns to be at least five to 10 times higher than the benefit, and likely far higher.”
This kind of calculation is by no means an exact science, but I think it is fair to say that a scientific consensus is emerging to the effect that shutdowns do vastly more harm than good.


Reject woke Civics

A national movement to mandate standards for the teaching of Civics and History is gaining momentum .
No conservative should support it .
For any conservative who has been paying attention to the education wars , no further explanation should be required .
For those who haven ’ t been , this column by Stanley Kurtz is essential reading .
The rest of us should read it to learn that things are even worse than we think .
The critical point is that final responsibility for setting the new history and civics curriculum will lie with state school boards and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and even more so the bureaucratic curriculum specialists upon whom they rely , are far more left-leaning than the legislators — or citizens — of their states .
Most come out of university schools of education , where “ woke ” curricula are generated to begin with .
ALEC ’ s model bill [ ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council ] gives these left-leaning bureaucrats carte blanche to set state curricular standards .
That means those standards will be a world apart from what parents in traditional and conservative-leaning school districts would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on teachers and college professors to devise the National History Standards in the 1990s , legislators will find their well-intentioned efforts captured by the very advocates they are hoping to counter .
What kind of Civics will leftist bureaucrats impose ?
They will impose “ action civics.
” The civics now recognized and promoted by America ’ s dominant , left-leaning education establishment is radically different from what conservatives or traditionalists think of when they hear the word civics .
Not one in ten conservatives has even heard of “ action civics ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is what professional educators now mean by civics .
Essentially , “ action civics ” trains students to protest on behalf of leftist political causes .
The Parkland students who agitate for gun laws , as well as the seven- to-sixteen-year-old students who notoriously surrounded and harangued Sen. Dianne Feinstein about the Green New Deal , are considered models of action civics by the Left .
Those students are notable for refusing even to consider opposing points of view .
Anger is their currency .
Action civics is the application of Alinsky-style @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So-called action civics is more like anti-civics .
It pressures ill-prepared students to take up leftist causes , when educators dealing with policy controversies ought to be teaching students how to assess the strengths and weaknesses of conflicting viewpoints instead .
Leftist action civics is already widespread in blue states , and activists hope to force it onto deep-dyed red-state school districts via statewide civics mandates .
These activists hope to use the Biden administration to do it , but ALEC is about to beat them to the punch by having conservatives inadvertently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website of Illinoiscivics , considered a model for teachers who favor the new not-so-civic “ civics , ” confirms Stanley ’ s warning .
Read it and weep .
For example , as Stanley says , the Illinois Civics teaching resource page on LGBTQ+ history builds off of a 2019 Illinois curriculum law requiring the teaching of such history by the end of eighth grade .
The posted teaching materials blend history with not-so-subtle advocacy for highly contested perspectives on cultural issues .
Some links have little to do with history at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Would parochial schools be required to teach LGBTQ+ history along leftist lines ?
Probably .
Stanley explains : Detailed state curriculum standards could be tied to state tests , which are also often imposed on religious schools that accept state tuition vouchers , or seek to participate in other state programs , such as athletics .
Failure on those tests would imperil a school ’ s accreditation , or bring the loss of state voucher funding or other state benefits .
Teacher certification would likely also be tied to mastering the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bureaucratic fiat , once advocacy-tinged LGBTQ+ requirements are built into state standards , religious schools will be trapped .
It should be apparent to any conservative who has been paying attention that local control is preferable to national control ( or influence ) when it comes to any culturally contested area ( and these days , there are very few areas that aren ’ t culturally contest ) .
This is certainly true here .
As Stanley concludes : The best way to battle educational decline is a return to local control , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first place .
Relying on our current education establishment to carry out reform is a fool ’ s errand .
They are what got us into trouble to begin with .
The real hope for improvement lies with parents .
A grassroots movement to take back the curriculum from woke education bureaucrats could shift the composition of local school boards across the country .
That is the level at which curricula recommended by places like Hillsdale College , ConSource , and 1776 Unites should be adopted .
People are fleeing Blue States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make sure that when they arrive in Red parts of the country , their children can get an education free from left-wing indoctrination .

A national movement to mandate standards for the teaching of Civics and History is gaining momentum. No conservative should support it.
For any conservative who has been paying attention to the education wars, no further explanation should be required. For those who haven’t been, this column by Stanley Kurtz is essential reading. The rest of us should read it to learn that things are even worse than we think.
Stanley writes:
The critical point is that final responsibility for setting the new history and civics curriculum will lie with state school boards and their attendant bureaucracy. These boards, and even more so the bureaucratic curriculum specialists upon whom they rely, are far more left-leaning than the legislators — or citizens — of their states. Most come out of university schools of education, where “woke” curricula are generated to begin with. ALEC’s model bill [ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council] gives these left-leaning bureaucrats carte blanche to set state curricular standards. That means those standards will be a world apart from what parents in traditional and conservative-leaning school districts would choose. Like the politicians who relied on teachers and college professors to devise the National History Standards in the 1990s, legislators will find their well-intentioned efforts captured by the very advocates they are hoping to counter.
What kind of Civics will leftist bureaucrats impose? They will impose “action civics.”
The civics now recognized and promoted by America’s dominant, left-leaning education establishment is radically different from what conservatives or traditionalists think of when they hear the word civics. Not one in ten conservatives has even heard of “action civics” or “project-based civics,” but this is what professional educators now mean by civics. Essentially, “action civics” trains students to protest on behalf of leftist political causes. The Parkland students who agitate for gun laws, as well as the seven- to-sixteen-year-old students who notoriously surrounded and harangued Sen. Dianne Feinstein about the Green New Deal, are considered models of action civics by the Left. Those students are notable for refusing even to consider opposing points of view. Anger is their currency. Action civics is the application of Alinsky-style political organizing tactics to school children. So-called action civics is more like anti-civics. It pressures ill-prepared students to take up leftist causes, when educators dealing with policy controversies ought to be teaching students how to assess the strengths and weaknesses of conflicting viewpoints instead. Leftist action civics is already widespread in blue states, and activists hope to force it onto deep-dyed red-state school districts via statewide civics mandates. These activists hope to use the Biden administration to do it, but ALEC is about to beat them to the punch by having conservatives inadvertently impose action civics on themselves.
(Emphasis added)
The website of Illinoiscivics, considered a model for teachers who favor the new not-so-civic “civics,” confirms Stanley’s warning. Read it and weep.
For example, as Stanley says, the Illinois Civics teaching resource page on LGBTQ+ history builds off of a 2019 Illinois curriculum law requiring the teaching of such history by the end of eighth grade. The posted teaching materials blend history with not-so-subtle advocacy for highly contested perspectives on cultural issues. Some links have little to do with history at all and go directly to advocacy organizations instead.
Would parochial schools be required to teach LGBTQ+ history along leftist lines? Probably. Stanley explains:
Detailed state curriculum standards could be tied to state tests, which are also often imposed on religious schools that accept state tuition vouchers, or seek to participate in other state programs, such as athletics. Failure on those tests would imperil a school’s accreditation, or bring the loss of state voucher funding or other state benefits. Teacher certification would likely also be tied to mastering the state standards. Whether by law or by bureaucratic fiat, once advocacy-tinged LGBTQ+ requirements are built into state standards, religious schools will be trapped.
It should be apparent to any conservative who has been paying attention that local control is preferable to national control (or influence) when it comes to any culturally contested area (and these days, there are very few areas that aren’t culturally contest). This is certainly true here. As Stanley concludes:
The best way to battle educational decline is a return to local control, which should never have been abandoned in the first place. Relying on our current education establishment to carry out reform is a fool’s errand. They are what got us into trouble to begin with. The real hope for improvement lies with parents. A grassroots movement to take back the curriculum from woke education bureaucrats could shift the composition of local school boards across the country. That is the level at which curricula recommended by places like Hillsdale College, ConSource, and 1776 Unites should be adopted.
People are fleeing Blue States like California and Illinois. We must make sure that when they arrive in Red parts of the country, their children can get an education free from left-wing indoctrination.


powerlineblog--2020-12-28--Mr. Watt lights it up

Mr. Watt lights it up

Even if you hate the NFL and its woke corporate stupidity , you have to love J.J. Watt .
While @ @ @ @ @ NFL have the backbone of an overripe banana , Watt is a man of character @ @ @ @ @ in a variety of contexts .
Yesterday he showed it in comments directed to his @ @ @ @ @ watching professional teams getting blown out .
As a long-time Vikings fan , I ’ @ @ @ @ @ this year .
Players on the short end of the stick have the opportunity to @ @ @ @ @ Do they continue playing with what they have to give , or do they make @ @ @ @ @ it in ?
Mr. Watt urges the former to those he believes to be pursuing @ @ @

Even if you hate the NFL and its woke corporate stupidity, you have to love J.J. Watt. While the malleable personas running the NFL have the backbone of an overripe banana, Watt is a man of character. He has proved it in a variety of contexts. Yesterday he showed it in comments directed to his underperforming teammates.
I love watching professional teams getting blown out. As a long-time Vikings fan, I’ve had some special opportunities this year. Players on the short end of the stick have the opportunity to show their true character. Do they continue playing with what they have to give, or do they make a business decision to pack it in? Mr. Watt urges the former to those he believes to be pursuing the latter.
THIS is why we love @JJWatt 📹: Houston Texans pic.twitter.com/lXQzowheFq — Joe Gleason (@joeagleason) December 27, 2020
Via Frank Schwab/Yahoo! Sports.


The Brexit deal

The United Kingdom and European Union have reached a post-Brexit trade agreement after many months of negotiations .
The no-deal Brexit that many expected and some feared has been avoided .
I lack the knowledge to evaluate either the deal or a no-deal scenario .
Instead , I ’ ll present for consideration the views of the estimable Melanie Phillips .
She ’ s delighted , above all , that the UK is finally free of the EU .
I know enough to understand her delight .
Maybe in due course some buried horrors will emerge .
But at present @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson really has delivered his country from the grip of the EU and restored its ability to govern itself as an independent nation .
That ’ s principally because the deal frees the UK from the European Court of Justice , and thus from the power of the EU to impose its will through laws that bind the British parliament .
So the UK is now able once again to create its own laws and policies in accordance with the democratically expressed wishes of the people .
.
.
.
The deal with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK has freed itself while still being able to engage in trade without tariffs and quotas .
However , that benefit comes with strings : [ What ’ s ] concerning .
.
.is the undertaking to stick to EU standards and the ability of the EU to impose a tariff where it claims unfair competition .
While many such standards are entirely reasonable , and any possible claims of unfairness will operate equally for both sides , there is potential scope here for serious trouble ahead .
Disputes will be arbitrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sides and with a chairman chosen by both .
It remains to be seen , however , quite how independent this will be in practice .
And the battle over the UK ’ s all-important financial services is yet to be had , the issue having been inexplicably parked unresolved .
But it ’ s not unusual for trade agreements to come with standards and a mechanism for arbitrating disputes .
Thus , as Phillips states : The real concern is that “ since neither Johnson nor his successors will ever again be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without a deal , the British government may once again take the path of least resistance in any future negotiation with the EU and sell British interests down the river.
” Indeed , “ the instinct for appeasement displayed by successive prime ministers as a political default does not inspire overwhelming confidence , ” says Phillips .
That ’ s why Phillips was inclined to favor a no-deal Brexit .
Even so , she concludes : [ T ] he deal that has been done is very much better than the Brexiteers had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regained .
The UK has taken back control of its own destiny .
Now we ’ ll see whether it will exploit or squander the opportunity .

The United Kingdom and European Union have reached a post-Brexit trade agreement after many months of negotiations. The no-deal Brexit that many expected and some feared has been avoided.
I lack the knowledge to evaluate either the deal or a no-deal scenario. Instead, I’ll present for consideration the views of the estimable Melanie Phillips.
She’s delighted, above all, that the UK is finally free of the EU. I know enough to understand her delight.
Phillips writes:
Maybe in due course some buried horrors will emerge. But at present, it does look as if Boris Johnson really has delivered his country from the grip of the EU and restored its ability to govern itself as an independent nation. That’s principally because the deal frees the UK from the European Court of Justice, and thus from the power of the EU to impose its will through laws that bind the British parliament. So the UK is now able once again to create its own laws and policies in accordance with the democratically expressed wishes of the people. . . .
The deal with the EU confers the added benefit that the UK has freed itself while still being able to engage in trade without tariffs and quotas. However, that benefit comes with strings:
[What’s] concerning. . .is the undertaking to stick to EU standards and the ability of the EU to impose a tariff where it claims unfair competition. While many such standards are entirely reasonable, and any possible claims of unfairness will operate equally for both sides, there is potential scope here for serious trouble ahead. Disputes will be arbitrated by an independent tribunal composed from both sides and with a chairman chosen by both. It remains to be seen, however, quite how independent this will be in practice. And the battle over the UK’s all-important financial services is yet to be had, the issue having been inexplicably parked unresolved.
But it’s not unusual for trade agreements to come with standards and a mechanism for arbitrating disputes. Thus, as Phillips states:
What [Boris Johnson] has signed with the EU is therefore more akin to a conventional treaty between states (or in this case, the UK and the EU “super-state”) which has an exit mechanism and which future governments can therefore renegotiate or reverse.
The real concern is that “since neither Johnson nor his successors will ever again be able to leverage the threat of leaving without a deal, the British government may once again take the path of least resistance in any future negotiation with the EU and sell British interests down the river.” Indeed, “the instinct for appeasement displayed by successive prime ministers as a political default does not inspire overwhelming confidence,” says Phillips.
That’s why Phillips was inclined to favor a no-deal Brexit. Even so, she concludes:


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--What did President Trump gain by delaying coronavirus relief? [UPDATED]


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--Depressing news from Georgia

Depressing news from Georgia

Last week , I reported on polls by Trafalgar that had Sens .
Perdue and Loeffler leading in their Georgia Senate races .
But this week , Trafalgar shows both Republicans to be trailing — Loeffler by about a point and Perdue by about 2 ( 3 if you include “ leaners ” ) .
I asked my Georgia source , a well-placed state Republican who correctly predicted the Georgia outcomes in November , for his view from the ground .
I was hoping for reassurance .
Instead , I got this : All of the oxygen has been sucked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversy around the November election .
Loeffler and Perdue both almost immediately called for the resignation of the Georgia Secretary of State , the RNC and State GOP has filed suit against the Secretary of State , and there is growing tension among many elected officials over what exactly happened in November , and who , if anyone , is to blame .
This continued fighting ( Georgia GOP vs Secretary of State , POTUS vs .
Governor , etc ) has led to a lot of Republicans telling me they are not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems to be some sort of righteous protest on their part—wanting to teach Republicans a lesson for either a ) not doing enough to change election procedures for the January election or b ) not doing enough to “ fight for Trump ” .
In fact , Democrats have placed billboards all over metro Atlanta stating “ Loeffler and Perdue didn ’ t fight for Trump , don ’ t fight for them.
” As you can imagine , every tv break , mailbox trip , and drive to the store has the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current trend lines actually show Republicans faring better than they did in early voting in November ( trailing by less than they did at this point in the November election ) , but that also banks on historic strong turnout on election day from Republicans , which may not come this year because of frustrations noted above .
Absentee by mail voting once again appears to be much higher than any other year , and the controversial settlement agreement made by the SoS with the DPG and DCCC is still in place .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ observe the signature match process ( often in another room or 50 ’ -100 ’ away from the table where the match is happening ) , the newly implemented drop boxes have been expanded , and today Stacey Abrams ’ sister halted elector eligibility challenges allowed under Georgia law .
We have had 80,000 new voters register for the runoff , no doubt some number of them “ moving ” here just to vote and then leave .
Georgia is going to be ground zero for election reform battles in 2021 .
Signature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national change of address list maintenance , election observer access , and much more will all be on the table when the legislature returns for session in just over two weeks .
Until then , if the election was held today , I return to my November prediction—slight advantage Democrats .
If Republicans can get to rowing the boat in the same direction , they likely can pull it off , but time is running out .

Last week, I reported on polls by Trafalgar that had Sens. Perdue and Loeffler leading in their Georgia Senate races. But this week, Trafalgar shows both Republicans to be trailing — Loeffler by about a point and Perdue by about 2 (3 if you include “leaners”).
I asked my Georgia source, a well-placed state Republican who correctly predicted the Georgia outcomes in November, for his view from the ground. I was hoping for reassurance. Instead, I got this:
All of the oxygen has been sucked out of the room by the continued controversy around the November election. Loeffler and Perdue both almost immediately called for the resignation of the Georgia Secretary of State, the RNC and State GOP have filed suit against the Secretary of State, and there is growing tension among many elected officials over what exactly happened in November, and who, if anyone, is to blame.
This continued fighting (Georgia GOP vs Secretary of State, POTUS vs. Governor, etc) has led to a lot of Republicans telling me they are not going to vote in January. It seems to be some sort of righteous protest on their part—wanting to teach Republicans a lesson for either a) not doing enough to change election procedures for the January election or b) not doing enough to “fight for Trump.”
In fact, Democrats have placed billboards all over metro Atlanta stating “Loeffler and Perdue didn’t fight for Trump, don’t fight for them.” As you can imagine, every tv break, mailbox trip, and drive to the store has the election ads front and center.
The current trend lines actually show Republicans faring better than they did in early voting in November (trailing by less than they did at this point in the November election), but that also banks on historic strong turnout on election day from Republicans, which may not come this year because of frustrations noted above.
Absentee by mail voting once again appears to be much higher than any other year, and the controversial settlement agreement made by the SoS with the DPG and DCCC is still in place. Election observers are still unable to meaningfully observe the signature match process (often in another room or 50’-100’ away from the table where the match is happening), the newly implemented drop boxes have been expanded, and today Stacey Abrams’ sister halted elector eligibility challenges allowed under Georgia law. We have had 80,000 new voters register for the runoff, no doubt some number of them “moving” here just to vote and then leave.
Georgia is going to be ground zero for election reform battles in 2021. Signature match, no excuse absentee voting, national change of address list maintenance, election observer access, and much more will all be on the table when the legislature returns for session in just over two weeks.
Until then, if the election was held today, I return to my November prediction—slight advantage Democrats. If Republicans can get to rowing the boat in the same direction, they likely can pull it off, but time is running out.


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--This Week in Race Controversy

This Week in Race Controversy

The latest racial controversy concerns the decision of the Washington Redskins “ Football Team ” ( by the way , did you hear Al Michaels slip up and refer to the “ Washington Redskins ” in the NBC Sunday Night Football broadcast ? )
to release quarterback Dwayne Haskins for violating multiple team rules .
The story comes with a slight twist , as ESPN football analyst Booger McFarland charged that the decision , while not perhaps racially motivated , reflects badly on black players who want to “ build their brand ” more than they want to work hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaging in racial stereotyping now ?
Never mind that black quarterbacks are thriving in the NFL : take your pick from Wilson , Mahomes , Jackson , Watson , Newton , Murray , and Hurts .
Some of them manage to “ build their brand ” just fine ( lots of TV spots featuring Wilson and Mahomes these days ) while working extremely hard at the game .
Mike Freeman of USA Today is having none of it : Before we fully address the absurd and remarkably dangerous comments from ESPN football analyst @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason quarterback Dwayne Haskins failed in Washington was because like other young Black men in the NFL he cared more about his brand than working hard , let ’ s go back in time to a name many will remember : Johnny Manziel .
Manziel was one of the true wastes of talent in recent NFL history because he cared more about partying and branding and tomfoolery than he did actual football .
This is not opinion , this is fact .
Manziel was taken in the first round by Cleveland in 2014 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NFL .
He then played for three different CFL teams in two years before flaming out and becoming one of the greatest cautionary tales in sports history .
And Manziel never , not once , became a symbol of failure for young white players .
He was just a singular , total bum .
To Manziel ’ s failure of discipline and seriousness add in the examples of Todd Marinovich and Ryan Leaf , among other famous NFL washouts .
Meanwhile , there has been another police shooting of an unarmed black man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officer has been fired for an unjustified use of force .
A complete investigation is just getting under way , but the initial press reports , and some body camera footage , support the narrative that the officer reacted poorly in the situation .
( He mistook a cell phone in the victim ’ s hand for a gun . )
Naturally the racial angle means it is receiving national publicity , unlike numerous similar shootings of white suspects that seldom get national media attention .
But my question is : where are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over now that the election is done ?

The latest racial controversy concerns the decision of the Washington Redskins “Football Team” (by the way, did you hear Al Michaels slip up and refer to the “Washington Redskins” in the NBC Sunday Night Football broadcast?) to release quarterback Dwayne Haskins for violating multiple team rules. The story comes with a slight twist, as ESPN football analyst Booger McFarland charged that the decision, while not perhaps racially motivated, reflects badly on black players who want to “build their brand” more than they want to work hard on the game. Who’s engaging in racial stereotyping now? Never mind that black quarterbacks are thriving in the NFL: take your pick from Wilson, Mahomes, Jackson, Watson, Newton, Murray, and Hurts. Some of them manage to “build their brand” just fine (lots of TV spots featuring Wilson and Mahomes these days) while working extremely hard at the game.
Mike Freeman of USA Today is having none of it:
Before we fully address the absurd and remarkably dangerous comments from ESPN football analyst Booger McFarland, where he said the reason quarterback Dwayne Haskins failed in Washington was because like other young Black men in the NFL he cared more about his brand than working hard, let’s go back in time to a name many will remember: Johnny Manziel. Manziel was one of the true wastes of talent in recent NFL history because he cared more about partying and branding and tomfoolery than he did actual football. This is not opinion, this is fact. Manziel was taken in the first round by Cleveland in 2014 and lasted just two seasons in the NFL. He then played for three different CFL teams in two years before flaming out and becoming one of the greatest cautionary tales in sports history. And Manziel never, not once, became a symbol of failure for young white players. He was just a singular, total bum.
To Manziel’s failure of discipline and seriousness add in the examples of Todd Marinovich and Ryan Leaf, among other famous NFL washouts.
Meanwhile, there has been another police shooting of an unarmed black man in Columbus, Ohio, and the officer has been fired for an unjustified use of force. A complete investigation is just getting under way, but the initial press reports, and some body camera footage, support the narrative that the officer reacted poorly in the situation. (He mistook a cell phone in the victim’s hand for a gun.) Naturally the racial angle means it is receiving national publicity, unlike numerous similar shootings of white suspects that seldom get national media attention. But my question is: where are all the protests? Is protest season over now that the election is done?


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--Donald Trump is the man Americans admire most

In a new Gallup poll , 18 percent of Americans name President Trump as the man they admire most .
No one else reaches that mark .
Former president Obama comes the closest at 15 percent .
The sitting president usually comes in first in this poll , which Gallup has taken for decades .
But throughout most of his presidency , Trump trailed Obama .
( The two men tied last year . )
In fact , Obama has been at the top of the list for the past 12 years , a run that ties Dwight Eisenhower for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long history .
I think Obama dropped to second this year because he had to share liberal votes with Joe Biden .
The president-elect came in a distant third with 6 percent .
Anthony Fauci and Pope Francis round out the top five with 3 percent and 2 percent , respectively .
To me , the most interesting result is that 48 percent of Republicans named Trump the man they most admire .
You can look at this in two ways .
On the one hand , a Republican president should , perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters .
On the other hand , no other figure was named “ most admired ” by more than 2 percent of the Republicans surveyed .
If Trump decides to run in 2024 , he will be the clear frontrunner , it seems to me .
On the female side of the Gallup survey , Michelle Obama remains most admired .
She was named as such by 10 percent of respondents .
Kamala Harris was second at 6 percent , followed by Melania Trump at 4 percent .
Jill Biden did not crack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In fact , Dr. Jill didn ’ t reach the 1 percent mark .
Among those more admired than Jill Biden are non-doctors Dolly Parton , Betty White , Jacinda Ardern , and even Gretchen Whitmer .
Jill Biden will do better next year , I ’ m sure — with extra points if she stops insisting on the “ Dr. ” appellation .

In a new Gallup poll, 18 percent of Americans name President Trump as the man they admire most. No one else reaches that mark. Former president Obama comes the closest at 15 percent.
The sitting president usually comes in first in this poll, which Gallup has taken for decades. But throughout most of his presidency, Trump trailed Obama. (The two men tied last year.) In fact, Obama has been at the top of the list for the past 12 years, a run that ties Dwight Eisenhower for the longest in the survey’s long history.
I think Obama dropped to second this year because he had to share liberal votes with Joe Biden. The president-elect came in a distant third with 6 percent. Anthony Fauci and Pope Francis round out the top five with 3 percent and 2 percent, respectively.
To me, the most interesting result is that 48 percent of Republicans named Trump the man they most admire. You can look at this in two ways.
On the one hand, a Republican president should, perhaps, be even more admired by Republican voters. On the other hand, no other figure was named “most admired” by more than 2 percent of the Republicans surveyed.
If Trump decides to run in 2024, he will be the clear frontrunner, it seems to me.
On the female side of the Gallup survey, Michelle Obama remains most admired. She was named as such by 10 percent of respondents. Kamala Harris was second at 6 percent, followed by Melania Trump at 4 percent.
Jill Biden did not crack the top ten, her doctorate notwithstanding. In fact, Dr. Jill didn’t reach the 1 percent mark.
Among those more admired than Jill Biden are non-doctors Dolly Parton, Betty White, Jacinda Ardern, and even Gretchen Whitmer.
Jill Biden will do better next year, I’m sure — with extra points if she stops insisting on the “Dr.” appellation.
Via Byron York.


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--What Trump gained by delaying coronavirus relief [UPDATED]

Yesterday , I suggested that President Trump gained nothing by delaying the implementation of the relief in the stimulus bill passed by Congress .
However , I did allow that , as a result of his criticism of the bill , it ’ s possible that Congress will up the stimulus checks from $ 600 to $ 2,000 .
In that case , of course , Trump will have gained something .
On reflection ( and this should have been obvious to me without it ) , Trump gains whether or not the larger checks are approved .
The mere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help him down the road .
If Trump runs for president in 2024 , he can remind voters that he did all he could to get them $ 2,000 checks .
Even if he doesn ’ t run , he will want to maintain influence with his base .
Either way , as one administration official puts it , Trump has sent this message to his base : “ Never forget , I ’ m here , I ’ m fighting for you.
” It ’ s true that Trump didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was formulating the relief package .
It ’ s also true that when the package was ready to go , administration officials signed off on it .
The Trump administration was for it before it was against it .
But these details will be forgotten .
Trump ’ s final message won ’ t be .
From Trump ’ s perspective , the possibility that his move might divide Senate Republicans is a feature , not a bug .
If the Senate votes on the House ’ s authorization for $ 2,000 checks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2024 nomination will have to take a position .
If the Senate doesn ’ t vote , Trump can accuse the GOP establishment — the “ swamp ” — of not caring enough even to take up his demand for a meaningful amount of individual relief .
There ’ s a tension within the GOP between old-fashioned , fiscally responsible conservatism and Trump ’ s brand of populist conservatism .
This tension , largely dormant during the past four years , might well become a clash once Trump leaves office .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate as the opening salvo .
UPDATE : As expected , Majority Leader McConnell has blocked a stand-alone vote on increasing the stimulus checks to $ 2,000 .

Yesterday, I suggested that President Trump gained nothing by delaying the implementation of the relief in the stimulus bill passed by Congress. However, I did allow that, as a result of his criticism of the bill, it’s possible that Congress will up the stimulus checks from $600 to $2,000. In that case, of course, Trump will have gained something.
On reflection (and this should have been obvious to me without it), Trump gains whether or not the larger checks are approved. The mere fact that Trump fought for them will help him down the road.
If Trump runs for president in 2024, he can remind voters that he did all he could to get them $2,000 checks. Even if he doesn’t run, he will want to maintain influence with his base. Either way, as one administration official puts it, Trump has sent this message to his base: “Never forget, I’m here, I’m fighting for you.”
It’s true that Trump didn’t ask for $2,000 checks when Congress was formulating the relief package. It’s also true that when the package was ready to go, administration officials signed off on it. The Trump administration was for it before it was against it.
But these details will be forgotten. Trump’s final message won’t be.
From Trump’s perspective, the possibility that his move might divide Senate Republicans is a feature, not a bug. If the Senate votes on the House’s authorization for $2,000 checks, Trump’s potential rivals for the 2024 nomination will have to take a position. If the Senate doesn’t vote, Trump can accuse the GOP establishment — the “swamp” — of not caring enough even to take up his demand for a meaningful amount of individual relief.
There’s a tension within the GOP between old-fashioned, fiscally responsible conservatism and Trump’s brand of populist conservatism. This tension, largely dormant during the past four years, might well become a clash once Trump leaves office. If so, think of the current stimulus debate as the opening salvo.
UPDATE: As expected, Majority Leader McConnell has blocked a stand-alone vote on increasing the stimulus checks to $2,000.


powerlineblog--2020-12-29--Get Ready for the “Climate Emergency”?

Get Ready for the “Climate Emergency”?

It has been widely noted that many of our government leaders seem to like the air of crisis and the exertion of emergency power that the COVID pandemic has enabled .
And there has been open support among the climatistas applying the kinds of strictures used to battle COVID to climate change as well .
The superficiality of this parallel will be lost on lots of people—after all , how well are the lockdowns and mark-wearing mandates working ?
Thus we are starting to hear calls for proto-President Biden to declare climate change to be a national emergency when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a long-shot bid to get President-elect Joe Biden to go beyond naming a climate czar and declare an environmental national emergency , borrowing a tactic employed by President Donald Trump to fund part of his border wall .
Invoking a climate emergency could give Biden the authority to circumvent Congress and fund clean energy projects , shut down crude oil exports , suspend offshore drilling and curtail the movement of fossil fuels on pipelines , trains , and ships , according to a research note by consulting firm ClearView Energy Partners .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate change through an emergency are very , very large , ” said Kassie Siegel , an attorney with the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity , * which is lobbying Biden ’ s team to act .
“ This is No .
1 on the list of things the Biden administration should do.
” And just yesterday , Biden said : “ Climate change will continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods , public health and economics of our existence and literally , the very existence of our planet.
” One reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate emergency ” is that it is hard to see what else Congress might do at this point .
As John has already noted , the recently passed COVID relief bill contained huge giveaways for “ green energy ” extending out for several years .
Some environmentalists actually call these climate provisions “ the most significant climate legislation ever.
” If that ’ s true , then why should Congress worry about it again next year ?
Robert Bryce has pointed out how lopsided these subsidies are relative to the amount of energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden wants to declare the climate equivalent of martial law , he has just the team to do it with Long- ( Faced ) -John Kerry and former EPA capo Gina McCarthy , though Kerry ’ s doltery is seldom more obvious than when he talks about climate .
Myron Ebell reminds us : The fact is that Kerry knows less about climate science than a person of normal diligence could learn on the Internet in an hour .
Now , it is fair to note that politicians have to talk about a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about .
But Kerry has specialized in climate for decades .
.
.
Kerry not only doesn ’ t know anything about the basics of climate science ; what he is sure he knows is wrong .
Here ’ s one of Kerry ’ s actual explanations of the climate system , from 2014 : Try and picture a very thin layer of gases—a quarter-inch , half an inch , somewhere in that vicinity—that ’ s how thick it is .
It ’ s in our atmosphere .
It ’ s way up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And for millions of years—literally millions of years—we know that layer has acted like a thermal blanket for the planet—trapping the sun ’ s heat and warming the surface of the Earth to the ideal , life-sustaining temperature .
Average temperature of the Earth has been about 57 degrees Fahrenheit , which keeps life going .
There are a few cool-headed environmentalists who know better , like Alex Trembath of the Breakthrough Institute .
Writing last year in Slate , Alex says : What might worry me most is that , like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay for the border wall through the National Emergencies Act ] , the declaration of a national emergency in the name of climate change amounts to an end run around democracy .
And this would not be the first ecological challenge in which scientists and activists demanded an authority higher than the populace ’ s .
The famous 2009 “ planetary boundaries ” hypothesis explicitly proposed geophysical limits that must be enforced by institutions sitting above democracy .
These included climate change but also freshwater use , land use change , and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Steve Rayner put it , “ the framing of planetary boundaries as being scientifically derived nonnegotiable limits obscures the inherent normativity of deciding how to react to environmental change.
” Indeed , several of the idea ’ s leading advocates argued affirmatively for such a power structure , proposing “ an institution ( or institutions ) operating , with authority , above the level of individual countries to ensure that the planetary boundaries are respected.
” I can not help but recall this overt attempt at a scientistic power grab when I hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ climate emergency .
* Nota bene : The Center for Biological Diversity is a Stalinist organization .

It has been widely noted that many of our government leaders seem to like the air of crisis and the exertion of emergency power that the COVID pandemic has enabled. And there has been open support among the climatistas applying the kinds of strictures used to battle COVID to climate change as well. The superficiality of this parallel will be lost on lots of people—after all, how well are the lockdowns and mark-wearing mandates working?
Thus we are starting to hear calls for proto-President Biden to declare climate change to be a national emergency when he takes office:
Progressive environmentalists are mounting a long-shot bid to get President-elect Joe Biden to go beyond naming a climate czar and declare an environmental national emergency, borrowing a tactic employed by President Donald Trump to fund part of his border wall. Invoking a climate emergency could give Biden the authority to circumvent Congress and fund clean energy projects, shut down crude oil exports, suspend offshore drilling and curtail the movement of fossil fuels on pipelines, trains, and ships, according to a research note by consulting firm ClearView Energy Partners. “The president’s powers to address climate change through an emergency are very, very large,” said Kassie Siegel, an attorney with the environmental group Center for Biological Diversity,* which is lobbying Biden’s team to act. “This is No. 1 on the list of things the Biden administration should do.”
And just yesterday, Biden said: “Climate change will continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods, public health and economics of our existence and literally, the very existence of our planet.”
One reason a Biden Maladministration might declare a “climate emergency” is that it is hard to see what else Congress might do at this point. As John has already noted, the recently passed COVID relief bill contained huge giveaways for “green energy” extending out for several years. Some environmentalists actually call these climate provisions “the most significant climate legislation ever.” If that’s true, then why should Congress worry about it again next year?
Robert Bryce has pointed out how lopsided these subsidies are relative to the amount of energy generated by source:
Now, if Biden wants to declare the climate equivalent of martial law, he has just the team to do it with Long-(Faced)-John Kerry and former EPA capo Gina McCarthy, though Kerry’s doltery is seldom more obvious than when he talks about climate. Myron Ebell reminds us:
The fact is that Kerry knows less about climate science than a person of normal diligence could learn on the Internet in an hour. Now, it is fair to note that politicians have to talk about a lot of things that they know nothing about. But Kerry has specialized in climate for decades. . . Kerry not only doesn’t know anything about the basics of climate science; what he is sure he knows is wrong.
Here’s one of Kerry’s actual explanations of the climate system, from 2014:
Try and picture a very thin layer of gases—a quarter-inch, half an inch, somewhere in that vicinity—that’s how thick it is. It’s in our atmosphere. It’s way up there at the edge of the atmosphere. And for millions of years—literally millions of years—we know that layer has acted like a thermal blanket for the planet—trapping the sun’s heat and warming the surface of the Earth to the ideal, life-sustaining temperature. Average temperature of the Earth has been about 57 degrees Fahrenheit, which keeps life going.
There are a few cool-headed environmentalists who know better, like Alex Trembath of the Breakthrough Institute. Writing last year in Slate, Alex says:
What might worry me most is that, like Trump’s recent move [to pay for the border wall through the National Emergencies Act], the declaration of a national emergency in the name of climate change amounts to an end run around democracy. And this would not be the first ecological challenge in which scientists and activists demanded an authority higher than the populace’s. The famous 2009 “planetary boundaries” hypothesis explicitly proposed geophysical limits that must be enforced by institutions sitting above democracy. These included climate change but also freshwater use, land use change, and other environmental measures. As Oxford’s Steve Rayner put it, “the framing of planetary boundaries as being scientifically derived nonnegotiable limits obscures the inherent normativity of deciding how to react to environmental change.” Indeed, several of the idea’s leading advocates argued affirmatively for such a power structure, proposing “an institution (or institutions) operating, with authority, above the level of individual countries to ensure that the planetary boundaries are respected.” I cannot help but recall this overt attempt at a scientistic power grab when I hear calls for a national, highly partisan climate emergency.
Hear, hear.
* Nota bene: The Center for Biological Diversity is a Stalinist organization.


powerlineblog--2020-12-30--You’re Talking To a Desperate Man

You’re Talking To a Desperate Man

The desperate man is the owner of a Los Angeles restaurant called Bread and Barley .
He has done his best to comply with the ever-shifting demands of Governor Gavin Newsom , but it ’ s tough .
After all , he doesn ’ t run an $ 800 a plate restaurant of the sort that Newsom and his lobbyist friends frequent , flouting the orders that apply to the little people .
Finally he snapped .
The immediate cause was a health department inspector who demanded that he prevent people who bought food to go from his restaurant from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The restaurant owner responded by moving his truck to block a health department vehicle , which led to the dialogue that you see in this video .
It illustrates the most important class divide of our time , of which the restaurant owner is acutely aware : the division between the privileged elite , public employees who are getting paid during our selective and irrational covid shutdowns , courtesy of the taxpayers , and those who are left to fend for themselves , trying to keep themselves and their employees in business .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ sound isn ’ t great , but it is well worth your time because of the voice of truth that is the owner of Bread and Barley :

The desperate man is the owner of a Los Angeles restaurant called Bread and Barley. He has done his best to comply with the ever-shifting demands of Governor Gavin Newsom, but it’s tough. After all, he doesn’t run an $800 a plate restaurant of the sort that Newsom and his lobbyist friends frequent, flouting the orders that apply to the little people. Finally he snapped. The immediate cause was a health department inspector who demanded that he prevent people who bought food to go from his restaurant from sitting on a nearby city-owned bench.
The restaurant owner responded by moving his truck to block a health department vehicle, which led to the dialogue that you see in this video. It illustrates the most important class divide of our time, of which the restaurant owner is acutely aware: the division between the privileged elite, public employees who are getting paid during our selective and irrational covid shutdowns, courtesy of the taxpayers, and those who are left to fend for themselves, trying to keep themselves and their employees in business.
The video waxes and wanes and the sound isn’t great, but it is well worth your time because of the voice of truth that is the owner of Bread and Barley:


Hilaria Gets Married

The Hilaria Baldwin story gets funnier and funnier .
Scott wrote about it here .
Briefly , “ Hilaria ” Baldwin , social media star and wife of the anti-Trump actor and activist Alec Baldwin , has been impersonating a Spanish immigrant for many years .
In fact , her name is Hillary Hayward-Thomas , and she is from Boston .
Her father was a Boston lawyer and her mother was an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital and , I believe , on the faculty of Harvard Medical School .
Hillary grew up in Boston and attended prep school there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always be hard to top her Today show appearance , where , impersonating a Spaniard and talking about cooking , she uttered the immortal , heavily accented line : “ We have very few ingredients .
We have tomatoes , we have , um , how you say in English — cucumbers.
” How could the Daily Mail resist a story like this ?
The Mail has been digging into the past , and now reports on the Baldwins ’ 2012 wedding : This photo of the Baldwins at their wedding is hilarious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Still , one wonders : did Alec seriously believe that his wife was Spanish ?
Presumably not : her parents attended the wedding .
( Hillary ’ s father ’ s family , by the way , has been in Massachusetts since before the Revolution . )
Woody Allen , his wife Soon-Yi , and Robert Kennedy , Jr. all attended the wedding .
The couple married at Basilica of St. Patrick ’ s Old Cathedral in Manhattan , with the nuptials including readings in both English and Spanish .
Hilaria donned a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crown of her head , reminiscent of a mantilla , a traditional Spanish lace worn over the head and shoulders .
She later told People : ‘ I liked that I brought in a bit of my culture.
’ You can ’ t make this stuff up .
During their vows , Hilaria is also seen fanning herself with a flamenco hand fan .
The couple exchanged wedding bands that have the inscription ‘ somos un buen equipo ’ – meaning ‘ we are a good team ’ in English .
*** Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ode to Spain .
When Alec proposed just three months earlier in the Hamptons , Hilaria told Extra TV that he chose Montauk because it was ‘ as close as he could get to Spain , to my family.
’ Later that year , Hilaria spoke with Vanity Fair España , describing her marital bliss and dropped an anecdote about how her family couldn ’ t understand how to pronounce her new last name – Baldwin .
In my view , comedy aside , there are a couple of interesting aspects to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being non-white , or at least exotic , is considered by just about everyone to be an advantage .
Who wants to be the daughter of an upper-class Massachusetts family when you can pretend to be an immigrant who struggles with English ?
Presumably it was the same impulse that drove Elizabeth Warren to pretend to be an Indian .
See also Rachel Dolezal , Jessica Krug , and many others .
Being non-white , or non-American , pays in America .
Why that is so is a topic for another day .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that Hillary Baldwin is now being attacked by liberals , her erstwhile friends , mostly for the wrong reasons .
Predictably , she is accused of “ cultural appropriation.
” True , in a sense , but so what ?
It is not as if she took the place of a real Spanish woman in Alec ’ s affections .
And it is hard to see how anyone has suffered from her impersonation , other than liberals–the Baldwins rank near the top of the left-wing cultural hierarchy–who have been made to look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only that : some on the Left are also attacking Hillary for having five children .
I , on the other hand , take my hat off to her for that accomplishment .
It was Medea , in the play by Euripides by that name , who said , “ I would rather stand three times with a shield in battle than give birth once.
” I don ’ t know about the ratio , but I sincerely admire any woman who has borne five children , no matter what she does with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t , however : their attacks on Mrs. Baldwin include the claim that having five children is contrary to leftist principles , because of the carbon dioxide they give off , or something .
For my part , I am happy to overlook the fact that the Baldwins gave their children Spanish names , as part of Hillary ’ s impersonation : Carmen , Rafael , Leonardo Angel , Romeo Alejandro , and Eduardo Pau Lucas .
I can ’ t begin to penetrate the weirdness at work here , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is getting stranger all the time .
Maybe someday you can help us do something about it .

The Hilaria Baldwin story gets funnier and funnier. Scott wrote about it here. Briefly, “Hilaria” Baldwin, social media star and wife of the anti-Trump actor and activist Alec Baldwin, has been impersonating a Spanish immigrant for many years.
In fact, her name is Hillary Hayward-Thomas, and she is from Boston. Her father was a Boston lawyer and her mother was an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital and, I believe, on the faculty of Harvard Medical School. Hillary grew up in Boston and attended prep school there. For sheer comedy, it will always be hard to top her Today show appearance, where, impersonating a Spaniard and talking about cooking, she uttered the immortal, heavily accented line: “We have very few ingredients. We have tomatoes, we have, um, how you say in English — cucumbers.”
How could the Daily Mail resist a story like this? The Mail has been digging into the past, and now reports on the Baldwins’ 2012 wedding:
EXCLUSIVE: The bride wore a mantilla! Inside Hilaria and Alec Baldwin’s NY wedding where they said ‘sí,’ waved flamenco fans and exchanged Cartier rings inscribed in Spanish – and later she said her family ‘couldn’t pronounce her new surname.’
This photo of the Baldwins at their wedding is hilarious, given what we know now. Still, one wonders: did Alec seriously believe that his wife was Spanish? Presumably not: her parents attended the wedding. (Hillary’s father’s family, by the way, has been in Massachusetts since before the Revolution.)
Woody Allen, his wife Soon-Yi, and Robert Kennedy, Jr. all attended the wedding.
More:
The couple married at Basilica of St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral in Manhattan, with the nuptials including readings in both English and Spanish. Hilaria donned a long white veil with lace embroidering the crown of her head, reminiscent of a mantilla, a traditional Spanish lace worn over the head and shoulders. She later told People: ‘I liked that I brought in a bit of my culture.’
You can’t make this stuff up.
During their vows, Hilaria is also seen fanning herself with a flamenco hand fan. The couple exchanged wedding bands that have the inscription ‘somos un buen equipo’ – meaning ‘we are a good team’ in English.
***
Even the couple’s proposal was an ode to Spain. When Alec proposed just three months earlier in the Hamptons, Hilaria told Extra TV that he chose Montauk because it was ‘as close as he could get to Spain, to my family.’ Later that year, Hilaria spoke with Vanity Fair España, describing her marital bliss and dropped an anecdote about how her family couldn’t understand how to pronounce her new last name – Baldwin.
In my view, comedy aside, there are a couple of interesting aspects to this story. First, the fact that being non-white, or at least exotic, is considered by just about everyone to be an advantage. Who wants to be the daughter of an upper-class Massachusetts family when you can pretend to be an immigrant who struggles with English? Presumably it was the same impulse that drove Elizabeth Warren to pretend to be an Indian. See also Rachel Dolezal, Jessica Krug, and many others. Being non-white, or non-American, pays in America. Why that is so is a topic for another day.
The second point that I find interesting is that Hillary Baldwin is now being attacked by liberals, her erstwhile friends, mostly for the wrong reasons. Predictably, she is accused of “cultural appropriation.” True, in a sense, but so what? It is not as if she took the place of a real Spanish woman in Alec’s affections. And it is hard to see how anyone has suffered from her impersonation, other than liberals–the Baldwins rank near the top of the left-wing cultural hierarchy–who have been made to look foolish.
But it isn’t only that: some on the Left are also attacking Hillary for having five children. I, on the other hand, take my hat off to her for that accomplishment. It was Medea, in the play by Euripides by that name, who said, “I would rather stand three times with a shield in battle than give birth once.” I don’t know about the ratio, but I sincerely admire any woman who has borne five children, no matter what she does with them on social media thereafter.
Liberals don’t, however: their attacks on Mrs. Baldwin include the claim that having five children is contrary to leftist principles, because of the carbon dioxide they give off, or something. For my part, I am happy to overlook the fact that the Baldwins gave their children Spanish names, as part of Hillary’s impersonation: Carmen, Rafael, Leonardo Angel, Romeo Alejandro, and Eduardo Pau Lucas. I can’t begin to penetrate the weirdness at work here, but welcome to the world, Baldwin kids. It is getting stranger all the time. Maybe someday you can help us do something about it.