Monthly Archives: April 2018

E. J. Dionne of WaPo thinks the GOP and President Trump are in trouble due to their selection of tactics:

A fifth of the country can provide an ample audience for a cable network and a lot of radio hosts. It is not enough to win an election. In the nominally nonpartisan Wisconsin judge’s race, as Michael Tomasky noted in the Daily Beast, several counties that had moved from Obama in 2012 to Trump in 2016 swung back to Rebecca Dallet, the choice strongly endorsed by Democrats. And this came in a low-turnout race. In the Obama years, small turnouts benefited Republicans. The energy gap means that this pattern is now reversed.

A Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation poll released Friday brought home additional concrete results of this imbalance. It found an astonishing 1 in 5 Americans reporting that they had joined protests and rallies since the beginning of 2016 — and that 70 percent of them disapproved of Trump.

The dilemma for Republican politicians tempted to cut and run from Trump is that doing so might only further dispirit the party’s core and diminish Trump’s already parlous popularity. For his part, Trump knows only the politics of outrage. It is looking like a strategy with a very short shelf life.

But for me, there’s 7 months left before the mid-term elections. Will those who’ve been stirred up by Trump’s incompetence remain politically engaged for those seven months? For that matter, for the next 2 years and 7 months?

It’s one thing to have become interested because you had to, which means speaking out and voting. But how about running for office? If you’re frozen out by the local politicos because you’re the newbie on the block, will that alienate the public-spirited citizen, and will she then broadcast her negative experience with (presumably) the Democratic machine that disallowed her desire to serve? The Democrats are going to need to make the new guys welcome.

This may not be difficult in districts where the Democrats have not been noticeably active, i.e., those districts dominated by the Republicans. The Democrats may welcome anyone willing to invest their time and energies in a possibly fruitless run for a seat, be it at the state level or the Federal level, just so they can say they competed. But if the novice wins? Can the Democrats stomach that, work with the new legislator? I’ve been wondering about recent unexpected special election victors Senator Doug Jones (D-AL) and Representative Conor Lamb (D-PA), who are reportedly both relatively conservative Democrats. Can the progressive wing of the Democratic Party temper their leftward, and allegedly intolerant, lean enough to work creatively and positively with these two on projects of importance?

These are just two of the questions which face the Democrats over the coming months.

Betsy DeVos, Secretary for Education, has a long history of advocating for private, for-profit schools – and that implies a dislike for teachers’ unions. That would explain this rather ridiculous remark concerning the current Oklahoma school teacher walkout, as noted by WaPo:

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said Oklahoma teachers who walked out of their classrooms to protest school funding cuts should “keep adult disagreements and disputes in a separate place.”

“I think about the kids,” DeVos said Thursday, according to the Dallas Morning News. She had been touring a middle school and meeting with leaders of an anti-violence initiative in Dallas. “I think we need to stay focused on what’s right for kids. And I hope that adults would keep adult disagreements and disputes in a separate place, and serve the students that are there to be served.”

One of the most potent weapons in a unions’ armament is to stop working. Secretary DeVos, by implying that, somehow, children may be terribly injured by a strike, is trying to stack guilt upon teachers who, quite frankly, are hardly making poverty-line wages for a job where they are both teaching and helping raise children.

But it’s not going to do that much damage to kids; in fact, it’s a civic lesson in action. If it takes a couple of weeks of no teaching by the teachers in order to get better wages and more support for the educational sector from a government that is far too fixated on low taxes, then fine – have them, and the students, make it up at the end of the school year. Let the kids learn that Americans can be flexible, that education is important, and that they, too, can be important parts of societal improvements.

DeVos, as Secretary of Education, should know all this and not engage in fallaciously guilt-inducing remarks that are designed to defang the teachers.

Geophagy:

In fact, geophagy, or intentionally consuming dirt, has been documented in multiple historical and present-day cultures, many of which ingest specific soils medicinally to prevent diarrhea or increase iron intake.

“People certainly engage in geophagy all over the world, especially while pregnant,” Zipkin says. “But I think it’s very, very hard to demonstrate in any meaningful way consumption in the archaeological record.” [“Pigment of Our Imagination,” Gemma Tarlach, Discover (April 2018)]

Andrew Sullivan is outraged at the thought that Gina Haspel, chief of staff to Jose Rodriguez, who was in charge of “enhanced interrogation” of prisoners gathered up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and chief advocate for destruction of the tapes of the actual torture sessions, has been nominated for the post of CIA Director, assuming current Director Pompeo is confirmed for the Secretary of State position. After covering her heinous alleged acts and how their there is no defense for them, Andrew concludes:

In a fateful decision, President Obama decided to give complete legal immunity for war crimes committed by agents of the CIA. Haspel then cannot be prosecuted, as she should be under domestic and international law. She was not fired; no one, in fact, was disciplined for these atrocities. But to actually reward someone who has committed war crimes with promotion, and then to elevate her to the highest position in Western intelligence, is a whole new level of depravity. It sends a very clear message: that anyone committing war crimes in the future will be celebrated, not disciplined, rewarded, not punished, that torture is justifiable, even worth reviving, as our future secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, opined only last year. It would amount to a full-on endorsement of torture by the United States, and a signal to the entire world that it can be justified. This is a profound threat to human rights globally and to the long tradition of American warfare, initiated by George Washington no less, in which the use of torture has always been regarded as exactly the kind of barbarism America was founded to overcome. It would be the final nail in the coffin that used to be the West.

Maybe in the era of Trump, that coffin is already covered in dirt. But if senators want to retain any semblance of the notion of American decency, if they are to honor the countless men and women in the CIA and military who for decades have resisted the impulse to torture, if they are to respect those who fought the torture-states of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, and if they also want to remember those Americans, like John McCain, who were once subject to exactly the kind of torture Haspel authorized, they will vote down the nomination. If this line of defense falls, we are truly lost in a vortex of self-perpetuating evil. We will have abolished something deep and essential in the soul of America.

We will be a dungeon on a hill.

It’s difficult to argue with Andrew’s position, and I have no intention of doing so. I’ll simply add this is a blot on the honor of every Trump supporter of every stripe. As we can see, that group is actually growing, according to Gallup, which now has him over 40% approval. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I’m appalled, and can only attribute these disgracefully high numbers to ignorance. In a sea of information, it can be difficult to find the critical information.

The inability to bring these war criminals to justice is one of the most galling decisions of President Obama.

Steve Benen notes that Trump’s EPA Administrator is not only pursuing corrupt practices, but he’s also not effective at destroying environment regulations:

The hype surrounding the EPA chief is starting to unravel. The New Republic’s Emily Atkin explainedthe other day that Pruitt has been prolific in attacking environmental protections, “but so far, Pruitt’s biggest achievement is that he appears successful.”

The piece went on to note that “at least ten of Pruitt’s intended regulatory rollbacks, in fact, are on hold due to lawsuits,” and given the EPA’s recent track record in the courts, those lawsuits against Pruitt’s moves stand a decent chance of success.

Politico’s Michael Grunwald added over the weekend that despite the Trump administration’s regressive efforts, Pruitt “has not yet killed or rolled back any significant regulations that were in place when President Donald Trump took office. While Pruitt is often hailed (or attacked) as Trump’s most effective (or destructive) deregulatory warrior, the recent spotlight on his ethics … has arguably overshadowed his lack of regulatory rollbacks during his first 15 months in Washington.”

It’s true that the damage he’s done to the agency is real and substantial. But given his rampant abuse of power as well as his amazing ineffectuality, one has to wonder:

Is Pruitt a mole, a Democrat under deep cover?

If we’re lucky, he’ll poop in my hand!

It’s a visual treat, but at its heart it’s a little empty. Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) has a constant kaleidoscope of vistas, sometimes as background to the action, other times as the focus of the scene. Colorful and imaginative, they easily outclass the story.

The referenced City is a former Earth space station, grown so huge that the Earth chose to push it out into intergalactic space. Along with its original human inhabitants, many other species have colonies, some numbering in the millions. But a mysterious zone of radiation has appeared in its midst, and probes to discover the nature of the problem never return to report. As the zone expands, the commander of the City calls in Major Valerian and his teammate, Sgt Laureline. The Major and Sergeant have recently retrieved a converter, a living creature capable of reproducing whatever it is fed, and a pearl of immense power.

The Major is romantically interested in the Sgt, who spends half her time fending him off, but when a high level Security Council meeting is crashed by mysterious beings who kidnap the Commander of the City. Valerian pursues, with Laureline monitoring, but when Valerian enters the radiation zone and disappears from the monitors, Laureline disobeys orders and goes in to find him. After a successful rescue, though, she is caught and kidnapped by one of the more barbaric species of the City, who plan to make a meal of her brain. Valerian and a quickly recruited sidekick arrive just in time to rescue Laureline, but the sidekick dies during the operation.

This little spaceboat must have had a helluva kick to ti. See that planet below? It’s soon going to be nachos.

Valerian and Laureline discover that at the center of the radiation zone, of which there appears to be no radiation, is a force field through which they penetrate and find another species, this one totally unknown. They are the survivors of the collateral damage of a space war, the original owners of the converter and the pearl, and now attempting to build their own spaceship. The converter and the pearl are the last keys they needed.

And they are the kidnappers of the Commander of the City.

While the team negotiates with this new species, the temporary commander of the City has dispensed a battalion of troops to the force field, preparing to blow it up. With the battalion is a robotic force of soldiers as well, provided by the Commander of the City. When the temporary commander aborts the sequence to blow up the force field, the robotic force abruptly mutinies, cutting up the battalion as well as the City’s command area.

Valerian destroys the mutinous robotics force, of course, and soon we discover the Commander of the City was also responsible for destroying the planet of the survivors – with full knowledge of what he was doing. In the end the survivors of the war get their converter and pearl, the Commander gets his arrest, and Valerian gets his girl.

As I said, the visuals are imaginative and breath-taking. The story, sadly, has its problems. It’s hard to imagine a soldier with the rank of Major acting in such a childish, self-centered manner. The thematic material is erratic and, so far I could see, nearly trivial – act like a grownup and you’ll be a chick magnet. For all the imagination and amusing details and well-thought out scenes, there’s a hole at the center of this story, a failure to identify a compelling problem which we can recognize and evaluate as to its solution, or lack thereof, in this movie. Perhaps emblematic of the problems in this story was the reaction of the Major and Sergeant to the complete loss of their support team during the retrieval of the converter and pearl – none whatsoever. The sacrifice of brave men to a veritable monster warrants nothing more than a wisecrack about the altitude at which the monster was shaken loose from their spaceship.

Is this how much empathy and loyalty we have for team members in the future?

See it for the visuals, but try not to pay much attention to the story.

Well, let’s — let’s be, again, clear-eyed about this. It’s one thing for the Chinese to admit publicly to a policy. It’s another thing for the Chinese to actually implement that policy. We had, a number of years ago with President Obama, agreements about not stealing our intellectual property through cyber theft. How’s that working out? Not very well. I mean for the American people, and I don’t think, Mr. Todd, there’s any disagreement between you and I about the fact that China is engaged in these egregious practices. The only debate is over how we go about solving them. But every American understands that, every day of the week China comes in to our homes, the businesses, our government agencies, and the damage is on the order of about $1 billion a day. – Dr. Peter Navarro, Director of the White House National Trade Council. [Meet The Press]

Hold on there, Dr. Navarro. I’d be amazed if 10% of Americans had any clue that the Chinese are engaged in IP theft or other unfair trade practices. I’d be surprised if the number exceeded 1%.

Or, for that matter, whether we do the same things to China.

But when I read this report from early March in HuffPo, particularly this passage, I had to draw a conclusion:

“Evangelicals still believe in the commandment: Thou shalt not have sex with a porn star,” Robert Jeffress told Fox News on Thursday. “However, whether this president violated that commandment or not is totally irrelevant to our support of him.” …

“Evangelicals knew they weren’t voting for an altar boy when they voted for Donald Trump,” he said. “We supported him because of his policies and his strong leadership.”

Conclusion: No, you support him because you’ve abandoned God. (OK, so that’s cheeky coming from an agnostic.)

Look, the reason we embrace our various ethical, philosophical, and religious systems is because they should increase our survival and reproductive potential. There may be a circuitous route to that conclusion for any given system, but it should be there; conversely, those that do not have long-term survival benefits will self-extinguish. Including a trope that even pre-dates the Web (yeah, we did this back in the old BBS days of the 1980s), consider the Nazi philosophy. It brutally pursued goals that it perceived as beneficial to itself – and in its best known incarnation, lasted hardly 12 years and was thoroughly extinguished and discredited. In fact, this effort led to international efforts to build and agree upon an ethical framework, in order to understand and repudiate those who would ally with Nazis and other such barbarians.

The point of such systems should be that they are applicable to all situations we’re likely to encounter. When extremists on the left or the right advocate for exceptions to our generally accepted framework of laws, they are implicitly stating that our set of laws, our shared and agreed upon philosophy, is not applicable to all situations, and by further implication, they are incomplete and thus our system is inferior to what it might be.

It’s possible, even probable, that our extremist du jour will argue that their favorite exception should, in actuality, be part of that philosophy, but that argument is, by definition, in fact a contradiction of one of the guiding principles of the framework, and generally not a contradiction which can be intellectually argued around. A fine example was the advocacy and use of torture by the Bush Administration during the Iraq War. A few of those victims, innocent or guilty, died under torture; the United States’ honor sustained a disastrous blot; and the CIA declared that no useful information was gained from the exercise, former Vice-President Cheney’s protestations notwithstanding. The uproar over the discovery of the use of torture was motivated by the anger over having some of our strongest moral principles contravened; those who argued torture was a valid response revealed themselves as morally corrupt. The results were predictably useless or replicable through more honorable means.

When the Evangelical movement’s leaders declare that Trump is their preferred candidate, and they acknowledge that he’s no altar boy, they have presented a situation with one of two interpretations for non-Evangelicals.

First, they have acknowledged that their philosophical system is incomplete and inferior. Maybe they’re personally good people, but their willingness to vote for someone who has little congruency with their religious system, who is an adulterer with no regrets, who lies and hollowly boasts and swaggers belligerently, suggests their philosophical system, their religion, the values they live their lives by, does not create good leadership skills outside of the religious context^[1].

Or, secondly, they’re a bunch of fucking hypocrites, unable to put forth a viable candidate of their own into the fray, and too hungry for power to wait for the next election.

If the Evangelicals want to know why a large portion of the United States does not consider them to be an admirable sect with respect to their adulation of President Trump, I think that’s why. We look at folks like Jeffress, and we don’t see a moral religious leader, but just another power-junkie, hungry for the prestige and adulation which goes with being in the inner circle of the powerful.

And that’s not only repulsive, but dangerous to the souls of the Evangelicals, as well as the standing of the United States as Reagan’s City on the Hill.

¹In recent years, Presidents Carter (D) and Bush-43 (R) were considered Presidents from the Evangelical movement. Neither is thought to be an outstanding or even mediocre President, but, instead, ineffective. Carter has certainly rehabilitated his personal reputation with his many good works, but that doesn’t really improve his Presidential standing, which is a probably too-high 26th in this survey of historians. Bush-43 is rated at 30th in the same survey, which is far too high for obvious reasons, but probably a comparative reaction to Trump’s debacle, who incidentally is rated DFL.

“This thing is going to me on my head, isn’t it?”
And then it does.

Bringing drama to dry scientific process, even for exploration, can be difficult, and Riders To The Stars (1954) struggles with that problem. A test rocket, penetrating into space, returns to Earth with its metal parts deeply compromised, such that they can be shattered by a simple blow. The hypothesis is that cosmic rays are damaging the metal. Yet, meteorites survive the trip through space unscathed, but whatever may preserve them burns off in the atmosphere. If we’re to explore space and other planets, we must solve this mystery. How?

By capturing a meteorite before it enters the atmosphere.

This is the story, from the recognition of a solution to the selection of the pilots, to the capture and safe return to Earth of a meteorite. In order to spice it up, the storytellers withhold information as with any mystery, although, truth be told, there’s no reason that the candidates to pilot the rockets have to hold doctorates – nor is it clear why the candidates are told not to share the nature of their specialties with each other during the testing period.

But the story, given its subject matter, is told in an adequate, if not exciting, manner. A little bit of broken romance is thrown in to symbolize the sacrifices the pilots are making, and some new romance to indicate that those who are brave are presented with interesting opportunities.

And it was refreshing to see two strong female characters (one only briefly, though), including a doctorate-holder on the launch team (but I don’t recall if they actually specified her area – it might have been astrophysics), although she’s stuck with a boring communications job during the actual launch – but the studio’s budget may have been stretched a bit thin at that juncture.

The special effects ranged from awful (why are the rockets and meteorites dancing a jig out there?), to a bit beautiful in a scene where passing meteorites are seen through a telescope, all the way to borrowed footage from actual rocket launches, both outside and inside views, which gives us some of verisimilitude. The acting was also good.

But, despite a fairly good climax, it’s all just a bit dry, perhaps a trifle too didactic, even if sometimes the science is absolutely wrong.

Call it a good college try at a tough subject.

Politico reports on the latest bit of political drama to pop up in Washington:

Rep. Blake Farenthold announced Friday he would resign immediately from Congress, after an ethics inquiry was opened into allegations of sexual harassment and other inappropriate behavior from former staff members.

The Texas Republican had said he would not run for reelection, but he had previously resisted calls to step down.

Source: Ballotpedia

Possibly a special election will be held in order to fill his seat for the remainder of the Congressional term, which lasts until November. If this holds true, I think this is important because the outcome of such a special election will give both parties a preview of how the mid-term elections may turn out for the entire House and the third of the Senate seats up for election (+2 more than usual, the extras being Franken’s and Cochrane’s seats, and even possibly McCain’s if his illness becomes too severe for him to continue to serve effectively). Such information can be used to improve messaging and other campaign tactics. In fact, if Trump comes to town to the district to campaign on behalf of the GOP candidate, then the candidate’s performance becomes important data for other GOP candidates with regards to Trump’s reputation.

Unfortunately – for the GOP, in my opinion – a source told Politico that there may not be a special election:

Farenthold’s seat leans Republican, and [Rep. Steve Stivers (R-Ohio), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee] expressed confidence the GOP would hold the district in the fall. A GOP source familiar with the matter said a special election before November was unlikely.

But suppose there was a special election – what are the chances that voters will deliver a whack to the nose of the Republicans in Texas for the special election? Since the redistricting in 2011, according to Ballotpedia Farenthold has won his district with never less than 56% of the vote, and twice more than 61% of the vote. In other words, he’s been dominant. It seems unlikely that the Democrats will be able to quickly rally to select a candidate acceptable to Texas independents and Democrats. Still, if Texas Republicans in the 27th district are sufficiently deflated by the sudden collapse of Farenthold into a puddle of ethical mush, they may have a chance. In fact, that latter possibility applies for the usual election if the special election is not held.

Incidentally, Ballotpedia had this delightful note concerning the 2011 redistricting:

Texas was redistricted in 2011. The controversial map, approved by the Texas Legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Perry, was appealed up to the U.S. Supreme Court before going into effect.

In redistricting, The Hill published a list of the Top Ten House Members who were helped by redistricting. Farenthold ranked 1st on the list.

The fact that a seat is safe for a party doesn’t mean the member who holds it is a safe office-holder. Indeed, because of its status as safe, it’ll attract cockroaches. Now, I don’t know if Farenthold was categorically a cockroach – but clearly, if he resigns just as the Ethics Committee is revving up its engines, there might be something to the suggestion that he has a relation to an insect.

While reading in AL Monitor about Middle Eastern reaction to Trump’s desire to pull out of Syria, I was struck by the following rhetoric from Turkey’s Prime Minister Binali Yildirim:

Talking to reporters on March 31 as he was flying back from a visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina, Prime Minister Binali Yildirim complimented Trump on his “courageous decision.” He added that although different branches of the US government were saying they knew nothing about plans to withdraw from Syria, it was Trump’s words that Turkey looked to.

It occurred to me to wonder, Does Trump actually take boilerplate speeches like this seriously? Personal compliments of this sort are meant to manipulate weak leaders, and U.S. Presidents understand this. But does Trump? One of the reasons he engages in those “ego-rallies,” as one friend terms them, is because he is continually seeking reassurance and positive feedback. So he says he doesn’t want to stay in Syria, even though various advisors say that’s where we should be. Will the words of the Turkish Prime Minister manipulate him into leaving, despite the best advice from his own government?

I have no opinion on the Syrian conflict myself, I should add. I haven’t studied it, and it often seems like any action taken – or bypassed – in the Middle East comes at some unanticipated cost.

But Trump should act with the best advice of his long-time foreign relations and diplomatic experts in mind, not the words of a foreign official with his own country’s agenda in mind.

If you’re a new investor, you’re a little jumpy. Today the markets – the American markets – took a tumble. The Dow Jones Industrial was down 2.34%, and the others were comparable. The chart illustrates the neck-breaking ride:

But what really caught my eye was the reaction of the Asian markets to the latest threats in the trade war. From Daily Record News:

Most Asian stock markets turned higher Friday as investors brushed off initial worries about the Trump administration’s latest threats of yet more tariffs on Chinese imports, indicating concerns were easing about a brewing trade battle between the world’s two biggest economies.

KEEPING SCORE: Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 index edged 0.1 percent higher to 21,672.94 while South Korea’s Kospi slipped 0.4 percent to 2,427.21. Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 crept 0.1 percent higher to 5,783.40 and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng jumped 1.1 percent to 29,852.93 after trading resumed following a holiday as investors caught up with the previous day’s global gains. Singapore’s share index rose while Indonesia’s fell. Mainland Chinese markets remained closed for a holiday.

My suspicion is that the Asian markets recognize that the biggest local force is China, not the United States. That’s natural. But they also recognize that China, whatever you think of its trade policies or its political system, is stable and will respond to all tariff threats only after due consideration.

American markets don’t have that level of confidence in President Trump, or the balance of the GOP leadership in Congress.

I can’t prove this supposition, of course. But it’s congruent with the evidence. And it leaves Trump looking weaker and weaker. What if Kudlow turns out to be wrong again, and China refuses to knuckle under and come to the bargaining table? Does Trump eventually backtrack because the agricultural portion of his base is hurting too much? Or does his ego lead him down the path of not backing down either, until we’re staring a global depression in the eye again?

And how ever will he blame Obama and Clinton for that?

Nor are GOP leaders happy. WaPo reports:

In a rare moment of agreement between the ultranationalist Chinese paper and a Republican lawmaker, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) responded to Trump’s move using similar language.

“Hopefully the president is just blowing off steam again,” he wrote in a statement Thursday. “But if he’s even half-serious, this is nuts.”

Not that it matters. Until Trump’s base finally cracks up – if ever – he’s safe from a GOP revolt, it seems.

WaPo reports on a recent data breach at a popular restauranteur, and what that may mean for its customers:

The records belonged to customers who had registered for the MyPanera program to order food online. The details exposed included their names, email and physical addresses, birthdays, and the last four digits of user credit card numbers, according to the security news site KrebsonSecurity. Customers’ Panera loyalty card numbers were also exposed, KrebsonSecurity reported, which scammers could potentially abuse to spend prepaid accounts.

On Tuesday, Panera estimated that fewer than 10,000 customers had been affected by the leak. KrebsonSecurity put the number at closer to 37 million, though experts say the true number of compromised records may never be fully known. Panera did not return a request for comment or for clarification on the nature of the data breach.

As with so many other data breaches, this one raises questions for consumers. In some respects, it has grown ever more difficult to avoid e-commerce transactions. Many people now manage their personal banking on mobile apps. And consumers appreciate the convenience of ordering goods online. Every relationship and transaction raises the possibility of a data breach.

This is going to continue until one of two things happens.

First, industry comes up with a technological solution in which the security portion of any given application is separate from the actual functionality that makes it useful. This would mean that the majority of your engineers needn’t learn the hard lessons about security, they can just focus on the functionality, performance, and scalability questions which are already difficult enough to solve.

Second, society and the law changes such that no one can write commercial level code without a license. Naturally, every time one of these breaches occurs, those engineers who screwed up lose their licenses. At least temporarily. Let them go do fast food service for a while. Stop screwing up.

I have my doubts about the first solution, and the second will never happen. The future looks bleak for those folks who think giving up their personal information is worth a fast ham sandwich.

Not me. Not yet. I wonder how they’ll get me. What did I forget?

Back in the old mailbag I dive, this time discovering a missive that uses the current assault weapon debate to cover a divisive message emphasizing xenophobia. Here’s the mail, annotated:

To those with an open mind and searching for the truth, here is some education for you.

Not really going to get into with anybody on this but for what its worth here is some education for you. At the top of this picture is an evil black rifle an XM-15e2. On the bottom is an M1 Carbine. Both can hold 30 round magazines. Both have the same rate of fire. Both are available to the civilian market. One was invented for war to defeat oppressive governments that were murdering millions of defenseless and unarmed citizens. Yes that would be the wooden one.

The M1 was manufactured in WW2 and millions were made. After the war many of our boys came home with their M1’s and even more were sold to the civilian markets by the CMP [ed. Canadian Mounted Police] for $20 dollars a piece. “My grandfather bought one.”

Since this was an illegal practice, at least for the Americans (this may be written for Canadians, but since it’s clearly aimed at the American conservative, I’ll write this from that angle), no, granddad did not buy one. He, or his supplier, stole it. A little searching will reveal that truth, such as here or here; I did not find a single site claiming the troops took their weapons home with them. As a matter of fact, the weapons are government-owned, and they didn’t permit former soldiers to retain them.

As I’ve noted in the past, there’s often a big lie at the center of these poisonous letters to the American conservative, and this is the big lie of this mail. Without this lie, the rest of the mail falls apart. Let’s take a look at the direction this fraud takes.

So yes evil assault rifles “your terminology not mine” have been around for decades. So here is the question. How did we have thousands upon thousands of men return home from some of the most horrific fighting the world has even seen, have access to the M1 and didn’t go around killing innocents? Access? Nope. You could go to Sears and buy an M1. You didn’t even have to be 18 to purchase one in the 50’s. To buy a handgun you have to be 21, that didn’t change until 1968.

As I just noted, this paragraph turns to dust. There were no weapons coming home from the war. As for buying them from Sears, that’s unclear after searching – asking the question of Google gets you lots of stuff. But I will note that the veterans of WW II and following conflicts had seen combat up close and personal, and dealt with the shattered bodies and minds of friends and enemies. I suspect that made violence less attractive, rather than moreso.

Well today’s guns have more firepower. Nope, also not true. Ammo cheaper? Hell no. Much, much cheaper in the 40’s and 50’s. So try if you will to take the gun out of the picture and put your focus elsewhere? What has changed?

How about we no longer have a society flooded with vets who could see what assault weapons could do? No?

Nuclear family under attack. God removed from school. Prayers forbidden. School administrators not allowed to punish kids anymore. Defeat is not allowed, everyone gets a trophy. Teasing is bullying. Girls should not be treated as girls and boys should not be treated as boys. When in doubt, administer drugs. Games where you kill people or cops you get points for. Movies that glorify violence. 15 minutes of fame given out on social media for stupidity.

And here’s the divisive message, designed to chip away at American solidarity. If you’re conservative, the nuclear family is almost certainly your family structure of choice; this is the sort of message designed to activate the xenophobic response. The hidden message? Terrible school massacres have only started since those terrible gay people came out and began marrying each other, those transgenders began having their operations, all the great parts of the good old days gone! If we could only go back!

Well, no. We’ve had violence in our society for centuries. Remember the Valentine’s Day Massacre? How about the Bath School Massacre, which was not guns but illustrates schools have never been safe from maniacs. Our history is punctuated with violence, from both explosives and guns. (And ask my sister the psychologist about the 1950s and women. They were not good.)

So welcome to another un-American bit of propaganda, trying to make us hate each other by blaming those who yearn for liberty and freedom for violence which is supposedly new. Do we need weapons of war in the hands of civilians? That’s the keen question here. Don’t let the author of a vicious, misleading lie color your thinking. You can do that yourself.

Have guns change? Yes, went from wood to black plastic. Has our society changed? What do you think? Ramble over.

Ah, and so offhand, isn’t he? But. We. Know. Better.

On Lawfare Professor Carrie Cordero discusses the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the US Presidential Election, and how it hasn’t changed much since Obama left office:

Since then, intelligence community officials in the Trump administration have reaffirmed the intelligence assessment regarding the Russian influence campaign that had begun during the prior administration. In congressional testimony and related statements, intelligence community leaders have made clear—despite the president’s rhetoric to the contrary—that there is no daylight between the intelligence community’s intelligence assessment in the current administration and that of the prior administration. In the national security community, that continuity is expected; but as part of the greater public dialogue, it is notable and important to highlight.

I view the continuity as important in the following ways.

1. It indicates the intelligence community has not been terribly compromised by President Trump.
2. It indicates the intelligence community is relatively undisturbed by changes in the political world, such as exchange of control of the White House. This indicates to me that they are non-partisan
3. It may provide information – eventually – on why President Trump continues to deny their conclusions, and that may be incriminating – politically or even within the justice system – evidence for removing this incompetent amateur from this important position.

Professor Cordero goes on to address WikiLeaks:

As far as I know, consistent with practice, the U.S. government has not ever confirmed publicly whether it has an open counterintelligence investigation of WikiLeaks, although the Washington Post reported last spring that “the FBI has spent years investigating WikiLeaks…” and continued to do so in the context of the exfiltration of sensitive CIA hacking tools.

As a result, the U.S. intelligence community has made specific statements about WikiLeaks—without really saying what it is, who funds it, who controls it and how it obtains information it releases. This makes it difficult for the public to accurately understand how to interpret WikiLeaks’ activities and releases. The current approach also makes it difficult for consumers of information released by WikiLeaks, including but not limited to professional journalists, to understand whether they are reviewing information that has been released as a public service, or as an orchestrated effort intended to manipulate, which activities may be supported, conducted or encouraged by a foreign intelligence service.

Given the near-impossibility for a citizen to verify the information released by WikiLeaks is authentic and integral, I’ve made the decision to simply disregard WikiLeaks from here on out.

At ThinkProgress, Ian Millhiser writes about the history of the Federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals when it comes to appeals based on claims of rejecting or selecting jurors based on race. As he notes, this is a practice strictly forbidden by the Supreme Court, yet the Fifth seems to be blind to the problem, possibly even deliberately blind:

But even if the Supreme Court does hand down a swift, summary reversal of the Fifth Circuit’s error in Chamberlin, it is far from clear that the judges on this appeals court will take the hint. For three decades, the Fifth Circuit has behaved as if racial jury discrimination simply does not exist in the states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. It’s behaved this way, moreover, despite the fact that the Supreme Court explicitly stated in the second Miller-El case that there is “widely known evidence of the general policy of the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office to exclude black [jury pool] members from juries at the time Miller-El’s jury was selected.”

Ian’s secondary title [what is that called, anyways?] is striking, if perhaps a trifle inaccurate:

What good is a constitution if judges refuse to follow it?

No doubt a question conservatives have asked in frustration in reaction to liberal judges “making law.” But it’s a question that disturbs the heart, because we run this nation under Law, and to find out that an entire circuit is ignoring a SCOTUS ruling is a bit earth-shaking. This may call for some investigation. It’s an interesting article.

Some economists get reputations for always being wrong. Such a reputation afflicts Arthur Laffer, inventor of the Laffer Curve, which shows how lowering tax rates leads to higher revenues for government because of the economic renaissance which follows such changes. Except … it doesn’t happen. Government finds itself in a financial bind.

Steve Benen suggests Trump’s new economic advisor, economist and TV commentator Larry Kudlow, is another economist with a bad reputation:

In political circles, the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol is known for a few things. He was former Vice President Dan Quayle’s chief of staff; he’s one of the more influential Republicans in the D.C. media; he’s a notable critic of Donald Trump; and he has an unfortunate habit of making predictions that don’t come true.

Larry Kudlow is similar, except instead of always being wrong about political developments, Kudlow is always wrong about the economy. And while that’s an unfortunate track record for someone who pontificates about the economy on television – Kudlow is a longtime CNBC anchor – it’s an even worse trait for someone who leads the White House’s National Economic Council.

And yet, that’s the job Donald Trump tapped Kudlow for this week.

It’s an interesting thought – Trump guided by someone he likes and trusts, who unfortunately gets it all wrong. Will it continue? And how long will he last, being wrong all the time? Here’s one of his earliest pronouncements, regarding the imminent, threatened trade war, via Reuters:

The official Xinhua news agency said late on Wednesday that the U.S. tariffs proposal would cost the United States “dearly”.

“China will not be afraid or back down if a trade war is unavoidable. The country has never surrendered to external pressure, and it will not surrender this time either,” Xinhua said.

The apparent determination not to retreat is at the polar opposite of comments by White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow, who told Fox News Channel on Wednesday: “I believe that the Chinese will back down and will play ball.”

I’ll try to remember to keep an eye out for results as well as other prognostications by Mr. Kudlow. For the sake of our farmers, I hope he has this one right.

Here we have Guiron tickling Gamera’s tummy. I do hope it’s not breeding season!

Attack Of The Monsters (1969; aka Gamera vs. Guiron) is an odd, teeth-gritting, yet mildly charming movie starring Gamera, known as “Friend to children,” a gigantic, flying (there’s rockets up that ass, I’m tellin’ ya!), space-patrolling turtle with tusks and an odd devotion to the children of Earth.

In this fifth entry in this series of movies, two boys, Akio and Tom, spy a spaceship approaching Earth, and recognize it is landing near their homes in Japan. The next morning, rush off and find it. Traipsing inside, they find it unoccupied, and pushing a button as children will, it takes off. When in space, they encounter Gamera, who appears to be about three times the size of the spaceship. Gamera saves them from an incoming meteoroid strike, but when he tries to stop the spaceship, it evades and outruns him.

Knifehead of Pacific Rim

Where is it going? To the twin planet of Earth, circling the Sun in direct opposition to our blue marble. Our twin planet is cagily named Terra, the Latin name for Earth, and often used in old science fiction stories. The boys land near an abandoned science station and witness two monsters fighting, with victory going to the monster they later learn is named Guiron, which bears more than a passing resemblance to the kaiju Knifehead of Pacific Rim (2013).

Then they encounter the inhabitants of the station, two lady scientists, and learn they are the last survivors of Terra, endangered by creeping cold and invading monsters. (Hey, what about that spaceship, then?)  Their only protection is Guiron, whom they control. They promise to help the boys get home by repairing the spaceship, which has been damaged.

But there are ulterior plans going on. The ladies really want to put the boys on their lunch menu, as they believe consuming the boys’ brains will give them the kids’ knowledge of Earth – and permit them to blend into the population when they, ah, emigrate. But just as Tom and Akio about to become appetizers, Gamera appears, and the ladies must occupy themselves with loosing Guiron to tackle Gamera.

The battle is strange, with Gamera running around on his hind legs, and Guiron revealing he can throw shurikens that are attached to his knife-like snout at Gamera, which even return to him after taking chunks out of Gamera. But Gamera has a few tricks of his own, including immobilizing Guiron for a few moments, long enough for Gamera to blow fire right up his ass.

No, I’m not kidding. It was quite impolite, I thought, and really a bad example to these kids.

In any case, Gamera loses in a victory for plot twists, and sinks to the bottom of a nearby lake, apparently dead. During the commotion, the boys stumble onto the secret of their destiny (good with olive oil), and do their best to escape – and it’s not a bad try, actually, what with short-range teleport stations and young legs. But their antagonists are equally wily and eventually capture them. But as they begin the preparations for the great feast, they are distracted by something (I forget what), one of the boys awakens from an enforced nap and frees himself, and eventually manages to find the control room and free Guiron from his cave. The scientists try to escape in the spaceship, but Guiron, apparently in a bad mood, slices the ship in half, injuring one of the scientists (turns out that injury in the Terran society is a fatal mistake, which may explain what really happened to the Terran society). Gamera, at the pleas of the children, springs back into action and destroys Guiron by dropping him on his head from about 100 feet up, and while he’s stuck in that position, Gamera uses a convenient rocket to blow Guiron up (the surviving scientist is also finished off).

Yeah, they could have just left Guiron alone, as he was stuck for a while, but instead they blew him up. For something that loves Earth kids, Gamera sure sets a bad example.

Gamera then repairs the spaceship, the boys board it, and Gamera takes them home by putting it in his mouth and taking flight.

What hurt? The dialog and/or dubbing, which was both dreadful and awful. The monsters are hardly any better, just guys in rubber suits, and while Guiron is sort of interesting, Gamera still has rockets up his ass, and this creepy interest in Earth’s children. The special effects in general were also awful.

But there are elements of a real story here. Gamera is not impregnable, as Guiron not only makes him bleed, but knocks him unconscious. And the monsters’ battles do have elements of cleverness, which adds an element of ebb and flow of tension.

And for all that the dialog was awful, the bones of this story are not rotten. Both the boys and their antagonists are clever. The boys formulate a plan and you expect it to work – and it doesn’t. So they try something else. There’s an actual bit of anticipation, although you know the boys are hardly likely to actually end up in an oven.

So it’s sort of looking at a soup full of rotten vegetables and realizing the carrots are not rotten. I wouldn’t watch it again, but I can’t quite categorize it as utterly trite trash. You have to comb it for a while, but there’s just a little bit that’s OK. The soup’s base fish stock was made from a rotten piscine, and most of the veggies are rotten, but every once in a while a bit of turnip is OK.

Good thing I spent most of my time “watching” this actually making and eating dinners, though.

I see that Reuters is suggesting my speculation is correct:

China appeared to be angling to inflict political costs on Trump by striking at signature U.S. exports, including soybeans, frozen beef, cotton and other agricultural commodities produced in states from Iowa to Texas that voted for him in the 2016 presidential election.

The sad thing is that China has drawn a number of complaints over the with regard to its trade practices. Trump, however, has no concept effective action, only of newsworthy action. War is a big-time word, guaranteed to get the blood moving, so he uses that, rather than working with allies to quietly but effectively move China into a more friendly posture vis a vis trade.

Instead, he’s waving a big flag and will probably accomplish nothing – but he’ll trumpet it to high heaven, because that’s all he knows how to do.

Who knows, maybe he’ll get the Chinese to back down and change some practices. I’m not putting any money on it, though, especially since the Chinese kicked Trump’s butt way back at the beginning of this debacle of an Administration.

The trend towards building tall with wood continues as Moriyama & Teshima Architects and Acton Ostry Architects have won a $130 million project in Ontario, CA. From the press release:

George Brown College has announced that Moriyama & Teshima Architects + Acton Ostry Architects have been selected to design The Arbour. This $130-million project will be a 12-storey mass timber building on George Brown’s Waterfront Campus, ushering in the first building of its kind in Ontario. The team was one of four shortlisted teams in this international design competition.

To this non-architect, it has a little bit of a feel of a Brutalist architecture, although, not being primarily concrete, it doesn’t really qualify. But it’s big and not shy and retiring.

And it’s made of wood.

From their Project Description:

George Brown College envisions The Arbour as a landmark, tall wood, low-carbon building that will feature ecological innovation across its entire life cycle and be a model for 21st Century smart, sustainable, green building innovation throughout Canada. To support this vision, our proposed design for The Arbour is deceptively simple, straightforward and, above all else, smart.

The design of The Arbour enhances connections to neighbouring developments and the natural spaces offered by Sherbourne Common and the Water’s Edge Promenade. The soaring solar chimney signals the sustainable systems within, while the angled apex of the Tall Wood Institute speaks to future advancement of tallwood technologies and development of low carbon building methodologies.

Looks like if you’re an architect who’s not investigating the use of wood in your 10-20 story buildings, you may be behind the curve.

CNN reports on a GOP candidate for the Senate and how he views his sought-after job:

Cramer’s comment criticizing Heitkamp’s voting record came in a Wednesday radio interview with conservative North Dakota host Scott Hennen.

“Here’s the good news about Donald Trump: Most of the time, he’s for North Dakota, and that’s my point where I’ve heard her say, ‘Gee, I voted with him 55% of the time,'” Cramer said.

“Can you imagine going home and telling your wife, ‘I’ve been faithful to you 55% of the time?’ Are you kidding me? Being wrong half the time is not a good answer.”

Nor is running around with your head crammed up Trump’s ass.

Look, it’s not unexpected that there’ll be some coordination among Party members on legislation, as one would expect those with a certain ideological orientation to come up with the same answers to the same questions. However, in a general situation, there are always those who will have different answers, even when coming from roughly the same ideological positions. Different judgments and life experiences are part of what brings wisdom to the Legislature.

And, of course, as a member of the legislative branch, his responsibilities are far different from those of the President. Simply from scoping considerations, answers may be different. To say you’ll stand with your leader is to abandon your responsibilities. You must fulfill your legislative responsibilities, not his Executive responsibilities.

But this is fuckin’ Trump. He’s incompetent, erratic, contradictory, ignorant, and incurious. You’re going to marry HIM? You may have oversight responsibilities to ensure he’s not corrupt and damaging the Republic. Are you up for that? After swearing allegiance Trump?

And don’t forget this power-hungry dude. I have to think Mr. Cramer fits into the same mold.

Conspectus:

1. : a usually brief survey or summary (as of an extensive subject) often providing an overall view
2. : outline, synopsis [Merriam-Webster]

Noted in “The Passing of the Libertarian Moment ,” Kevin D. Williamson, The Atlantic:

But rather than embodying the future of the Republican Party, Paul embodies its past, the postwar conservative era when Ronald Reagan could proclaim that “the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism,” when National Review founder William F. Buckley Jr. could publish a conspectus of his later work under the subtitle “Reflections of a Libertarian Journalist,” and young blue-blazered Republicans of the Alex P. Keaton variety wore out their copies of Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose.

New one on me.

Minnesota and Mississippi may be joined by yet another State – Arizona. The nature of this exclusive club? Hosting not one, but two Senate races later this year.

This is brought about by the potential retirement of Senator McCain (R-AZ), currently battling a glioblastoma (brain cancer). While I admire Senator McCain and regard him as an erratic member of the better half of the GOP, there’s little use in pretending there’s no change he’ll choose to retire before the end of his term in 2020. WaPo has details on a deadline:

If McCain vacates his seat by May 30, there would be primaries in August and a November special election to fill the remainder of his term, provided candidates submit enough signatures to qualify for the ballot, according to Eric Spencer, the election services director in Arizona.

While some close observers contend there is gray area in the way the election laws are written, most agree that if May 30 comes and goes without any vacancy, there would be no election this year and the Ducey appointment, should there eventually be one, would serve through 2020.

This would be yet another seat the Republicans would have to defend unexpectedly, vs only one so far for the Democrats. But who would run? No names, yet, although when McCain first announced his illness, State Senator Kelli Ward demanded that he immediately retire and Governor Ducey (R-AZ) appoint her to his seat. She has since waded into the race for retiring Senator Flake’s (R-AZ) seat, but if two become available, I’d guess the current GOP contenders would split up and cover both races.

All good wishes to Senator McCain, however. He and Flake have tried to be the conscience of the Senate, although their actions have only occasionally backed up their words.

Yesterday’s storm was so awful it killed a ghost. I was fortunate to catch a picture of the poor thing.

Oh, wait, I’m told this is something else.

Darn it, another fine theory shot down by an inconvenient fact!