Category Archives: Uncategorized

A couple of weeks ago, Representative Chris Collins (R-NY) was indicted on insider trading charges. Today, Representative Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA) and his wife were indicted on federal charges of misusing campaign funds. Is it a trend?

Normally, for 538 or so people, you’d expect a few to be bad apples, or for one or two to trip over the laws that can sometimes have special application to members of Congress, and I’m more than willing to accept that these two fall into this category, particularly as Duncan appears to have served honorably in the recent wars with the Marine Corp.

But its not hard to consider the possibility that they are representative of the general run of Republicans in Congress, given recent behaviors over the last 4-6 years, and the general drift of the party to the extremist right.

So it’s worth keeping an eye on this situation. As Federal prosecutors were selected by Trump, there’s no reason to think Collins or Duncan was setup, unless it’s a particularly vicious intra-party feud. However, Collins was an early supporter of President Trump and almost certainly hasn’t earned a trump-up charge (sorry) to clear him out of the House. Hunter appears to be in a similar position.

Will we be seeing a wave of such indictments? I’d like to believe not, but given how the party has drifted away from its law and order fundamental tenet, I will not be surprised if more sitting Representative and Senators of the Republican persuasion find themselves staring at a judge.

Might not hurt to put in a supply of popcorn. Collins occupies one of the reddest seats on the East Coast, but his indictment and subsequent decision to drop his re-election bid may put it firmly in play, especially if district independents are sick and tired of Republican shenanigans. Duncan’s seat in California’s 50th district has been solidly Republican for years, judging from Ballotpedia, so, again, it’s a little difficult to assume the Democrats might seriously challenge for Hunter’s seat, even if district voters are repulsed by the charges.

… and, by the same token, it’s not really wise to pay attention to a person proclaiming on the activities of their spouse. In both situations, they may be inclined to stretch the truth – and they’re also likely a second-hand source. So what to make of Simona Mangiante Papadopoulos, whose husband plead guilty and is to be sentenced for lying to FBI Agents concerning his work on the Trump Campaign? Lawfare’s Quinta Jurecic, and Benjamin Wittes are on the case:

Anyone who has been paying attention to the Russia investigation has probably seen Papadopoulos’s wife appearing on television over the past couple of months to declare her husband blameless and request a presidential pardon. It seems that Mueller’s team has as well. In a lengthy footnote, the sentencing memo documents and rebuts Simona Mangiante Papadopoulos’s protestations. The repudiation of her claims—specifically, that her husband “voluntarily reported” his interactions with Mifsud to the FBI and was subsequently entrapped by the bureau—is fairly damning. [Mueller’s footnote rebutting her claims omitted for brevity – HAW] …

These lies are the sort of thing the FBI prosecutes routinely. In fact, they are the sort of lies the FBI doesn’t tend to overlook.

The bottom line is that the George Papadopoulos story should be neither blithely dismissed nor inflated into more than it likely is. It appears to have been the trigger for the Russia investigation. It does not appear to hold the key to what we don’t yet know about L’Affaire Russe.

Papadopoulos’ stubbornness on the matter, evident in the footnote I omitted, is most curious, because he must know that digging in your heals will make prosecutors less likely to suggest to the judge that leniency might be appropriate. Is he so certain that, having plead guilty, he’ll get the leniency regardless? Is he certain he’ll be receiving a Presidential pardon despite having plead guilty? Is he so far gone in the party-before-country rathole that he can’t envision coming clean? In a way, he may be emblematic of much of the conservative side of the political spectrum these days, grimly clinging to what the Leader says is right without regard to how much damage the country may be sustaining.

Perhaps the War of 1812 was too long ago, and we need reminding that the United States is not an invulnerable institution. Existential threats tend to shake people lose from comforting, yet damnable, delusions.

Or pound the nails home in their coffins.

Vedette:

A vedette is the main female artist of a show derived from cabaret and its genres (revue, vaudeville, music hall or burlesque).

The purpose of the vedette in a cabaret or nightclub show is to entertain the public. The vedette has to know how to sing, dance and act on stage. [Wikipedia]

Noted in the Wikipedia entry for Gypsy Rose Lee:

Gypsy Rose Lee (born Rose Louise Hovick, January 8, 1911 – April 26, 1970) was an American burlesque entertainer and vedette famous for her striptease act. Also an actress, author, and playwright, her 1957 memoir was adapted into the 1959 stage musical Gypsy.

Some sort of Volvo. Noted in a parking lot nearby.

Seems to be in superb shape.

WaPo reports on one of the negative consequences of President Trump’s constraints on legal migrant Mexican workers:

Normally, the crabs would be steamed and hauled through double doors to a long, fluorescent-lit room, where dozens of employees at Russell Hall Seafood would extract the meat. But on this day, the steel tables inside that room sat empty.

“There’s nothing going on at all,” said owner Harry Phillips, “ ’cause we haven’t got our pickers.”

Changes to a foreign-worker visa program have left businesses like Russell Hall without the seasonal laborers — mostly from Mexico — who help drive Maryland’s signature industry.

About a third of picking jobs remain unfilled across the Eastern Shore this summer, as few Americans have responded to openings and Mexican laborers are stranded at home without permission to come here to work.

The situation illustrates a general unwillingness among U.S. workers to perform certain kinds of labor, some of the business owners here in Dorchester County say. It also demonstrates how President Trump’s “America First” policies have not necessarily helped those workers or small-business owners but instead have dealt them a new economic reality.

But it may be damn good for the crabs. No, not humor, just fact. A little less consumption means a few more crabs, doing there thing, out in the environment.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesman Michael Bars said his agency — which manages the H-2B program — is “focused on ensuring the integrity of the immigration system and protecting the interests of U.S. workers.”

“We are committed to reforming employment-based immigration programs so they benefit the American people to the greatest extent possible,” he said in a statement.

Mr. Bars and his boss, President Trump, may actually be accomplishing it – just not in quite the way envisioned. And, of course, at the expense of those running the crabbing business.

But, like the American farmer, some American workers have been sacrificed for the good of President Trump the rest of us.

At work, some of my colleagues periodically organize a fund and materials drive in order to donate to one of the local school districts. My first inclination is, like most folks, thinking of how to contribute.

Source: Flickr Hivemind

But I have second thoughts on this one. As a society, we should be adequately funding our schools, not because our students deserve it or some such empty phrase, but because, if society doesn’t make adequate investment in the education of our kids, we’ll become a pack of second-raters and the world will pass us by. Indeed, we might even be influenced by foreign powers in our corporations and our politics.

If that doesn’t make your skin crawl, you haven’t been paying enough attention to the outside world.

So I look at this drive and I wonder: Are we enabling the cheapskates who’ve not heard of TANSTAAFL^[1] in the Minnesota Legislature to continue to “hold taxes down” in a penny-wise, future-foolish manner? Does bridging the gap I presume exists through these informal, non-guaranteed way really make do, or are we doing unforeseen damage to an educational system already under attack by conservative forces which have convinced themselves that teachers’ unions and secular education are the Devil’s tools, rather than the light and the way to a brighter future.

Or, if I with hold a donation, am I condemning children to an inferior education?

¹TANSTAAFL: There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

Over the weekend, WaPo reported the removal of former CIA Director John Brennan’s security clearance was reportedly due as much to his criticisms of President Trump as for the activities of a fired aide:

[An unnamed] White House official acknowledged that the step against Brennan had been prepared in late July, when Sanders first said Trump was considering it. But the decision to take that step was made this week to divert attention from nonstop coverage of a critical book released by fired Trump aide Omarosa Manigault Newman.

Consideration is being given to holding other prepared documents in reserve for similar opportunities in the future, the official said.

Deliciously, retired Navy Admiral McRaven wanted in to Director Brennan’s club:

I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.

As more wannabe members want to join the club, I can’t help but suggest a template for their letters:

Dear President Trump,

    Thank you for qualifying me for the finest club in the land. CIA Director Brennan has sent me a warm welcoming letter, which I have framed. You have truly made today a high point of my life.

    And now, back to the controversy du jour, wherein I haven’t the least doubt that your incompetent Presidency will be sunk by the rocks on which it finds itself.

Sincere regards, XYZ, latest member of the Patriot Club.

It’d at least tick him off.

Atelier:

noun, plural at·el·iers [at-l-yeyz, at-l-yeyz; French atuh–lyey] /ˈæt lˌyeɪz, ˌæt lˈyeɪz; French atəˈlyeɪ/.

1. a workshop or studio, especially of an artist, artisan, or designer. [Dictionary.com]

Noted in the movie McQueen (2018), wherein one of the tailors is noted to run an atelier.

This is your brain on narcotics.

The theme of Mutant Hunt (1987) is probably We wanted to make a movie showing off our skills! From Mr. Cleft Chin to Mr. Martial Artist to the ladies who also did a bit of kicking, each gets to show off in this clumsy movie about a genetic engineer who discovers that adding a contaminated narcotic to the hydraulics of cyborgs results in vastly increased strength and a desire to commit murder of humans – which apparently makes them mutants. From the awful synthesizer music to the terrible stage combat skills, this was a colossal waste of time and effort. OK, I liked the cyborgs during their meltdown phase.

But it’s a bit of a shame. Somewhere in this swamp, some sort of theme concerning the cyborgs, such as their resemblance to slavery and what that says about those who use cyborgs, might have been found and worked out.

But that didn’t happen.

Avoid! Avoid! Avoid!

In case you were wondering if only the United States experiences religious-based cultural wars, look no further than Egypt and the decision of a former actress who had decided to give up her career and wear the hijab has now reversed her decision. From AL Monitor:

… [Retired Egyptian actress Hala] Shiha created new Twitter and Instagram accounts, posting pictures of herself without the veil. In one caption, she tweeted “strong independent woman from the beginning.” Within hours of its creation, the Twitter account had gained thousands of followers, according to the BBC, but it was suspended by Shiha shortly afterward, when the pictures drew mixed reactions from supporters and critics. Liberals hailed Shiha’s decision to take off her veil while ultra-conservatives decried the move, exhorting her to reconsider her stance.

“We applaud her; hopefully other women will follow,” cheered an Alexandria resident on Twitter.

A critic, meanwhile, rebuked Shiha in a demeaning tweet on Aug. 10: “Who cares about an ‘uncovered apple’ except flies?”

Not only has Shiha been lambasted by hard-line critics, she has also been the target of a fierce campaign to pressure her into changing her mind, with some even offering cash.

“I’ll pay you 300,000 Egyptian pounds [$16,727] if you keep your veil on,” offered one Twitter user who claims to be a Saudi banker, on Aug. 10.

Osama Gaweesh, a London-based TV presenter with the privately owned Mekameleen Channel, which is often critical of Egyptian government policies, tweeted Aug. 8 that removing the headscarf was “a personal choice.” Nevertheless, he chided those hailing Shiha’s move as “stepping out of the abyss of darkness” and “a slap in the face of the Muslim Brotherhood,” warning that such rhetoric is “purely racist and a form of hate speech against all veiled women.”

The tug of war over culture is a universal phenomenon.

An outfit from Highland Rape.

The biography of late fashion designer Lee Alexander McQueen in McQueen (2018) speaks to one man’s obsession for telling stories, vignettes if you will, with fashion as a central element of that story. That obsession is perhaps not called out as such, but as we saw runway couture show after runway couture show, up to fourteen a year in his own words, it was clear that these were stories with subplots, each model striding down the catwalk embodying an element of the story McQueen strove to tell without words. An example was his Highland Rape show that drew on his Scottish heritage, speaking to the English invasion of Scotland and the butchery of the Highland Clans. This was not a show to attract consumers to any specific item of clothing; it was, at least as presented, an ephemeral memorial to the victims of a long-ago and savage war of conquest.

As his shows evolved, the traditional runway changed to support his evolving notions of  narrative, a literal mutation of the medium itself, as he looked for ways to tell his stories more clearly. His presentations mirrored changes in his own life. Beginning as a lad from humble origins who happened to have a literal single-minded obsession with designing clothes, his obsession took him to the heights of Chief Designer at Givenchy and, later, Creative Director at Gucci. During the early parts of this journey, he appeared to be a humble, happy-go-lucky type, but as the pressures of his work molded him, his response wasn’t necessarily positive. The biography suggests he became somewhat abrasive and sometimes unwilling to share the results of his good fortune. Yet his team remained loyal, even during his unreasonable periods, suggesting that his personal genius and charisma remained constant.

But the curse of the truly single-minded is the instability of their lives; in McQueen’s case, possibly aggravated by sexual abuse when he was young. Such obsessions are often fueled by the positive feedback one receives, and I have to wonder if that blinded him to building the necessary supporting structure of his life. This is brought briefly into focus by McQueen himself in an informal interview, where he seems to express unease concerning his future, summoning the ennui many folks feel when it comes to understanding one’s place in the Universe. I know little of the fashion industry and how it affects those shooting stars working in it, but it strikes me that the end-point for a star designer within the industry is not necessarily a pleasant ending in a chair of dignified achievement.  The essence of fashion, even for a trail-blazing story-teller such as McQueen, seems to be analogous to the old phrase Flavor Of The Month. Granted, he lasted nearly two decades, but the journey appears to have been draining, even if he was highly respected.

The difficulty of his journey was, indeed, exemplified by his death. It’s not enough to note that he died of suicide, for, in my view, absent an underlying biological terminal condition, that is in itself a positive act that requires explanation. The darkness at the end of his life began earlier, as one of his team confides to the audience that McQueen spoke of committing a very public suicide: at the end of one of his shows, he’d make the traditional appearance to acknowledge the applause, and the put a gun in his mouth and end it. This suggests a deadly entanglement with the possibly pathological elements of the industry.

But he did not go out an as an accusatory finger pointing at his industry, but silently and alone.

The first deadly blow was the death of his mentor, stylist Isabella Blow, who died of suicide motivated by terminal cancer. She had bought the entire collection he constructed for his graduation from fashion school and became an important influence in his life. Already profoundly shaken by her death, the death of his mother soon followed, causing his support structure to crumble. His family had always been important to him, always attending his shows; they, in turn, often provided snacks for cast and crew. That he and his family were close is not, I think, in doubt.

At this juncture, his story is obscure, as tales of sudden death often are. I speculate, coming from some analogous observations from within the previous generation of my family, that the death of his mother, for him, presaged the ultimate and inevitable dissolution of the family. That is, the structure in his life had crumbled, and that, in combination with some hints that his own health was unstable, may have given the less stable portions of his mind dominance and ultimately led to his own decision to take his life. It was a fast decision, for he was dead before his mother was buried.

This is a movie rife with beautiful images, yet many are internally contradictory. Throughout the film, we see the motif of a damaged skull, beautifully gilded with gold, often with something equally lovely associating with it, such as a butterfly. In current Western culture, the skull symbolizes death, while gold is commonly associated with wealth and all the positive facets that go with wealth. Photographed luminously, that skull dominates a movie about a a genius fashion designer who nearly always appears in the most informal of aspects: jeans and sneakers and shirt half-tucked, goofy grin and Cockney accent. Maybe the silent, withdrawn, stereotypical genius was there, but I didn’t see it; just looking at him, I’d expect maybe he drove a truck for a living, or worked at the gas station.

Appearance vs. reality; the meat of high fashion.

Don’t go to this expecting to see a complete biography, for this is a depiction of his stories and himself, and how they were at the core of himself. There’s little mention of any mundane consumer work he might have done, for instance, and I see in other sources that he was also an avid scuba diver, a fact not mentioned in this movie. I don’t know what else is omitted, but I suspect that it’s just as well. This is a biography about a story-teller telling his own story in the only way he knew how.

Recommended.

Comity:

1. a : friendly social atmosphere : social harmony • group activities promoting comity • bipartisan comity in the Senate
   b : a loose widespread community based on common social institutions • the comity of civilization
   c : comity of nations • trans-Atlantic comity
   d : the informal and voluntary recognition by courts of one jurisdiction of the laws and judicial decisions of another
2. : avoidance of proselytizing members of another religious denomination [Merriam-Webster]

I tried to use the word comity while speaking to my Arts Editor yesterday, and we discovered that neither of us have a precise notion of its meaning.

Returning to a dormant thread, I can remember 20 years ago, when climate researchers speculated that the Gulf Current might be weakened by climate change, and, if that happened, it could have dire consequences for Europe. So perhaps this article by Michael Marshall in NewScientist (4 August 2018, paywall) shouldn’t come as a surprise:

THE northern hemisphere is roasting. Greece is battling lethal wildfires, and even the UK’s weather has been so hot and dry that record-breaking fires have broken out in its usually damp climes. In Oman on the Arabian peninsula, thermometers registered the hottest night on record anywhere on Earth on 28 June: the temperature never fell below 42.6°C.

Climatologists have been quick to point out that extremes are to be expected in a warming world. But there may be more to it than that. The ongoing European heatwave may have been made worse by a consequence of climate change rearing its head after decades of Cassandra-like warnings. For more than a century, the oceans have been changing right under our noses, as a powerful Atlantic current has weakened. The result, it seems increasingly likely, is more extremes of both heat and cold on both sides of the Atlantic – and the prospect of even more dramatic switches to come.

The object of concern is the Atlantic ocean conveyor belt, also known as the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation or AMOC. It is part of a global network of currents that push all the water in the oceans up and down the length, breadth and depth of the various interconnected basins. From the tropical Atlantic off the coast of South America, warm surface water flows north towards Greenland and western Europe, bringing with it an uncharacteristically warm climate, carried by the Gulf Stream.

And there’s more, much more. But the real point is that, yes, the predictions of climate change are being fulfilled. Humanity’s made some efforts, but they haven’t exactly been whole-hearted, have they? Speaking of, what are the latest measurements at the NOAA Mauna Loa CO₂ measurement site?

Well, I suspect Nature’s going to be making its own corrections for us. I hope they’re not too painful.

… try to stop by the New Bedford Whaling Museum and see four-fifths of one of the largest paintings ever produced:

Image: New Bedford Whaling Museum Blog.
“Detail view of the port of New Bedford with the Seamen’s Bethel flag flying at left and the Greek Revival steeple of the First Christian Church clearly visible at right. NBWM #1918.27.1.2”

On July 14, an artwork equal in length to 14 blue whales placed in a line will go on display in its entirety for the first time in more than half a century. Incidentally, those colossal creatures are central to the work. At 1,275 feet long, the Grand Panorama of a Whaling Voyage ‘Round the World, which was painted in 1848 in New Bedford, Massachusetts by Benjamin Russell, an artist and merchant, and Caleb Purrington, a sign painter, is the longest painting in North America, according to the New Bedford Whaling Museum, which is staging the work’s big return. …

Over the last three years, it has undergone extensive restoration work, having damage that it incurred over its action-packed life repaired. During the mid-19th century, the Panorama traveled to cities around the country—Boston, New York, and St. Louis, to name a few—and was exhibited as a lively, cinematic experience, often narrated by Russell himself over the course of a two-hour performance. The spools of painted cotton sheeting that comprise the work were furled and unfurled, revealing rich scenes of far-flung wonders, seen by Russell while working as a steerer on the Kutusoff, which set sail from New Bedford in 1841 and returned in 1845. The ship traveled to New Zealand, Tahiti, Cape Horn, and the Hawaiian Islands, among other distant locations, and Russell, entangled in many debts, created the fanciful Panorama with the hope that it could function as a commercial attraction. Audience members for these displays were “armchair travelers,” as Christina Connett, the Whaling Museum’s chief curator, put it. [ARTNEWS]

And then send me a letter telling me if it was worth the time!

NewScientist (4 August 2018, tragically hidden behind a paywall) gives a sampling of AI-generated sonnet quatrains and suggests they have a ways to go before we can claim to have cloned the mortal Bard. Here’s one:

with joyous gambols gay and still array
no longer when he twas, while in his day
at first to pass in all delightful ways
around him, charming and of all his days

Fun!

Am I the only one wondering this? If the GOP is completely blasted in the mid-terms, President Trump will pivot like no one’s pivoted before and proclaim a glorious victory for the Democrats, and it’s all due to himself for revealing what a bunch third-raters they’ve become?

Man, that makes me ill just thinking about it.

She puts it in a glass of water and calls it ‘art’.

Still, murder is murder. So sorry, Mr. Poppy.

Recently, President Trump admitted he took former CIA Director John Brennan’s security clearance away because of his perceived involvement in the investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 Presidential election, thus apparently destroying the official White House statement that rationalized the decision while insulting Brennan. On Lawfare, Robert Litt comments on the consequences of Trump’s public pronouncement for the future of the power of the Presidency:

I don’t know whether Brennan intends to challenge the revocation of his clearance in court. There are good reasons not to, including the burdens inherent in litigation and the fact that he likely has little need for the clearance. But if he does, he should have little difficulty persuading a court that his clearance was revoked in retaliation for his exercise of his First Amendment right to criticize the president. That will then squarely present the issue of whether courts are powerless to prevent such abuse of the clearance system—and the result may be that the president’s control over security clearances, long jealously guarded, will have been weakened as a result of one president’s tantrum.

The judicial system, with some exceptions, has shown little favor or deference to the Executive in this Administration, presumably due to the extreme amateurism and probable abuses of power inherent in many of the activities of this Executive. If the courts were to rule against Trump in such a hypothetical suit, the advocates of Executive Power would scream holy hell about the loss of discretion on the part of the Executive, generic – but I think the truth is that using the Executive to persecute political enemies is a far worse problem than a loss of discretion when it comes to security clearances, especially if the courts were to rule in such a way as to criminalize the specific motivation of persecuting an enemy.

But does Brennan himself lean towards or against Executive discretion?

My Arts Editor liked it. Here it is.

I occasionally joke that men of a certain age, shall we say, tend to walk in ruts with edges roughly at the level of their eyebrows, and even if they generally believe change can be a good thing, they’re still muttering Change is bad! Change is bad! when it comes to themselves.

So I’m sort of wondering as to the age of Michael Gerson, who believes that, post-Trump, our Republic will never be the same, as published in WaPo:

But the broader influence of celebrity culture on politics is to transform citizens into spectators. In his book “How Democracy Ends,” David Runciman warns of a political system in which “the people are simply watching a performance in which their role is to give or withhold their applause at the appropriate moments.” In this case, democracy becomes “an elaborate show, needing ever more characterful performers to hold the public’s attention.” Mr. Madison, meet Omarosa.

Trump is sometimes called a populist. But all this is a far cry from the prairie populism of William Jennings Bryan, who sought to elevate the influence of common people. Instead, we are seeing a drama with one hero, pitted against an array of villains. And those villains are defined as anyone who opposes or obstructs the president, including the press, the courts and federal law enforcement. Trump’s stump speeches are not a call to arms against want; they are a call to oppose his enemies. This is not the agenda of a movement; it is the agenda of a cult.

Will the republic survive all this? Of course it will. But it won’t be the same.

Whether this is good change or bad change will depend on how our leaders, liberals and conservatives, treat the aftermath of the Trump Administration. We can already see the broad outlines of the tremendous mess that’ll be left behind, from a healthcare system that had promise for reducing health care costs to unbalanced taxes, an overweight military to trade wars that benefit only the very few positioned to take advantage of them, and so much more.

But this can be an opportunity for a civics education. Some of it is already taking place, as evidenced by high turnouts for the mid-term primaries here in the Midwest, as well as far more women running for elective office than ever before. But that is the easy, reactive stuff. When the full results of the Trump Administration comes into view, how will we convince a substantial portion of the conservative base that there’s a serious problem when a large group of voters devote themselves to an obvious liar, braggart, and business failure? That they were conned?

No one likes to admit they’ve been conned.

But it’s become evident that there’s a serious dysfunction in the electorate. “Dyed in the wool Republican” doesn’t cut it anymore, if it ever did. Nor does “dyed in the wool Democrat,” because membership does not connote honesty, integrity, or competency in matters of government.

One of my hopes is obvious, I’m sure, for long-term readers: the expungement of the notion that a successful businessman will be a successful politician. (See here for more elucidation.) He can be, as George Romney, father of Mitt Romney, demonstrated a long time ago. But I suspect Romney spent a lot of time studying and thinking about the differences between the private and public sectors, and was willing to learn as he went along. But a businessman unwilling to acknowledge and work on these subjects is going to be a failure, and it’s the electorate’s responsibility to determine if a politician has made the effort to understand how our government works and the issues that it faces.

Secondly, I’d like our electorate to become more self-aware, to understand their particular triggers and how to learn to ignore them properly. A story about a family with the names obscured to protect the innocent: when the mother was quite ill, her doc, quite the cheerful and voluble sort, gave an upbeat report and then took off on vacation. A few days later, his partner, a rather dour fellow, called the family into a conference and gave another report in his own style.

One of those family members became upset.

The reason for the panic was because they were reading the body language and non-verbal signals and all those other things that make for charisma, or lack thereof. The first doc had lots of it, the second did not.

And that panic was unwarranted. The rest of the family calmed their family member by simply noting that the second doc had delivered the same information as the first doc, plus one minor detail. The facts hadn’t materially changed. But because that family member naturally tried to gather all the information they could, they picked up irrelevant information which actually just reflected the personality of the doctor, rather than relevant to the prognosis at hand.  Because the doc was less upbeat than his partner, his delivery made the prognosis seem much less optimistic than had the first doc. The lesson here is to discard all those non-verbal signals and simply listen to the content of the message. In Trump’s case, discard the “fact,” dubious as it is, that he acts like a “great boss” (a quote from an article I read a while back, which made me slightly ill). What is he saying? Is it true? As well all know, or should know, the odds are considerably less than even that he’s going to tell the truth anytime he opens his mouth or Twitches his thumbs. This will be a prime, if unhappy, opportunity to learn the results of voting for a confirmed liar, boaster, and braggart.

Finally, and perhaps hardest of all, it’s clear that a lot of folks were desperate to hear certain phrases from any prospective leader. “Clean coal” is the iconic example, the cry of an industry in a death spiral, and of the workers who viewed their work in it as deeply honorable and important, and they didn’t want to leave that industry. My general interpretation is that a lot of people quite understandably fear change. There’s no surprise there. It’s not true of everyone, but a lot of people see the world as essentially static. Consider the coal miner who, upon being offered free educational opportunities, decided to study business practices connected to the coal industry. Definitely a WTF moment for someone who embraces change, but this makes sense for those who believe strongly in the status quo.

That desperate need, that fear of change, led a lot of people down the road to a bad decision, even if they do not yet agree with me. It’s not enough to acknowledge that and move on, but to also consider how to improve ourselves, collectively and individually, so that this doesn’t happen again. It’s not as if we were not warned, because a lot of pundits on both sides of the spectrum were horrified as Trump advanced through the Presidential campaign – but obviously a lot of voters voted for him when the time came. How do we, as the electorate of a signal democracy, find a way to improve ourselves and not go into a quagmire like this again?

This is one of the tests for democracies, one of those tests that will either indicate that democracy is a good governing model – or is on the way to the junkheap, to assume a place next to such models of madness as absolute monarchies and communism.

This is our chance to change. So stop that muttering and get on with it.

Part of the push for legalization of marijuana have been rampant claims of how it cures just about everything under the sun. However, as any medical researcher will tell you, making out what’s true and what’s not when it comes to med is quite difficult, and it turns out marijuana is actually a little more difficult. NewScientist (4 August 2018) and Graham Lawton has the skinny:

Performing large and high-quality clinical trials of whole cannabis is possible, but difficult. The lack of standardisation is a problem, and the characteristic taste and odour makes finding a placebo tricky. A review by the World Health Organization found only 12 placebo-controlled trials of whole cannabis; most were small and inconclusive.

The same article notes there are risks to recreational usage:

The exact make-up of what is being ingested is often not clear. Different cannabis strains vary widely in their constituents, especially in their ratio of the two most abundant cannabinoids: delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which is powerfully psychoactive, and cannabidiol (CBD), which is not. That’s true even for medical-grade cannabis grown under controlled conditions. The Canadian grower Tilray, for example, sells products with specified amounts of THC and CBD, but they all come with a disclaimer that THC and CBD levels may vary considerably. This is a serious problem, says [Deepak D’Souza of Yale School of Medicine]. “Patients will have to experiment with different strains and doses to achieve the desired effects.”

The use of whole cannabis also opens people up to some of the well-known risks that recreational users face. One is dependence, which despite cannabis’s reputation as a non-addictive drug is a real risk. According to [Robin Murray at the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London], about 1 in 11 people who try cannabis become dependent on it. People also become tolerant to the drug and need to escalate doses to get the same effect.

Next on the checklist of concerns is psychosis. Cannabis consumption is a proven risk factor for short-term psychotic breaks as well as chronic psychoses including schizophrenia. “We can say with absolute certainty that cannabis carries severe risks,” says Adrian James, registrar of the UK Royal College of Psychiatrists. A body of work by many research groups suggests that the average cannabis user is about twice as likely as a non-user to develop a psychotic disorder.

Something to keep in mind if advocating for the legalization of marijuana.

Gary Sargent in The Plum Line is trying to understand President Trump’s behavior in the wake of the removal of former CIA Director Brennan’s security clearance, because it appears that Trump decided to contradict the statement put out by the White House:

The latest example of this: In an interview with the Wall Street Journal published Wednesday night, Trump openly declared that his revocation of former CIA director John Brennan’s security clearance was actually about the Russia investigation.

The detailed statement that the White House released Wednesday to justify this act only referred obliquely to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe, insisting Brennan had misrepresented the importance of the “Steele dossier” to the investigation. …

Why does Trump keep admitting to his real motive in such cases? The best answer is that Trump sees nothing whatsoever wrong with trying to derail the investigation.

And that may indeed be the reason. But I’d like to return to an earlier interpretation of his behavior.

Dementia.

Honestly, his actions, his unwillingness or inability to learn, his lack of impulse control, his inability to follow through, and his fascination with irrelevancies, such as his reported inclination to continually bring up his electoral victory in 2016, all point to a man whose mental faculties are deteriorating. His willingness to lie, especially about his health, also correlates with such a conclusion.

And an elderly man with dementia and his hands on some of the biggest levers of power around is a frightening thought.

Spaceweather notes our atmosphere is behaving a little oddly:

A MYSTERY IN THE MESOSPHERE: This summer, something strange has been happening in the mesosphere. The mesosphere is a layer of the atmosphere so high that it almost touches space. In the rarefied air 83 km above Earth’s surface, summertime wisps of water vapor wrap themselves around specks of meteor smoke. The resulting swarms of ice crystals form noctilucent clouds (NLCs), which can be seen glowing in the night sky at high latitudes.

And, no, that’s not the strange thing.

Northern sky watchers have grown accustomed to seeing these clouds in recent years. They form in May, intensify in June, and ultimately fade in July and August. This year, however, something different happened. Instead of fading in late July, the clouds exploded with unusual luminosity.

They may know why – the mesosphere has been exceptionally wet and cold this year, although exactly why is not yet clear. Fascinating stuff. And cool pics.

It makes you want to giggle and throw up at the same time, doesn’t it? From NewScientist (4 August 2018):

STUDENTS in the US who have a type of brain parasite carried by cats are more likely to be majoring in business studies. …

Now an analysis of almost 1300 US students has found that those who had been exposed to the parasite were 1.7 times more likely to be majoring in business. In particular, they were more likely to be focusing on management and entrepreneurship than other business-related areas.

The study also found that professionals attending business events were almost twice as likely to have started their own business if they were T. gondii positive, and that countries with a higher prevalence of the infection show more entrepreneurial activity.

This, from the abstract of the paper in The Proceedings Of The Royal Society B, is a lot more thought-provoking:

Disciplines such as business and economics often rely on the assumption of rationality when explaining complex human behaviours. However, growing evidence suggests that behaviour may concurrently be influenced by infectious microorganisms. The protozoan Toxoplasma gondii infects an estimated 2 billion people worldwide and has been linked to behavioural alterations in humans and other vertebrates. Here we integrate primary data from college students and business professionals with national-level information on cultural attitudes towards business to test the hypothesis that T. gondii infection influences individual- as well as societal-scale entrepreneurship activities.

Economic systems are built on an assumption of rationality in the actors of the system; when rationality is replaced, if partially, by the programmed inclinations of a micro-organism, it certainly goes a long way towards explaining the failures of those systems.

I wonder if anyone’s performed a similar study on investors, from the fearful mutual fund investors to the folks who invest in stocks with a beta in excess of a standard variation off the average, where beta is the average volatility in the price of stocks in a given category.