Category Archives: Uncategorized

Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) has …

1. Decided to seek vengeance on the Democrats for suggesting former President Trump was, and remains, a flying nutcase;
2. Received orders from on high – perhaps from flying nutcase former President Trump – to push this attack;
3. Decided to cover up for Governor DeSantis’ (R-FL) incompetency (this one courtesy Chris Cillizza of CNN/Politics);
4. Engage in a weird relative of moral equivalence;
5. Decided it’s time to launch Rick Scott for President in 2024;

What’s making me laugh and wonder why I didn’t predict this all along?

After the disastrous events in Afghanistan, we must confront a serious question: Is Joe Biden capable of discharging the duties of his office or has time come to exercise the provisions of the 25th Amendment? https://t.co/l1bFrUdZH9

— Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) August 16, 2021

Given what little I’ve seen out of Senator Scott over the years, he’s not capable of confronting serious questions, just political questions of power.

For the record, here’s my take on the contents of his, errr, concerns:

• No, inflation is not raging. Show me an annual rate of 20% and I’ll express some concern.
• The debt ceiling is a Congressional responsibility, not a Presidential responsibility. Perhaps you should see if you can possibly address the issue without looking like a great hypocritical goof, Senator. Maybe you should agree to raise taxes, Senator. Maybe you should raise funding of the IRS so we can catch the cheats. You know. Do your job.
• The entire border crossings thing, whatever the details may be – I have not followed it closely – does not necessarily condemn the Biden Administration. It may signal that problems in Central America have worsened and need to be addressed, an issue I’ve ranted on before.
• And, yes, Afghanistan has gone from the forgotten war to front page news. We’ll need our experts – and, no, Senator Scott, you are not one of them, and I’m not particularly interested in your blathering – to investigate whether this collapse was predicted or not, and what went wrong over the four administrations responsible for this debacle. I suspect a shit-storm of blame will hit all four President in about 50 years, when today’s political polarization is no more than a chapter on madness in history books, and a fair assessment can take place. My suspicion: “nation-building” is simply hubris, and former President Bush (R) will bear most of the responsibility.

Meanwhile, the economy has come roaring back, foreign relations, with the notable possible exception of Afghanistan, is recovering from the debacle of the Trump Administration as shown in overseas polls and a general lack of drama, and we’re moving forward again with an adult in the Oval Office, rather than the boastful, vain child to whose ass you shoved your nose.

What a hollow grandstander this Senator has turned out to be.

I see Erick Erickson is carrying the ball for the anti-experts in the far-right extremist crew today:

The experts said if Trump withdrew from the Iran deal, there’d be war and Iran would have nukes. The experts were wrong.

The experts said if Trump moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, there’d be war. The experts were wrong.

The experts said if Trump killed Qasem Soleimani, there’d be war. The experts were wrong.

The experts said if Biden withdrew from Afghanistan, the Taliban would not sweep back into power. The experts were wrong.

Is it any wonder we are all less likely to listen to the experts? This has spillover effects because Americans don’t distinguish “foreign policy experts” from “public health experts” so they are no more likely to trust the expert saying to get vaccinated than the expert saying Biden could pack up and leave Afghanistan.

So – just to be contrary – I note the following:

1. No links. Frankly, Soleimani was dead before we had even heard of him. I doubt anyone predicted war with any certainty. In fact, since Soleimani was killed outside of Iran, in Iraq, I suspect the experts simply shrugged, predicted some loud mouths but no real actions, and ate their breakfasts. At least some of this feels like propaganda, designed to enrage rather than inform.
2. He’s not talking about simple stuff here, is he? Foreign relations is among the most difficult of subjects. His desperate need for 100% certainty is not the mark of a mature judgment.
3. Experts do not express themselves in certainty in most cases; they typically express themselves with percentages, or proxies for percentages – Good chance, almost certain, almost certainly not. Erickson’s failure to acknowledge that experts traffic in probability is another mark of his failure of judgment.

But, for me, what really signals his lack of good judgment is that he doesn’t take into account what the experts leave unsaid because everyone knows it: If this goes on, If no one does something about it …

Experts are pointing out where they think this will go if no one does anything about it, and that’s the role they play – the big red flag being waved at those who have the power to affect things.

Take that first example. Trump irresponsibly junks the JCPOA and the experts sounded the alarm – and leaders of the European powers started talking to Iran about what it was going to do. And perhaps delivered some warnings and promises of their own. It was quite noteworthy how Iran decided to hang around until Trump was thrust out of power, and now we’re back to the sad little negotiating dance that was entirely unnecessary, but forced upon us by a yokel.

The experts aren’t wrong. They’re part of the process. If we don’t do anything about this is the unwritten rule of how this works.

And if, truly, conservatives are using this to distrust public health, well, that’s on them. If they don’t understand that expert evaluation is part of the process, then they need to learn more.

Now, Erickson’s post was all about Afghanistan and Biden not addressing the nation – which he later did. This is the point where we know the experts’ next step – but I’ll point it out anyways. Assessment. How wrong were we, what didn’t we consider, and how can we do better next time?

And that takes time. As I’ve mentioned before, I think it’s worth patiently awaiting results and assessments, rather than jerking off at the very thought of Biden being wrong. Yes, it does look like the general assessment of how fast the Kabul government would collapse is wrong. This is what happens when you telegraph your next move.

Like Trump did – the guy who caused this in the second place (first goes to Bush). Like Obama did.

Hysterical instant assessments such as Erickson demonstrate a tension I’ve recently recognized to be inherent in democracy: The expert vs the clod who thinks his opinion is as good as the next guy’s. After all, it is a democracy, we’re all supposed to be equal … even if we forget that part about before the law.

Perhaps something more on that subject anon.

You know your favorite pundit is an inferior, knee-jerk hack if, concerning the conclusion of the Afghan debacle, they fail to note the following facts:

1. This intervention, war, whatever you call it, was started by President Bush (R) following the attack on and destruction of the World Trade Center, along with the attack on the Pentagon. While the top line goal of killing head plotter Osama bin Laden was not accomplished by Bush and his war, other objectives were accomplished, as pointed out by Jonathan Rauch.
2. Obama tried various tactics to overwhelm the Taliban, before suggesting we would be leaving near the end of his term.
3. Trump did little until the final year of his term, when, in a highly criticized move, he released several thousand Taliban prisoners in exchange for a cease-fire; he later promised that the United States would leave Afghanistan by September of 2021. Professor Richardson’s summary of events is useful. SemDem on Daily Kos, while inevitably biased, also has a useful summary.
4. Acts in the past influence events in the future. Seems obvious, doesn’t it? Yet, many pundits have and will caper about as if Trump’s deal with the Taliban didn’t occur or should have been ignored. Neither is an honorable option, once the deal was struck.

In the end, Biden had to leave by September. As shocking as the fall of Kabul has been, it’s important to keep a few facts in mind:

1. How many American lives have been lost in this sudden crash? None.
2. How many Afghani slaughters have occurred? None reported so far.
3. What has hurt the most so far? American pride at failed nation building.

That, of course, is not the end of the matter for evaluation purposes. We need to worry about future events, future facts if you will: how many slaughters will still occur? Will Taliban oppression result in offenses against humanity? What of the Afghan translators who should have been given asylum?

The near-immediate fall of Afghanistan, so far, has not been a humanitarian disaster, although it could still become such a thing. The real disaster may be for an American military caught lying to multiple civilian administrations, unable to accomplish a mission that was often ill-defined, and the follow-on hit to its pride. The fact that Afghanistan was not a center for terrorism is, I fear, going to be forgotten by a mainstream (and far-right) media that has been trained to shallow thinking and quick-draw blame.

The messaging challenge for Press Secretary Psaki is going to be immense. I wish her luck.

And for you and your pundit? Remember, it’s ok for a pundit to make major mistakes, so long as they recognize them, apologize, and self-analyze. My favorite pundit, Andrew Sullivan, initially backed the Iraq invasion; when the consequent CIA torture sessions were revealed, he reversed positions, apologized, admitted actual shame, and then self-analyzed. For that, I respect him.

If you have a pundit that knee-jerked like, say, Erick Erickson did, I hope they soon apologize, too.

The American withdrawal from Afghanistan has attracted conservative criticism (such as here and here), but what I’ve read is operational criticism of the withdrawal, or that we’ve left at all. Liberal journalist Jonathan Rauch takes the longer view, suggesting that our failure to install a permanent Western-style government in Kabul (the President of Afghanistan has already fled) does not mean we’ve wasted our time, money, and lives in Afghanistan, particularly if our ideas have spread throughout the country:

Those are a lot of lives saved and improved. Even at their most monstrous, the Taliban cannot roll back all the gains of the past 20 years. In fact, back in power, they would find a different country than the one they left: one with a substantial Western-educated elite and a population that has known peace and progress. “That’s what’s going to challenge the Taliban or anyone who comes in to take over leadership,” Shuja Rabbani, an Afghan expatriate and son of a former president, told me. “They’re going to have a very different kind of fight to put up.”

Indeed, assuming this WaPo report is accurate …

Some of the restrictions the militants are imposing — burqas for women, long beards for men, forced attendance at mosques — hark back to their rule of the late 1990s. But new restrictions are intended to rein in 21st century technology and advances in women’s rights.

Mah Jan, who taught under Taliban rule, said militants monitored teachers and their relationships with aid groups before they were toppled in the 2001 U.S. invasion, but they were not coercive. Now, she said, “the Taliban have grown very brutal.”

… suggests the Taliban may be painfully aware that the population of Afghanistan, exposed to Western ideas and technologies for twenty years, may not be as easy to control as they were prior to the Western invasion. That might contribute to the explanation for what appears to be greater brutality in their rule.

So President Biden decided to end a war that, incidentally, Trump wanted to end. Biden must be aware of the problems of simple humanity in the machine of war: an evasion of responsibility, just as credit is unjustly pursued when available. Here’s Kevin Drum:

There’s no question that the US policy class has a lot to answer for here, but the bulk of the blame has to be placed on the army. They were the ones on the ground. They were the ones who built an Afghan military that was completely unsuitable to the country. They’re the ones who apparently never grasped the full extent of the corruption they were up against. They were the ones who advised four different US presidents that things were going well if they could just have a little more time and a few more troops.

The US military is hardly the only organization that hates to be the bearer of bad news. Nor are they the only organization that hates to admit they can’t do the job they’re being asked to do. But an unwillingness to do these things was one of the primary reasons we lost Vietnam, and our military leadership at the time swore it would never happen again.

But it did, just as soon as they found themselves in a similar situation. I remember years and years of blathering about counterinsurgency during the aughts, with army officers insisting that we could learn how to do it and skeptics pointing out that there were practically no examples of successful Western counterinsurgencies in the entire era since World War II. But after David Petraeus left the scene everyone got tired of this stuff and the nation’s op-ed pages moved on to other things.

If Biden was uncertain that he was getting accurate information, given the fog of war, along with deliberate misleading reports, he may have decided to stop trying to perform a miracle and get out. The fact that the Afghan government forces are collapsing like dominoes may not – may not – suggest a Biden botch, but that we, as a corporate intelligence, really didn’t understand the situation.

Rauch’s conclusion:

For all of those reasons, I am resolutely agnostic on Biden’s withdrawal decision. Anyone who thinks the answer is obvious hasn’t thought seriously about it. Given the many imponderables and unpredictables on both sides of the equation, the intuitions of the president and the public may be a better guide than any stack of white papers.

Regardless, consigning Afghanistan to the “lost wars” category is a mistake. Even if withdrawal brings chaos, that does not mean the operation was a failure. Decisive triumphs like victory in the Cold War are grand but rare; more often, liberal countries succeed by muddling through, temporizing, and preventing the worst rather than achieving the best. In Afghanistan, the U.S. did not achieve the best, but a generation-long dividend of security, stability, and decency is something to appreciate and learn from, not something to condemn and dismiss.

I am inclined to agree. Jumping to conclusions, such as that Biden should resign!, strikes me as a rush to judgment, especially from the right, who have been trained since the Reagan era to rush to judgment whenever that judgment can be thrust upon a Democrat. Rauch notes that the war achieved a number of objectives; a populace brought under Taliban rule is already known to be losing much of its younger generation, and it may find its remaining subjects to be restive. Given the number of arms available, the Taliban may find itself suffering unexpected losses as it attempts to clamp down.

I could be wrong. The immediate collapse of the Afghan government forces is a bit shocking and suggests they were never really ready. Time will tell.

Fellatial:

1. Of or suitable for a blowjob.
2. Of the nature of blowjobs, servile, fawning, with involvement of the mouth in a hoovering motion.
3. Ready to suck off those in authority, usually in exchange for favors, prestige or political appointments.
4. The way things work in Washington. [Arnold Zwicky, Language Log]

That definition is merely part of a much larger discussion of fellatial and other words in its family. However, please note that it’s rather explicit and vulgar in its word selection, so readers of a tender or prim disposition may wish to skip that reading.

In any case, fellatial is noted in “The Price Of Tucker Carlson’s Soul,” Andrew Sullivan, The Weekly Dish:

And in his fellatial conversation with Orbàn, Tucker actually allowed the prime minister to give the impression that Hungary was now dealing with immigration from other European states, when, of course, it’s Hungary that’s fast losing its younger population to freer societies like Germany and the UK. He also let Orbàn give the impression that he was defending a Christian country against secular nihilists, when, in fact, post-communist Hungary is profoundly secular, and Orbàn’s adherence to Christianity is about as credible as Trump’s. The transactional cynicism of this money-grubber is world-class. And the simpering flattery of Tucker made Sean Penn’s interview with Fidel Castro look like hard-hitting journalism.

Both Zwicky’s definition and Sullivan’s dissection of Carlson’s visit to Hungary as little more than manipulative entertainment are a reminder that the position of reviewer, pundit, and/or critic has, as its salient feature, an independent and fair-minded aspect to it that bans the quelling of criticisms of ideological allies. That is, an ideal specimen, despite necessary opinions and inclinations, discounts implicit alliances and applies critiques regardless.

Anything else is intellectual dishonesty, and the perceptive reader soon learns to discard such claimants to the position of critic, as they are unlikely to share a single observation that is both honest and surprising; more likely, they will be dishonest in service to their evil master, which is, oddly enough, loyalty.

Carlson is not a journalist, despite his claims. He’s, at best, an inept entertainer, trading in hatred and anger; at worst, he’s a propagandist for the worst in human nature.

Your anxiety makes me want to punch you out!

In the murder mystery Scoop (2006), the emphasis isn’t so much on the mystery at hand – who’s killing this string of women of a singular physical description? – as the promotion of two of the stars. While there’s nothing new or wrong about such star vehicles, it is disappointing that a more intriguing plot couldn’t be put together for these up and comers – Hugh Jackman and Scarlett Johansson.

Sondra is an American journalism student attending a magic show in London, and finds herself on-stage and participating in a magic trick. The box is shut, she disappears, and a recently deceased and famous journalist pops up and tells her who he thinks is responsible for the activities of a serial killer.

How does he know? He just interviewed the most recent victim on the other side. And he has problems of his own.

With the bumbling assistance of the bumbling – but very sincere – bumbling bumbling magician, Sondra plunges into investigating Lord Peter Lyman, rich, famous, politically ambitious – and single. One thing leads to another, and our youngster journalist believes she’s cleared her love for further assignations and eventual wedded bliss.

Meanwhile, the reluctant bumbler happens to have some mystical logical inductions of his own, and, sadly, ends up driving on the wrong side of those darned English road – it turns out being from Brooklyn while in the middle of England is decidedly a curse in this story.

In the end, this story just doesn’t quite work, as characters who should perhaps care for each other more just fail to do so. I found myself wondering just what was wrong with these people that someone ending up dead didn’t really seem to affect at least one other person; meanwhile, the murder victims exacted more tears than goggling we usually see on the screen. This make Scoop interesting but, ultimately, disappointing.

And, personally, I was cheering on the late journalist, hoping he could piss off Charon, who always comes off as too cold.

A bit of fun.

NBC News reports on the travails of Rep Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) at a fundraising event:

Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, was heckled at a fundraising event Wednesday night when someone in the audience rebutted him for saying the 2020 presidential election wasn’t stolen.

In the clip, posted to the YouTube channel of Bobby Piton, a Republican Senate candidate in Illinois, Crenshaw says: “Don’t kid yourself into believing that’s why we lost. It’s not.” Piton appears to interrupt Crenshaw by shouting, “You’re wrong,” and saying he has “plenty of proof” that the election was fraudulent.

Crenshaw’s response?

Crenshaw responds: “Five different states? Hundreds of thousands of votes? You’re kidding yourself.”

A better response?

“Really? That’s great news! You know, if you have evidence of a crime, you’re legally bound to report it to law enforcement, so, tell you what, I’ll escort you right to the FBI’s local office so that you can make this important report. Who knows, maybe the former President will give you a hug when he’s reinstalled in the Oval Office. OK, let me take this microphone off and I’ll be right down, you grab your coat!”

Don’t bother to mention that lying to the FBI is also a crime, as the extraordinary debacle of retired General Michael Flynn is still an object lesson. This Piton character is signaling his loyalty to the failed former President, attempting to claim a portion of the MAGA base for his campaign run.

Poor guy. He looks like an idiot.

Quinceañera:

The quinceañera is a Mexican-heritage right of passage that celebrates a girl’s transition into womanhood on her fifteenth birthday. It is usually commemorated with a simple or elaborate party, or one somewhere in between. It’s akin to a Sweet 16 celebration, but done at 15 or “quince.” [Tribune-Star/Brazil]

Noted in “A Colorado county offers glimpse of America’s future,” Silvia Foster-Frau, WaPo:

As she makes her way to her restaurant each morning, she passes by quinceañera venues, a tamale cafe, a Mexican candy store and shops for wire transfer services. Her customers often greet her in Spanish, standing at the counter below a string of papel picado — colorful Mexican banners — and in front of a menu with a mix of Spanish and English words, advertising items like “chicken nuggets con papas” — with fries.

There were in bloom and looking great.

Returning to the original thread concerning the pandemic, it appears the monoclonal antibody treatment, supplied by Regeneron and applied to the former President on the occasion of his

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is vowing to begindispensing Regeneron monoclonal antibodies — the treatment given to President Donald Trump when he had the coronavirus — through mobile clinics amid a record-breaking stretch of new cases and hospitalizations that have ravaged the state.

DeSantis said at a news conference in Jacksonville on Thursday that while coronavirus vaccines have been effective at preventing illness and death, more was needed to help curb the spread of the virus in a state that has become the U.S. hotbed of the latest surge of infections. The governor championed Regeneron’s monoclonal antibody cocktail for those who have already gotten sick, saying it is “the most effective treatment that we’ve yet encountered for people who are actually infected with covid-19.” [WaPo]

Unfortunately, supply is tight – too tight and probably too expensive – for DeSantis’ attempt to stave off disaster to have a realistic chance of working. Still, he had this to say:

In announcing the treatment, DeSantis claimed that the Regeneron treatment should “become part of the standard of care” for Floridians moving forward.

“This is going to be with us for a long time,” he said.

And do you know why that would be, Governor? Because BOOBS like YOU screwed up big time!

And it’s worth noting that the virus can develop resistance to this treatment:

Like other antiviral drugs, monoclonal antibodies, when used as antiviral agents, are also susceptible to developing resistance as a result of alterations in the viral genome which can alter the pathogenic potential of the virus resulting in the emergence of viral escape mutants, which may render the virus-resistant to a specific monoclonal antibody. [PubMed]

My correspondent replies regarding my comment about whether it’s proper to use the term ‘stupid’ in this situation:

Yes, yes, human cognition and sensory systems evolved to keep us from getting eaten by the sabre-toothed tiger, etc. But when people willfully ignore the science and allow ourselves to be intentionally led astray by politicians and wealthy — both groups knowing the truth — how is it anything but stupidity? Or in other words: “I know full well that this will destroy the future and possibly adversely affect me much sooner, but I’m going to do it anyway for some possible short-term personal gain or simple to feel comfortable in my faulty worldview.” And yes, it’s systemic, so it’s much harder to see (for the individuals) how those individual decisions are causing it, so another inaccuracy for the word “stupid”. But when making a short, one-sentence comment, rather than writing several paragraphs, it’s hard to find a better word.

Why are we really here? Well, it’s complex, very complex. The reasons include interactions between complex systems (hence, more complexity — and that’s using rather academic divisions between different human pursuits and foibles). For example, I include corporate personhood in American law. Corporations have been given to much freedom to sway the public on that basis. They’ve used it to convince us that there was no global warming for decades so that petro companies could continue to rake in huge profits. How did that come about? Well, one of the key SCOTUS rulings in its favor started with some law clerk bought off by rich railroad interests in the late 1800s.

Another cause is the right-wing’s propaganda about “socialism”. Where did that come from? Why, that came about because wealthy, white, former-slave owners and other racists didn’t want to give Blacks their full rights after the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments (yes, 3 of them) all tried to provide them. The whole “socialism” meme started back around the turn of the 20th century as racist code for Blacks being able to vote. While we’re on that subject, I’ll also point out the DOJ was created solely to solve this problem. And the Voting Rights Act. And the Civil Rights Act. [At this point, I feel like it would be ethically acceptable to simply charge any organizations whose purpose is furthering racism (e.g. the KKK, but plenty of others) with treason, and start locking up their leaders for long federal sentences. But only because I oppose the death penalty for treason. Because if 3 amendments, a federal department and 2 huge pieces of legislation are not persuading you, it’s time for corporal punishment.]

We are also here because of the changes in political alignments of various groups and classes of Americans, described by conservative writer David Brooks in an upcoming The Atlantic print article (where he blames one group of liberals, with which I disagree, but his description of the groups is good). Class warfare has morphed into fascists vs. progressives with a lot of confused centrists not doing the right thing.

And we’re here because of a panopoly of human flaws, from greed to confirmation bias to other cognitive weaknesses, including our horrible ability to correctly estimate relative risks. But we do know these things. They are documented in lots of literature, and even the popular press (best selling books, even). Else how would I know them? So why do not more people avail themselves of this knowledge and make use of it? I guess they’d rather wreck civilization, kill a few billion people than change their world views. That seems, well, stupid.

And I’ve only gotten started on the causal reasons above. I could go on and on.

There is much to appreciate in my reader’s reply, but I think my reader is unfairly disregarding two components of the electorate:

1. Those who have observed several verified government conspiracies and have decided that anything that seems like a conspiracy is probably a conspiracy. It’s neither logical nor reasonable, but for some it’s what their existence begins to revolve around.
2. Those who have permitted their religious upbringing to dominate their view of the world, and that religious upbringing tells that climate change isn’t happening, or its Part of God’s plan.

   Or this guy has another approach to the problem:

   Right-wing pastor Perry Stone says that Christians don't worry about climate change or the environment because they know that all those problems will be taken care of when Jesus comes back. pic.twitter.com/TGi6diOzU8

   — Right Wing Watch (@RightWingWatch) August 11, 2021

   We won’t talk about that fiendish problem of stewardship and how it means take care and not suck dry.

If this report from CNN is accurate:

Covid-19 cases and hospitalizations are surging and in Dallas, Texas, there are “zero ICU beds left for children,” Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins said in a news conference Friday morning.

“That means if your child’s in a car wreck, if your child has a congenital heart defect or something and needs an ICU bed, or more likely if they have Covid and need an ICU bed, we don’t have one. Your child will wait for another child to die,” Jenkins said. “Your child will just not get on the ventilator, your child will be CareFlighted to Temple or Oklahoma City or wherever we can find them a bed, but they won’t be getting one here unless one clears.”

The judge added no ICU beds have been available for children for at least 24 hours. The Texas Department of State Health Services told CNN the shortage of pediatric ICU beds is related to a shortage in medical staff.

Horrific, avoidable incidents like this deserve the prompt and decisive attention of the Texas Legislature:

Impeach Governor Abbott now.

In a rich country like the United States, in a rich State like Texas, this should not be happening. It’s time to recognize that Abbott’s incompetence is a menace to society and remove him.

Now.

For situations in other States, Steve Benen has a helpful list in his nightly roundup.

If you have an interest in gerrymandering, positive or negative, Daily Kos Elections has issued its expectations of how gerrymandering will play out this year, now that the US Census has issued its results.

More here. I see they expect an unfair Republican advantage to persist.

In your Halloween collection you have an effigy of Pope Urban VIII.

That’s the implicit question in a Steve Benen rant:

The good news is, Texans are seeing “decisive actions” from top state officials. The bad news, these ostensible leaders are taking decisive actions that are likely to make conditions worse, not better.

Backed by a court ruling, Dallas County’s Clay Jenkins (D) this week announced that all local public schools, child-care centers, and businesses in Dallas County must require face coverings to help stem the tide of COVID-19 infections. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) are ready to fight — not against the pandemic, but against the policy designed to address the pandemic. …

And if “liberty and individual choice” leads to a breakdown in Texas’ public-health system, as infections, hospitalizations, and deaths rise, so be it. That’s a price the state’s Republican governor and state attorney general are willing to pay.

After all, governing and protecting the public during a pandemic is fine, but they’re no match for conservative ideological goals, which must take precedence.

Developments in Texas are difficult to watch from a distance — The Atlantic‘s Adam Serwer noted, “Abbott and Texas Republican legislators have undermined virtually every effort to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus” — but they’re by no means unique. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) also refuses to abandon his passivity toward the crisis, and is investing much of his energies into fighting against local officials who are eager to take potentially life-saving steps.

On some days, I figure Abbott and DeSantis are competing with Governor Noem (R-SD) for the 2024 Presidential nomination in some sort of macabre pretense that the pandemic isn’t so bad, even if it does force hospitals to setup extra beds in nearby open spaces.

On alternate days, I think this is evidence of absolutist ideological tenets of freedom and the evils of government intrusion. It seems the officials in question believe that free citizens will, naturally, make the proper decisions. I had a bitter laugh at this notion yesterday.

And then there are those days when it seems like they’re operating off of obscure religious tenets that precedent freedom over life & health. Their maneuvers are those of cult leaders, asking their followers to perform maniacal stunts to prove their worthiness, and, not incidentally, strengthen their adherence to their cult.

And if it kills a few vulnerable people, hey, it’s all part of God’s plan, now isn’t it? The great absolver of responsibility.

So, yeah, I don’t have an answer for Benen, but I have a final selection of options to pick from.

Colbert & Alda culminating in … squirrels.

I can’t help the visuals in this newsletter clipping for a local veterinary clinic:

Minnesota State Fair (August 26th through September 6th): Traffic in our neighborhood is crazy during the fair! Remember to give yourself extra time to get to your appointment. Visit Dr. Megan at the MVMA Surgery Suite in the Pet Pavilion on 9/1! She’ll be performing surgery at 2 pm and 4 pm.

Music, dancers in very little, and the finale: We’ve fixed the hernia of your bulldog!

I need to be put away, don’t I?

NPR trumpets the Senate’s passing of an infrastructure bill yesterday:

The Senate voted 69-30 Tuesday to approve a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, a historic piece of legislation that could reshape American lives for decades.

The measure fulfills a call from President Biden for the two major parties to work together to deliver one of his top priorities, but it faces an uncertain fate in the House of Representatives as progressive Democrats press for even greater spending.

The obvious question is What happens next? The bill goes to the House of Representatives; the House Democrats decide if they like it as-is, or if it must be changed to keep the left-wing happy. If it’s changed, then it goes back to the Senate, where the Senators will either change it in a conference with the House, or simply approve it – or if former President Trump, who has been frantically against this legislation from the beginning, can bully those Republican who assented this time into not assenting again.

And if no changes are made by the House while approving it, or the Senate approves House-authored changes or a bill composed in conference, it goes to President Biden for his signature and, incidentally, his victory lap. Which will gall Trump no end.

But the truly important question is whether this is an inflection point, even a U-turn junction, for the Republicans’ political path – or merely a survival twitch? Nineteen Republicans voted for this legislation in one of the largest mass defections of Republicans to a Democratic cause celebre in quite a long time. I mean, decades. The group even includes Minority Leader and infamous Senator “No” Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

So how does this play out for the rest of this session of Congress? It can…

Be a survival twitch. The Republicans who defected realized the American Rescue Plan, passed earlier this year with nary a Republican vote, is reportedly tremendously popular, and credits goes almost exclusively to the Democrats. Given their general incompetence, this has to make them uncomfortably aware of the degraded Republican reputation. The antics of such Governors as Noem (R-SD), DeSantis (R-FL), Abbott (R-TX), and others does not help their situation.

But this realization doesn’t mean there’s a permanent change. An enraged Republican base would destroy their reelection chances as well, and their base will not tolerate compromise in general. They may even be taking a chance with this vote. But I think they had to go there. As a plus, it strengthens the hands of Senators Manchin (D-WV) and Sinema (D-AZ), as they can point at this as proof that bipartisanship does work, weakening Democratic unity.

Be an inflection point. This would be a major turning point in American political history in which a significant number of Republican officials have broken with the former President, as well as his base. This suggests that they’ll finally turn to governing, whether it’s because they realize that simple contrariness is not a valid political strategy, or that the current challenges take precedence over the simplistic gamesmanship we see today.

I think this is unlikely. They imperil their reelection chances and they have not begun to provide the leadership through which they’d teach their constituents to understand why we compromise as leaders – at least so far as I’ve heard.

But time will tell. Keep an eye on the future maneuvering of the Republicans who voted for this legislation.

And watch Trump for laughs.

So bright and cheery.

Governor Abbott (R-TX) is yelling for medical help:

Gov. Greg Abbott appealed for out-of-state help to fight the third wave of COVID-19 in Texas while two more of the state’s largest school districts announced mask mandates in defiance of the governor.

Abbott’s request Monday came as a county-owned hospital in Houston raised tents to accommodate their COVID-19 overflow. Private hospitals in the county already were requiring their staff to be vaccinated against the coronavirus. …

The highly contagious delta variant is fueling the wave. [AP]

Remember, Gov Abbott is one of several Republican governors who’ve refused to issue new mask mandates or signed legislation banning mask mandates, he has hospitals that are literally overflowing, so of course he’s also reversing direction on those mask mandates … uh … no.

The governor is taking action short of lifting his emergency order banning county and local government entities from requiring the wearing of masks and social distancing to lower the COVID-19 risk. Abbott has said repeatedly that Texans have the information and intelligence to make their own decisions on what steps to take to protect their health and the health of those around them.

So, ignoring the obvious questions concerning supplies and facilities, are medical professionals duty-bound to respond?

I suppose they will point at their medical oaths or motivations for joining the medical profession as reasons to respond, as balanced against burnout and exhaustion, and that’s all very valid.

But I’d like to point out that Governor Abbott is acting in bad faith. He’s duty bound to take actions to promote the public health; that’s why he has emergency powers that he can use at need. He’s refusing. He wants to hide his dereliction of duty behind the statement Texans have the information and intelligence to make their own decisions on what steps to take to protect their health and the health of those around them, but when your hospitals are overflowing with Covid-19 patients, it should be blindingly obvious that, No, they don’t have that ability.

Look, I’m not dissing Texas citizens. People in general are neither evolved nor trained to properly evaluate a virus, or the data describing it, that infects and degrades organisms as does SARS-CoV-2, much less its delta variant. Virologists and public health specialists are trained in this esoteric discipline; the rest of us just have to trust them.

This is where government has a role to play. It can disseminate information and orders at speed when necessary, informing citizens when a dangerous situation exists – like a tornado springing from the clouds. The time has passed when Abbott should have issued mask mandates and even vaccine mandates; as I said, he’s derelict, and the only reason I don’t recommend he be bounced from his position is that his Lt. Governor is, based on his idiotic statements during the 2020 election, no better. Ideology is all they know, and when the ideology is bad…

Abbott is obviously frantic. I wonder if he has national ambitions? This is the sort of behavior I’d expect from someone who sees the similarly incompetent Governor Noem (R-SD) as a competitor in an upcoming contest.

And doesn’t care about the lives of his constituents.

Reading Dr. Solomon Stevens remarks concerning conspiracy theorists, or those with a “conspiracy mentality,” as he puts it, reminded me of yet another, errr, theory:

And those with a conspiracy mentality lack social trust [or asabiyah – haw]. They see the world as moved by what Daniel Pipes called a “hidden hand.” Forces that cannot be seen or controlled are wielded by people behind the scenes who cannot be held accountable or controlled. The deep state is responsible. Satan is behind it. Some ethnic, racial or religious group is enabling it. People who we do not know but who have significant power are trying to hurt us.

Just think about all the ways in which social trust has eroded in recent years. For those with a conspiracy mentality, law itself is suspect; it is being manipulated by some hidden hand. The news media are seen as hopelessly biased and unreliable. Medical professionals are part of a conspiracy to promote a fake narrative about a disease. The election has been stolen. Our teachers are working to destroy the country. [The Post and Courier]

Along with the usual faux-explanatory power of conspiracy theories is this: these theories of hidden powers relieves the believer of responsibility. The degree to which one is loyal to a particular version of social theory, which is to say the theory, implicit or explicit, by which one believes society should be run, is developed by a number of factors; I hesitate to even attempt to fully enumerate them. But we can include in that list personal / family prosperity, and religion and its precepts & dictates; as well as personal experience and prejudices.

In reality, the correspondence between the dictates of all of these various contributors to personal social theory and the result is not necessarily congruent. That is, a particular group may take to heart the Christian decree of Don’t tolerate a witch to live!, which sounds good if you and your fellow citizens believe a witch is always a malevolent personality, but in practice the society resultant from hanging all the witches is so damaged that the formal dictate is quietly discarded.

The state of decay of a society might be described as the divergence of the apparent state of a society from the desired, or ideal, state. We don’t like the idea of unintended consequences, do we? Yet, they occur, diverging our society. Disturbing our prestige, even.

But if a different explanation, The Lizard People, say, can be found, then It’s Not Our Fault. It’s someone else at fault. The faults of our society suddenly fall to the acts of malevolent forces, rather than our own incompetence, fatuous principles, and dismayingly awful theories of how humanity works.

And all we need to do is eliminate those others. So easy.

Humanity hates to look at itself, a fault long ago observed and established. “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” – George Orwell

Animus:

a feeling of hate or anger toward someone or something:
He harbors no animus toward his rival. [Cambridge Dictionary]

Noted in “Republicans aren’t conservatives. They’re nihilists,” Max Boot, WaPo:

From Gallup:

Max Boot is succinct concerning current consequences: