Free Speech

It should come as no surprise that Vice President Kamala Harris has long been the target of racist and misogynistic online attacks as a consequence of her Black and South Asian ethnicity.  

As a candidate for president the gendered, sexualized and racial attacks aren't going away.  In some respects they've become worse.  In the absence of any personal restraint on the part of internet users combined with lackadaisical oversight by tech companies, the close to this election cycle will likely set a new standard for tastelessness.

Interesting to me is that of my 348 Face Book friends virtually everybody (on both sides of the aisle) have refrained from posting or reposting crude and vulgar content related to any candidate on their FB pages.  If anybody is talking politics they're going about it correctly;  sticking with policy differences, tasteful humor and witty sarcasm.  Personally, I avoid it.  If I have anything to say on politics I do it here because reading the blog is voluntary.  There is no faceless algorithm to foist it upon you.  If you're bothered or troubled about anything I publish;  don't come here.  But you already knew that.  Getting back to the subject of Face Book there are four acquaintances of mine who cannot seem to help themselves.

Moreover, the curious thing is that all four of these acquaintances have a great deal in common with me.  We're all within a year of each other in age, grew up in the same neighborhood, went to the same schools and for some the same church.  By all outward appearances they're upright citizens.  If you met them socially you'd find them personable and likeable.  Not a criminal amongst us.  But when it comes to the volatile mix of Face Book and political speech you might just think that from time-to-time they've lost their minds.

A couple of days following President Biden's abdication of the throne I spent a few moments  sampling of the Face Book pages for these four individuals and collected these screen shots.

Frankly, this sort of behavior is a turn-off.  And I don't think it's restricted to a conservative-leaning independent like me.  Many of my acquaintances who are Trump supporters likely share this sentiment.  Can you believe these are adults?

Are these four individual's under the impression that licentious posts are going to polish Donald Trump's brand?  Advance their cause?  Attract voters from the Big Fat Middle who are necessary to win an election?  It hasn't let-up either.

Thankfully it's a small number.  But Holy Cow, they've sure got a hard-on for sexualized hate speech. 

Meanwhile, last Wednesday, former President Trump questioned the racial identity of Vice President Kamala Harris during a tense appearance at the National Association of Black Journalists conference in Chicago.  He asked, Is she Indian or is she Black?  He falsely claimed that Harris, who has long identified as Black, attended a historically Black university, used to identify as Indian and then, all of a sudden, she made a turn, and she became a Black person. 

This is all part of the Trump campaign play book.  Skip the policy and dominate the media cycle.  Like I said earlier; looks like this election is game-on.

Pro Tip - Watch the Vegas Line and the odds-makers......

How To Win Hearts and Minds

One way to win friends and influence people is to write a book.

Or at least have one ghost-written for you.  

Just make certain it is a book that will attract moderates, independents, right-leaning voters, hunters, and dog lovers.

Kristi Noem, South Dakota governor, and supplicant for the position of Donald Trump's vice presidential running mate has a book:  No Going Back: The Truth on What's Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward.  

Officially released today, the book has captured the hearts and minds of moderates, independents, right-leaning voters, hunters, and dog lovers; although perhaps not as intended.  This is because in her book Governor Noem describes in grisly detail how she killed a self-described 'untrainable' puppy following a pheasant hunting trip.

According to the governor, a fourteen-month-old, female wirehaired pointer named Cricket 'went out of her mind with excitement, chasing all of those birds and having the time of her life.'  And 'later attacked another family's chickens' during a pheasant hunting trip.  And when the governor made a grab for the dog she got nipped.  According to Noem this was evidence that Cricket was 'less than worthless as a hunting dog.' 

So she shot and killed it.

It has occurred to me that my best friend and all-around champion hunting Lab, Inky, did all of those things too.  At about the same age.  She went out of her mind with excitement, chasing birds and having the time of her life, made a move on someones' barnyard chickens and nipped me.  That's what puppies do until they learn the ropes.  The difference between me and the South Dakota governor is I didn't immediately declare my dog 'worthless'; followed by an execution.  I corrected her, reinforced appropriate behavior, loved her and she matured into a marvelous hunting partner and family member.  I miss her more than you know.

Raising a hunting dog is hard work and can be incredibly frustrating some days.  It might be that the governor doesn't have the patience for this.  Maybe she doesn't have the time; she is a governor after all.  Or perhaps she simply doesn't know how to train a hunting dog.  All of which is anybody's guess.

Or maybe there is an altogether different explanation.  

Noem has said she included this story in her book to demonstrate her readiness in politics and to do what needs to be done, even if it is 'difficult, messy and ugly.'  Might it be that in the MAGA movement your star status rises if you demonstrate you are stone cold enough to shoot and kill your dog for being a puppy?  

I sure hope not.  Just about anyone I know, including some of my Trump supporting friends who hunt with dogs, tell me this is over the top.

I have hunted and killed countless animals in my life.  Same for fishing.  I have raised two hunting dogs and am presently training a third.  The art of raising a hunting dog is difficult, hard work that requires near daily coaching. It demands discipline, patience and love.  High-energy sporting breeds generally don't achieve their peak performance until almost three years of age.  In my world view there are no bad dogs; only bad dog owners.

That Governor Noem did not expend sufficient time training Cricket, and failing that; rehome a likely talented wirehair pointer is appallingly disappointing. Our new pup, Ruby, landed in our household solely because the original owners did not have the skill set, patience and time to commit to the task of raising a hunting dog.

Governor Noem may not have the skill set, patience or time.  However, as a wealthy individual she does have almost limitless resources to make good life choices.  Her derisive commentary about the circumstances, failure to put the pup up for adoption, did not lift a finger to humanely euthanize the dog and finally crow about it in a book calls into account her judgement.  

I see no evidence of love or empathy.

The implication is she might lack impulse control or possibly have a personality disorder.  I'm not an armchair shrink so that's not my call. My normal dog-owning, hunting guy impression of this entire unsavory episode is that it is exceedingly unsettling. It is a bad look. As a consequence, is Kristi Noem a 'less than worthless vice presidential candidate?'  That's not my call either.

While some of Donald Trump's base supporters might applaud and celebrate this sort of behavior, it would be fascinating to observe how it wins hearts and minds in a general election.

Catch 22

Appalachia has witnessed the disappearance of 33,500 coal mining jobs since 2011.  And with cheaper, cleaner, safer-to-extract natural gas being what it is those 33,500 jobs won’t be returning any time soon - if ever.   

You’d think that retraining for alternate forms of employment is in order.  Yet miners are resisting retraining without ready jobs from new sources.  Donald Trump is going to make coal king again.   

New employers are resistant to relocate to this blighted region without a trained workforce. The result?  A classic chicken versus egg conundrum.   A paradoxical situation from which one of the country’s poorest regions stands little chance of escape – a false hope for a coal resurgence and no clear path to recovery – much less prosperity.  A catch-22.

You can learn more about it here.

Posturing

I was sitting at my desk at the day job today over lunch poring over my news feeds and musing about Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) railing against the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  It would appear that Paul responded on Good Morning America today defending his relationship with the president and holding firm on his rejection of the bill - which would have repealed and replaced the ACA – what we all know as Obamacare.    

Of interest to me is Paul also happens to represent a state that has enjoyed a substantial helping of federal munificence as a consequence the ACA.  Almost a half-million Kentuckians obtained health insurance coverage thru the Act plunging Kentucky’s uninsured rate from 20 percent in 2013 to 7.5 percent in 2015.  Appalachia in particular embraced the bounteousness.   

In one of life’s great ironies this region voted overwhelmingly for Paul’s 2016 reelection than did any other region of the state.  Paul won by landslide margins in Leslie, Clay and Jackson Counties where 15 to 18 percent of the population would stand to lose their Medicaid coverage gained via Obamacare expansion if the ACA were repealed.  Any snide commentary about voting against one's self interests is omitted on purpose.

Former Senator (and presidential candidate) Robert Dole long ago imparted some wisdom about this sort of politics suggesting that the soundest thing for a politician to do is to support the bill that failed; oppose the bill that passed.  I think Paul is double-dealing – righteous posturing and simultaneously embracing the obvious outcome.  

Sheesh...

Read more about it here

King Coal or Humpty Dumpty

At the end of the month of March President Donald Trump made a dramatic display of executive power at the Environmental Protection Agency by signing an executive order to turn-back EPA regulations enacted under President Obama.

“My administration is putting an end to the war on coal,” Trump exclaimed.

This unique focus on coal is both curious and intriguing.  It's not like coal mining is a particularly appealing or desirable job.   The role of coal in producing electricity is shrinking and continues to shrink.   Coal produces maybe 30% of our power - down from 55% in its glory days - and by 2020, it will be exceedingly lucky to maintain a grip on a fourth of the energy generation market.  The relentless march of natural gas and renewable sources of energy are unforgiving.   Horizontal drilling and fracking technologies are safer, gas is more abundant, renewables are growing less expensive and apparently are not going away.  In summation they are cleaner, growing cheaper and they are here to stay.   

Instead of investing money to train coal miners for other jobs and develop new industries for coal country we spend over a billion dollars on black-lung healthcare for the miners.  Admittedly, this blogger would tell you that statement is a cheap shot at miners.  Nevertheless, in less than ten years an additional 13,000 coal mining jobs have been lost.  All the while other industries - newspapers among them - have lost more jobs.  Coal mining and coal burning is dangerous and dirty work, it's destructive to the environment, it's expensive relative to other energy sources and it should be a relic of the 19th and 20th centuries.  It is a dying industry on life support.  

What's so special about coal and coal miners?  

To be certain I can be sympathetic to the miners, their families, communities and employers that are impacted by the decline of coal - but nothing lasts forever.   I have blogged about this painful creative destruction or creative disruption before as products, services and labor continue to be priced according to market-forces of supply-and-demand.  The developments of cutting edge technologies, inexpensive, abundant and clean natural-gas are rendering coal obsolete.   I dunno, perhaps the future technological breakthrough will make coal viable again.  

I would like to ask if the coal miner is now the modern day working class hero.  Or are they the current detritus cast-off as a consequence innovation and technology.  Or are they convenient props for opportunistic politicians?  

Last year a candidate promised job retraining but the miners would tell you there isn't a demand for retraining.  If I had to hazard a guess it is easier to blame immigrants, liberals and others for your problems than it is to adapt and adjust.   

Last year a different candidate promised hope to people whose family livelihood has been coal for multiple generations.   Was this a calculated and cynical move?  

Plenty of communities have transformed themselves into innovative cities.  No surprise if you embrace the challenge.  People there created opportunity, or moved to join it.  West Virginians and Kentuckians could have done the same thing, but they didn't (or haven’t yet). 

It is going to be interesting to watch from the sidelines how this all plays-out…

Quote of the Day

Presidential lying is treasonous. Pointing it out is patriotic.

                                    - Comment found on the web

Fringe Benefits

Most of my friends know I started a new job a week ago today.  It's been a crap-ton of work getting settled-in but things are falling into place and I have a good feeling about this situation.

There are two kitchens in the office suite and there seems to be an almost daily stream of food available for the taking.  This, I am not used-to.  Having dropped a few unwelcome pounds since my return from France I'm either going to have to cut-back on the smorgasbord or ramp-up my physical activity.

And there is this too...

click on the bottle in the middle to enlarge

 

Tanning With Your Lottery Winnings

In case you’re wondering about who the apparent winners and losers will be following the repeal of Obamacare  you should start taking careful notes.   Here’s a start.  

In the winner column you will find the Tanning Bed Industry.  Yessir, it is told that the 10% excise tax imposed by the ACA - as both a revenue source and to discourage indoor tanning - has led to the closure of as many as half of the nation’s tanning salons.  

This critical dearth of artificially-imposed dangerous UV should begin to reverse very soon. Nevertheless, If there isn’t a tanning bed salon opening soon on a corner storefront near you - President Trump says to use orange spray-on tan.   

In the loser column are the lottery winners.  Pages upon pages, upon pages of language in the repeal bill are devoted to ensuring that lottery winners would not be able to avail themselves of Medicaid coverage.  Medicaid is for poor people - not for sudden millionaires. 

You can thank the enthusiastic Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI 6^th District) for his legislative vigilance on this.  Bravo.   

Of course, people of wealth or common sense (or both) don’t play the lottery.  And they’re not generally Medicaid beneficiaries either.  Oh well.  

You can learn more about the winner and loser scorecard here.

Misguided Government Policy Personified

A ruling is expected within days from an appeals court reviewing whether President Donald Trump’s executive order to bar entry of people from terror-prone countries is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Because we care about all things relevant the statistical staff here at The Platz has some additional data points to share.  

Not one person from the seven countries included in the ban has killed anyone in a terror attack on US soil in the last 40 years. This includes refugees too.  During this time only 17 people from these nations combined have been convicted of directly planning or implementing a terrorist attack.   

Do not construe the foregoing as diminishing the causes and threats of terrorist acts.  For sure international terrorism is a serious global issue.  However, when the risk is distilled to a matter of immigrants, refugees, and American citizens, the threat becomes infinitesimally small.  

According to a review by the CATO Institute, the chances of an American dying in a terrorist attack committed by a foreigner in the US stands at about one in 3.6 million.  The breakdown includes attacks over a 41-year period and includes the 9/11 attack, in which 3,000 people died.  Once you narrow it to refugees and illegal immigrants, the threat is even smaller.  

In 2016, the number of Americans killed in terrorist attacks in the US was unusually high because of the Orlando nightclub shooting.  It claimed 49 lives and is considered an act of terrorism carried out by a Muslim extremist.  

However, it's important to remember that attack was also the deadliest terrorist attack - and the deadliest mass shooting - in the US since 9/11.  

So, since 9/11, an average of 9 people a year have been killed by Muslim extremists in the United States.  We're all at greater risk of fatal crushing at the hands of our furniture than being killed by a terrorist.

What keeps me awake at night are the morons that text and drive.  37,000 individuals die each and every year in traffic accidents.  

Marinate in that.

Learn more about this at the Cato Institute.