We Picked the Wrong Time to . . . Fight Climate Change

See the source image

In case you haven’t heard, Biden is big on the fight against “climate change”.  It’s everywhere in the earlier “bipartisan infrastructure bill”, the Build Back Better monstrosity, new EPA edicts, and in the travels of Biden’s roving climate change ambassador, John Kerry.  We’re doing this as governmental Covid-panic bludgeoned the economy and the fed unleashed trillions of new dollars – 50% increase in two years – at a time when the economy registered only a 6-7% expansion.  Something has got to give, and I think it’ll be our personal fortunes.

It’s a perfect storm, in the words of the economist Edwin T. Burton.  You see, we need a leap in economic growth to absorb the tidal wave of new money.  Don’t expect it from a greenie economy.  A Greta Thunberg economy doesn’t work any better than a socialist one.  On second thought, is there a difference?

See the source image
16-year-old Great Thunberg

Central planning, common to both, whether to eliminate differences in wealth or fit the fantasies of Earth First (and our 16-year-old sage), replaces the decisions of millions of free individuals with the commands of a few autocrats.  Right now, as inflation is about ready to rage through the economy, these autocrats are working to cripple the economic lives of millions with expensive and unreliable greenie energy while at the same time they are trying to strip our freedom of movement in their war on fossil fuels and the internal combustion engine.  Supply chain disruptions aren’t the only misery that awaits us.

See the source image

As President Obama was famous for saying when confronting congressional Republicans, elections have consequences.  Yes, they do.  This time around, we replaced mean tweets and insults at rallies with a basket of lunacies.

The whole situation reminds me of the Jeff Bridges character in the movie “Airplane”.  We picked the wrong time to fight climate change while our practical lives are teetering at the edge of an abyss.

Watch the clip below.  It’s a hoot, and also a bit more frightening if we realize that sniffing glue is not that much different from an enthusiasm for the Green New Deal: escapes from reality.

RogerG

Leadership Is the Problem in Our Schools

In other words, where are our school leaders leading us?

Parents talk before rally to oppose critical race theory in Loudon County schools, June 12, 2021.

Please listen to the last 30 minutes of the Radion Free California podcast and capture Will Swaim’s (of the California Public Policy Center) interview of Dr. Lance Izumi, Senior Director of the Center for Education at the Pacific Research Institute.  Click on Dr. Izumi’s picture for the interesting conversation.  You’ll find it compelling if you’re worried about the condition of your child’s school.

See the source image
Dr. Lance Izumi

To be clear, let’s not tar everyone with the same brush.  Not every Trump voter cheered the January 6 riot, not every Democrat is, figuratively speaking, in bed with the socialistas of The Squad, and not by a long shot is every teacher responsible for the mediocrity of the schools.  During my near 30 years as a public high school teacher, I have seen the great variability in teacher quality but few, very few, fit the bill as truly incompetent and uncaring.  Some, like me, failed at their first bite of the apple, but learned the lesson that effectiveness is a dynamic process, experience being the best stylist of good teaching.

Yet, undeniably, something is amiss in our schools, and most emphatically in our public schools.  Pre-pandemic, the failings spared no socioeconomic group.  Certainly, the pandemic panic exacerbated the situation.  Using the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) as the benchmark, schools with overwhelming middle-class enrollment produced dismal results with over half performing at below grade level. It only gets worse when we look at schools with the entire student body on the school lunch program.  So, moving to a “better” neighborhood for the “better” schools is a fool’s errand.  You’re only getting a student body in nicer clothes and cars, not a better education.

If I was to choose one overriding factor for the dreary situation, it would come down to rotten leadership.  And I don’t mean to make administrators as a group the brunt.  Poor captaincy stretches from many school board members to professors to superintendents through an administrative descent to the individual school, and, lest I forget, their directors and abettors in state and federal government.  Most of this leadership crowd is pickled in a brine of progressive ideology emanating from the political arena and the gatekeepers of credentialing, the collegiate schools of education.

Teachers must also traverse the same gauntlet.

If you’re shocked by racial shaming sessions in your child’s Zoomed Social Studies lesson, well, what did you expect?  Today’s progressivism is synonymous with the militant wokeness of neo-Marxist critical theory and it percolates through ed courses and the teams of “educators” who produce the curricula.  It’s everywhere and everywhere destructive.

People hold up signs during a rally against “critical race theory” (CRT) being taught in schools at the Loudoun County Government center in Leesburg, Virginia on June 12, 2021. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP)

If you want better schools, clean house of the poison and install leaders with their heads screwed on straight.  Start with the state leadership and move like Sherman’s March through the collegiate schools of education and the people who run the local districts. The rot begins at the top, so start there. In the end, the teachers will be better for it.

Oh, before I leave the topic, an important cog in this Borg is the teacher unions. They need to stop being a conduit for this ideological mania. If they are to continue to exist, they must stop seeing themselves in the vanguard of a revolution and more as shapers of patriotic and productive citizens.  Got it?

See the source image

RogerG

Hillsdale College Riles the Hive in the Land of Gavin Newsom

See the source image
Hillsdale College in Michigan.
See the source image
Student walks past statue of Ronald Reagan on the campus of Hillsdale College.
Site of Hillsdale College campus in Placer County near Roseville.

I kid you not: Hillsdale College is coming to California and the true believers of the ruling groupthink are going bonkers.  The state is hemorrhaging legacy-cost red ink, businesses, and residents as it is mired in COVID totalitarianism, homelessness everywhere, a crime wave, debased schools, welfare dependency, expensive everything, and public spaces that aren’t fit for children (and adults).  And to think that they are frazzled beyond restraint by the appearance of a classical liberal arts college within their playpen.  Amazing, absolutely amazing.

If you want to know the reason for the state’s looniness, no better candidate can be found than in the loopy thought processes of many of the state’s college graduates who then scatter into the state’s institutions for employment.  An example of the phenomena is 24-year-old Hannah Holzer, “opinion assistant” at the Sacramento Bee. She penned an op ed – really, more of a screed – on January 23 titled “A conspiracy-peddling college is coming to Placer County.  That should scare us all” (read here).  What does she bring to the table other than vapid sloganeering and ad hominems?  Let’s see.

See the source image
Hannah Holzer

Her LinkedIn resume’ mentions a 4-year stint at UC Davis with an “English – professional writer” degree.  Her post-graduate journey winds its way through a news internship at the Bee, a DC communications internship, editor of The California Aggie, editor at SF Weekly, and finally Bee assistant opinion editor/Sunset Beacon freelance reporter at the wizened age of 24.  She had plenty of opportunity to ply her trade while infusing her journalism with left wing nuttery.

See the source image

And it shows.  Read the piece.  It’s a mental fingerprint of unexamined assumptions and left-wing boilerplate.  The opening paragraph is an unacknowledged tribute to the Unibomber’s Manifesto.  It’s ripe with “ultra-conservative” (Hillsdale College) and this gem, “. . . extremist institution [Hillsdale College], perpetuating alternative facts and harmful conspiracy theories.”  Plowing deeper into the tirade, one finds an excoriation of Hillsdale’s rejection of the lefty bromides of “social justice” and “multicultural diversity”.  She then unabashedly and unthinkingly equates the two with “a just nation”.  What?  A “just nation” is created by the racial discrimination of a racial favoritism?  For our intrepid reporterette, lady justice is not to wear a blindfold.

There’s more.  She adopts the vocabulary – “dog whistle” – of Democratic Party electioneering.  Of course, the phrase is attached to the opponents of the neo-Marxist critical theory and its offspring, critical race theory, leading to this whopper: “. . . they [Hillsdale] view the practice of accurately teaching America’s complex history to students as a threat to white supremacy.”  There you have it.  “White supremacy” has come full circle to include those who take Martin Luther King seriously.

Hillsdale’s sin is its unwillingness to kowtow to the fashionable tomfoolery that is so commonplace in the modern academy.  Hillsdale is an unflinching advocate of classical education – classical means rooted in Western civilization.  It’s the same civilization that gave birth to the university, the higher ed that has currently been bastardized to produce the youngins who can’t wait to dismantle it in their ignorance.

Hey, California, the doctor has arrived with a little tough love in the form of Hillsdale College.

RogerG

A Second American Revolution?

“. . . nothing would be more fatal than for the Government of States to get in the hands of experts.  Expert knowledge is limited knowledge, and the unlimited ignorance of the plain man who knows where it hurts is a safer guide than any rigorous direction of a specialized character.” ― Winston Churchill

Please watch a Virginia mom on February 3 lower the hammer on her school board’s policy of mandatory masks in school.

Something is afoot.  In the first edition of the American Revolution, it was portrayed as a fight against aristocratic rule.  That’s misleading.  More correctly, it was a fight against violations of the rights of Englishmen.  Key to the rights of Englishmen is self-rule.  We rule ourselves though our elected representatives, thus the cry against taxation without representation.  The king and Parliament were an ocean away and the colonists had no representation of their own choosing.

In this possibly emerging second edition, unaccountable experts have supplanted self-rule.  The expertocracy, like the aristocracy of old, claim a kind of divine right, and too many of a leftist persuasion bend a knee before them.  It’s the very essence of progressivism.

The pandemic is proving Churchill right.  In an understandable reaction, moms and dads are raising the flag of opposition.  Self-rule and the rights of Englishmen are making a comeback.

Marianne Jenson, go get ’em.

RogerG

A Flummoxed President

See the source image
Biden and New York City mayor, Eric Adams, at yesterdays’ meeting (2/3/22).

Flummoxed: adj.; bewildered or perplexed.

I am flummoxed and so is our president.  I am perplexed by young people, formally educated and from comfortable backgrounds, storming police stations, burning down central business districts, and imposing on us their warped views by defacing our monuments and memorials.  I am further bewildered by a refusal to recognize the most elemental of things: if you don’t enforce the law, there is more law breaking.  Our president is equally flummoxed and displays it regularly.  He strode into New York City yesterday (2/3/22) and announced that he was going to lead an effort to arrest, wait for it . . . guns!  Arrest guns, not the people who use them to commit heinous acts.

Yes, that’s right, President Biden declared a crackdown on inanimate objects.  The favorite phrase in vogue among his people is “gun violence”.  And they don’t mean violence committed by human beings WITH guns.  They mean violence BY guns.  It’s as if these metallic things have a mind, a will of their own.  They jump from the coffee table to a person’s hand, take over the psyche, and drive the individual to commit horrifying acts with them.

Nary a word about blue-bubble public leaders vilifying the police, robbing their budgets, and refusing to prosecute lawbreakers.  Check this out: mobs using phone calculators during smash-and-grabs to guarantee that their thefts don’t exceed $950, thanks to the voters and political establishment of California (Prop 47).  And blue-bubble potentates don’t need a Prop 47 to set a baseline for allowable criminality.  They’ve got Soros-funded henchmen as DA’s refusing to fulfill their oaths of office to faithfully enforce the laws, and thusly are deserving of impeachment.  Sorry, “prosecutorial discretion” doesn’t cut it.  This is not discretion; it’s essentially ripping pages out of the duly-passed code of laws.

Our exalted president says not a word about the vastly more significant contributions of his party to the mayhem.  Get prepared for a campaign to hamper your ability to own a gun to protect yourself from the lawlessness that they inspired.  Mr. President, you should be condemned for not lowering the boom on your party’s abettors of criminality while leaving the rest of us without any means to protect ourselves.

Watch yesterday’s disgusting spectacle on the video below.

RogerG

P.S.:

See the source image

The Mendacious Scientific Consensus

See the source image
Dr. Rochelle Walensky of the FDA and Dr. Anthony Fauci, chief White House medical adviser, testifying before the Senate Health Committee on Jan. 11, 2022.

In March of 2020, near the start of the government’s forceful reaction to the pandemic, I fretted that “We can’t do this!”, the this being the lockdowns and all the other strangulations of human interaction.  I was worried that the virus would still get out and we would have nothing to show for it but a mutilation of our own well-being.  Others more knowledgeable than I are starting to chime in.  Most recently, a Johns Hopkins University study by Jonas Herby, Lars Jonung, and Steve H. Hanke paint a dismal picture of what we’ve done to ourselves in our COVID panic.

Cutting to the chase, the researchers concluded,

“They [lockdowns] have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy. These costs to society must be compared to the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best . . . . lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.”

Hindsight has not been kind to the “scientific consensus”.  Fauci and company, and hyperactive and panic-riddled governors and mayors, mostly in the blue bubbles, have soiled themselves, and continue to do so.  As a consequence, many people are coming to the realization that “scientific consensus” is not science.  It’s an easy cover for people who don’t know science to lay claim to it for political advantage.  As such, when the opinions hiding under the phrase’s veneer get exposed for their erroneousness, it starts to lack credibility . . . as if it ever had any.

Beware, beware of the “scientific consensus” on climate change.  It is bandied about by the same actors pursuing similar goals in similar organizations with similar backgrounds and homogeneous worldviews.

Some have complained that the pandemic shouldn’t be about politics.  Really?  When has a “crisis too good to waste” not been about politics?  Of all people, Clausewitz gave us the proper insight: “War is the continuation of politics by other means.”  Just replace “war” with “scientific consensus”.

May be an illustration of 1 person, car and text that says 'OFFICER, YOu DON'T UNDERSTAND. ICAN'T BE AT FAULT. I'M AN ExPERT. ONE WAY USA COVID POLICY PATCROSSCARTOONS.COM Rs 2022©'

May be an illustration of text

RogerG

Our Defiled Brahmin Caste, Part II: Professional Associations

See the source image
2015 meeting of the American Historical Association.

Thomas Piketty, an academic apostle of the Left, once crowed in 2016 of the increasing correlation of higher educational attainment and the tendency to vote Democratic: high school graduates 44%, Bachelor degrees 51%, Masters 70%, and PhD degrees 76%.  Does this mean that smarter people vote for the Democrats?  Hogwash.  The gap between smartness and possession of degrees has not been greater than in our time.

It’s fair to say that degrees and certificates in many cases just paper over human failings.  We are still prone to unexamined and purely fashionable beliefs, an overwhelming desire to win at any cost, the penchant to make facts fit predetermined conclusions, and let hubris cloud our vision.  Nothing much has changed for many of us after many years of schooling.  Today, we have many such highly educated ideologues circulating amongst us.

It’s not necessarily a sign of brilliance to almost uniformly take crass positions on highly contentious issues. It heralds, if anything, a blind deference to peer group pressure.  Not exactly evidence of high intellectual acumen.  Abortion is one issue that brings to light a kind of organized intellectual debasement among the highly papered.

Just a reminder that the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade was written by a lifelong Republican
Justice Harry Blackmun (r), author of the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is before the Supreme Court.  The case has attracted amicus briefs like flies to a feed lot.  Stepping into the fracas is the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians in support of the Roe decision and abortion as a right.  That wasn’t the first time.  In 1989, 400 of them displayed their pro-abortion bona fides in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.

Strange thing, though, these doyens of historical truth based their position on a falsehood in the original Roe v. Wade decision that was allowed to marinate and pass into their “consensus”.  The fallacy stems from the uncritical adoption of the historical exegesis of a lawyer and abortion activist, Cyril Means, Jr., back in 1973.  Means contended that abortion was a common-law liberty before the 19th century.  He mangled primary sources, such as Samuel Farr’s 1787 medical treatise, to make it sound like abortion was an acceptable practice back then.  Instead, his source, Farr, makes the opposite point if Means had only turned a few more pages: “. . . unborn embryos . . . may be supposed indeed from the time of conception, to be living animated beings, there is no doubt but the destruction of them ought to be considered a capital crime.”  Historians, of all people, should know better but these didn’t.  Apparently, professional integrity must not be allowed to get in the way of prejudices.*

The issue has always been fraught with an emotional tug-of-war between the unborn child and the mother in distress, but it’s very probable that the practice was nonetheless condemned going back centuries.  Scholars have uncovered indictments in the 13th century for the killing of unborn children.  In 1602, a woman in Surrey, England, was indicted for ingesting poison to kill the “child in her womb”.  Many such examples exist in the historical record.

One cause for the confusion has much to do with state of knowledge, or lack thereof at the time, of the embryo (discovered in 1827 and the beginning of embryology) and pregnancy in general which led to the complicated picture in regards to early pregnancy abortions.  There were muddled attempts in a few instances at determining when the baby was “alive”, using the arcane language of the “quickening”.  Remember, this was a time when medicine was under the sway of Aristotle’s four humors (body fluids).  Confederate general Stonewall Jackson was said to ride into battle during the Civil War with one arm raised to keep the fluids in balance.  Still, it’s fair to say that abortion has always been considered at least an “inchoate felony” in the common law.  The “inchoate” part is tied to the limited pre-natal understanding of the era.

See the source image
The four humors in a medieval text.

It’s scandalous that professional historians have become so ahistorical.  It’s equally scandalous that legal experts are willing to use deceit to establish far-reaching precedents.  An example is the factual fraud in Mapp v. Ohio in 1961.  The SCOTUS decision extended the exclusionary rule (Weeks v. US, 1914) to state court cases.  After Mapp, the most violent perps – these are 90% plus tried in state courts – have a new legal weapon in their arsenal to take a walk.

The legal chicanery revolved around the belated claim of a lack of a valid search warrant.  The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court under the false assertion that there was no search warrant.  A simple examination of past issues of the Cleveland Plain Dealer establish beyond doubt that a valid search warrant was issued to enter the apartment of Dollree Mapp whose boyfriend was a bombing suspect (later convicted).  She was charged with the possession of obscene materials as a consequence of the search.  Authorities couldn’t locate the warrant during the legal proceedings in her case, but that wasn’t unusual in the era before photocopying.  At most, there might be one or two extra carbonized paper copies in a dank basement file room where decay was rampant.  Anyway, it wasn’t thought to be relevant since the operative legal principle was that evidence was considered valid no matter how it got to the court if it had a bearing on the case.

May be an image of 2 people and text

May be a black-and-white image of 10 people
Formal portrait of members of the United States Supreme Court,Washington DC, 1962. Pictured are, front row, from left, Justice Tom C Clark, Justice Hugo L Black, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice William O Douglas, and Justice John M Harlan; back row, from left, Justice Byron R White, Justice William J Brennan Jr, Justice Potter Stewart, and Justice Arthur J Goldberg.

Ohio was blindsided late in the game by the defense assertion of no valid search warrant and a call for the Court to apply the exclusionary rule in state jurisprudence.  If it was understood to be a point of contention earlier in the process, more stringent efforts at storing and retrieving these documents would have been made.  The Court took the side of Mapp: no warrant, no allowable evidence, perp takes a walk.  Now, with its application in state courts, where the overwhelming number of violent suspects are tried, the rule is extended to a suspected serial killer as much as a porn enthusiast.  And to think that it all rests on an untruth.  So much for the integrity of the titans of the law.

Even in cases when the Court reaches the right conclusion, oftentimes the reasoning is littered with drivel.  More than that, these decisions sometimes show the degree to which our judicial aristocrats get sucked into vogueish patterns of thought.  A classic in how to meander in junk thought but end in the right place is 1954’s Brown v. Board of Education.  To bolster their argument that racial segregation was unconstitutional, they resorted to the bag of tricks of ideologically charged social science researchers.

The married research team of Mamie and Kenneth Clark, MA student in psychology and CCNY prof respectively, conducted experiments that allegedly proved that black children were mentally and emotionally scarred to a greater degree by segregation.  As proof, they conducted studies such as the famous doll test.  A small group of children were given dolls of different skin and hair colors. The doll of the lighter shade was preferred by all children, including the black children.  Based on these preferences and answers to follow-up questions, the Clarks concluded that black children were traumatized with self-hatred.  They further asserted that it was more acute among black children in segregated environments such as segregated schools.  The test’s claims were cited in Earl Warren’s majority opinion.

May be a black-and-white image of person, child and indoor
The Clarks’ doll experiment.
May be a black-and-white image of 1 person, child and indoor
The Clarks’ doll test with Kenneth Clark in the background.

Since that time, the failings of the experiment were laid bare.  Everything from the small sampling to the biases of the researchers to the conclusions drawn from the children’s responses has drawn fire.  Yet, there it was; a highly questionable study lassoed into the judgment of the most eminent jurists.  The simple thought that crusading academics might not be the most reliable wasn’t a serious enough matter to avoid using them.  Right conclusion in the decision, but a perplexing path to get there.

Later, the dam broke on using social science studies as a substitute and supplement to the law in judges’ decisions.  The Coleman Report of 1966 proved to be a rich source to order forced busing, a court takeover of the management of the school districts in a region (St. Louis), and all sorts of incessant court and federal meddling in local schools.  Earl Warren’s majority opinion in Brown set the precedent for incorporating activism, disguised as chic research, rather than the law, its text and history, into a court’s rulings.  What’s next, filling court vacancies from the ranks of Harvard’s African and African-American Studies Department?

We are not well-served by the upper crust in many of our professions, our so-called best and brightest.  Historians are ahistorical.  The crème de la crème of the legal profession doesn’t hesitate to practice deceit to achieve the desired end.  Shoddy social science studies are ingested into rulings that impact everyone in ways large and small.  Maybe a civilization’s state of health is reflected in the state of health of its elites.  Now that’s serious food for thought.

RogerG

*Read here: “The Corruption of History”, Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review, Nov. 29, 2021.

Biden’s First Supreme Court Nominee. She’ll Be a Doozy.

See the source image
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer

Justice Stephen Breyer is stepping down.  Since the Supreme Court has insinuated itself in all matters of life, there’s much at stake when choosing a juridical potentate for a lifetime appointment.  President Biden set down his criteria for filling the seat and, guess what, it has little to do with merit.  It has everything to do with melanin count and genitalia.  But does it, really?

In a pandering applause line to a radicalized party base in a debate, Biden boasted of a “black” and “women” choice.  Do you think for a moment that’s what he’s really after?  Do you think the “black” part is encapsulated in a Clarence Thomas?  Do you think “black woman” means a Condoleezza Rice (NS advisor to Bush 43, former provost to Stanford University, Dir. of the Hoover Institution, and concert-quality pianist) or Winsome Sears (Lt. Gov. of Virginia)?  No, the closest equivalent is Corey Bush, charter member of The Squad.  Many of the women that he chooses are lefties, so much so that it’s hard to avoid the descriptor “socialist”.

Take for example his floundered choice for comptroller of the currency, Saul Omarova, a graduate of Moscow State University pre-Soviet collapse.  This Cornell University prof favors a Fed takeover of banking, a proposal that would make Lenin’s corpse smile.  Get the idea?

In a debate, Biden plaintively cried, “Do I look like a socialist?”  I don’t know what a socialist “looks” like since many of them look like they stepped off the pages of style magazines.  But I do expect a full-blown lefty of the kind that’ll produce the gibberish of a Sonia Sotomayor.  Once installed, the appointee better have an army of clerks to clean up the mess in her opinions.

May be a cartoon of one or more people and text

Get ready for a Supreme Court that looks like America: six sane ones, two Kool-Aid-drinking lefties, and one lefty trying to avoid the scat left by the other two.

RogerG

The Woke Bowl

See the source image
SoFi Stadium, Inglewood, Ca.

It looks like two-thirds of the key elements for a woke Super Bowl are lined up: a woke team and a woke location (plus the racial anthem and BLM sloganeering on team attire).  The NFC championship game will be represented by two urban dystopias in a dystopian state – San Francisco and Los Angeles in California.  One woke city or another from a woke state will land in Inglewood, an enclave in one of the worst governed metropolitan areas in the worst governed state.  Either the Bengals, Chiefs, or the Bills of the AFC will have to play in wokedom (Bills and Chiefs are tied as of this writing).

May be an image of 3 people and people playing football
49ers celebrate after the winning field goal against the Packers, 1/22/22.
May be an image of 4 people and people playing sports
Rams players celebrate after defeating the Buccaneers, 1/23/22.

That’s not the end of it.  The geographic center of wokedom, the state of California, will get its grubby hands on a good chunk of the players’ earnings.  Over half will be taken in income taxes once the tax-thirsty Sacramento goons with their highest state income tax in the nation thrust their mitts into each player’s till.  It’d be better if the game was played in Texas or Florida.  They don’t have a state income tax.

If you’re wondering how the scam works, California fine-tuned in 1991 the gambit of any professional athlete performing in the state to be subject to the state’s highest in the nation income tax.  The state dubs the teams’ visits “duty days” which includes all days for the visit.  The players for the Rams, 49ers, and Chargers really get whacked for at least 6 home games.  All other teams face the ordeal at most only two times, absent any playoff games in the tax hellhole.  The Woke Bowl in Inglewood may not be as joyous of an event if the players’ tax accountants run the numbers and get word to their clients.

As for me, the game is “Meh”.  The Woke Bowl has little appeal.  I’m not sure if I’ll watch it.  It depends on what’s showing at the theater.

See the source image

RogerG

The Babylon Bee: The Return of Satire

As a follow-up to “Buddy can you spare a U-Haul” in a previous post, check out this bit of humor from the uproarious The Babylon Bee under the headline, “U-Haul Introduces Armored War Rigs For Californians Trying To Flee State’s Post-Apocalyptic Wasteland”.  If you think that satire is dead with the downfall of SNL, it is alive and well on The Babylon Bee.

On the same link you’ll find this gem of a headline: “Christian plumber under fire for refusing same-sex fittings.”  Parody is an excellent vehicle to unmask the ditzy pretensions of the Left.  The whole belief system is a slipshod amalgam of demonstrably proven silliness.

Long live satire, an admirable tradition going back to Aristophanes of the 5th century BC.  I just hope that the lefty die-hards who permeate our cultural commanding heights can take it as well as conservatives in the past century and a half.

Go to the link below.  It’s a hoot.

RogerG