Punishing 6 January

For John, BLUF:  The riot on Capital Hill on 6 January was wrong, but it wasn't insurection.  And, I suspect, a fair number of Citizens just wandered in with the crowd.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Most Capitol protesters won't be jailed. Media angry

From Don Surber Blopspt, by Retired Reporter Don Surber, 30 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

The fake one at the Capitol won't result in much punishment.  It turns out, waving the flag inside the Capitol isn't a crime.

Politico was despondent.

It reported, "Americans outraged by the storming of Capitol Hill are in for a jarring reality check:  Many of those who invaded the halls of Congress on Jan. 6 are likely to get little or no jail time.

For real insurrection, check this out.  President James Buchanan called out the Marines, who shot and killed innocent bystanders, but none of the Insurrectionists.

If anyones doesn't understand the last sentence of the Dan Surber article, write me for an explanation.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

For John, BLUF:  This is a repeat post, after the first one, which was based on a Press Release, but not from Boston.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Votes are counted but still no resolution in Republican state committeewoman race

Here is the sub-headline:

Lyons demands resignation of city election board

From The Boston Herald, by Reporters Marie Szaniszlo and Erin Tiernan, 29 March 2021.♠

Here is the lede plus three:

GOP Chairman Jim Lyons blasted city of Boston election officials, calling for their resignation after the sudden appearance of more than 120 ballots in a year-old, disputed race for a seat on the Republican State Committee.

“They didn’t count lawfully cast ballots. The system is absolutely broken, and this is the evidence.  Every single member of that commission should resign immediately.  Election integrity in the city of Boston is a failure,” Lyons said.

The Boston Board of Election Commissioners on Saturday conducted a recount of the race for the committee seat for the Second Suffolk District.

In the process, they found a four-fold increase in write-in ballots and came up with a result at odds with the party’s appointment to the seat.

The Media and the Democrats can dismiss this as nothing, but it is actually footprints in the almost invisible dust of voter fraud.  And if not outright fraud, then neglect to the extent it subverts the voting process.

Mass GOP Chairman Jim Lyons is right to raise this issue.  A little of the light of day on this and perhaps we will get a better performance next time, with less hassle.

And, a year late.  At least the recount was finally executed, a year later, a year late.  This is very disrespectful.

But, it is Massachusetts and probably no one cares, since it is about Republicans.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  I have been trying to add the time from the dateline, but this was "7:54 p.m." on the 29th, which hasn't yet come to pass.  Strange and not yet understandable.

Suppressing "Colonial" 🎶

For John, BLUF:  I neither read music or play an insrument, but I see the value.  Apparently, Oxford does not.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

University of Oxford considers scrapping sheet music for being 'too colonial' after staff raise concerns about music curriculums' 'complicity in white supremacy' after Black Lives Matter movement

Here is the sub-headline:

• Professors set to reform music courses to move away from the classic repertoire
• Staff argued curriculum focuses on 'white European music from slave period'
• It is thought that music writing will also be reformed to be more inclusive

The Forgotten

For John, BLUF:  There is no doubt there are problems at the US Southern Border.  Large numbers of people are fleeing problems in their home nations and seeking asylum in the United States.  One wonders why they don't seek asylum in Meico?  In the mean time, millions are trying to do it the regular way, the legal way.  What of them?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Biden and the Blame Game at the Border

Here is the sub-headline:

The issues involved are nearly impossible to settle as long as policymakers regard decency as a political weakness rather than as a moral strength.

From The New Yorker, by Writer Jonathan Blitzer, March 28, 2021 (For the 5 April Print Edition).

Here is the lede plus three:

During the past decade, three U.S. Presidents have each faced a humanitarian emergency at the southern border.  Barack Obama did in 2014, when tens of thousands of children from Central America arrived, without their parents, to seek asylum.  Five years later, under Donald Trump—and the harshest border-enforcement regime in more than half a century—record numbers of children and families overwhelmed federal authorities.  Now, two months into Joe Biden’s Presidency, it’s his turn. Last Thursday, the topic dominated the first press conference he has given since taking office.  “What we’re doing right now is attempting to rebuild the system that can accommodate what is happening today,” he said.  “It’s going to take time.”

There are currently some eighteen thousand unaccompanied migrant children in U.S. custody, including more than five thousand who remain in holding cells, as the government scrambles to find space to house them.  Republicans who were silent when Trump was separating migrant children from their parents and eviscerating the asylum system are now denouncing “Biden’s border crisis.”  The messaging appears to be effective; it’s causing all sorts of confusion.  Biden is turning away forty per cent of asylum-seeking families and virtually all single adults arriving at the border, under a controversial Trump policy known as Title 42, which he has left in place.  Even so, everyone from TV news anchors to the President of Mexico is blaming Biden for encouraging more migrants to travel north, because he vowed to stop Trump’s heedless cruelty.  Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, tweeted that Biden has “emphasized the humane treatment of immigrants, regardless of their legal status.” He meant it as a criticism.

The Secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, has predicted that the United States will encounter more migrants by the end of 2021 than it has at any point in the past two decades. He has also, like the rest of the Administration, avoided labelling the situation a crisis.  “This is not new,” he said.  “We have experienced migration surges before.”  What is new, though, is the pace:  for most of March, about five hundred and fifty children have been arriving at the border every day.  Both Mayorkas and Biden have gone on television to announce that the border is closed; at a White House press briefing, Roberta Jacobson, from the National Security Council, made the announcement in Spanish.  But it was directed more at critics in Congress than at people in Honduras and Guatemala, the countries from which most of the families and children are coming.

The word “crisis” is both an overstatement and an understatement of the situation.  There were more families and children seeking asylum at the border under Trump in 2019 than there are now. And the current numbers, if higher than Biden anticipated, are not unexpected.  The pandemic has led to renewed desperation in Central America, as have two hurricanes that devastated the region last fall, displacing tens of thousands of people.  Yet, in another sense, the situation is worse than much of the public understands, because the issues involved are genuinely complex and nearly impossible to settle as long as policymakers in Washington continue to regard decency as a sign of political weakness rather than of moral strength.

The Author is correct, it is a mess at the Southern Border.  And later on he mentions that it is the plan of the Biden Adminisration to help fix problems in Central America, and bypassing oppressive regimes in the process.  Something we should have been doing since the 1950s.

The author tells us of the inequity of it all.  He pulls out the word "Decency" and asks that our political masters show some.  Perhaps because of some word limit, he avoids talking about doing the right thing for the rest of those seeking to come to the United States and become citizens.  There are millions out there who have done the paperwork properly and have had the prerequisite medical examinations, only to be waiting on line for a chance to legally enter this nation.  This extract is from the Migration Policy Institute:

Because of the numerical caps and per-country caps on certain green-card categories, there are significant waits for some categories, with sharper effects on a few countries.  For example, as of April 2019, the wait for U.S. citizens to sponsor adult, unmarried children was more than seven years for most parts of the world, but was 12 years for relatives from the Philippines—and more than 21 years for those from Mexico.  As of November 2018, there were 3.7 million people waiting in line abroad for a family-sponsored green card, and 121,000 awaiting an employment-sponsored green card.

What does decency say we owe those who follow the rules?  What does Mr Blitzer say?

I predict that nothing will be accomplished this Congressional Term, sort of the abolition of the Filibuster, and even then I have my doubts.

Regards  —  Cliff

Vote Counting Error in Boston

For John, BLUF:  It is things like this that raise questions in the minds of voters.  This incident is not "misleading, false and bizarre", to borrow from the Associated Press.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Statement from Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons on Second Suffolk District State Committeewoman recount

From Mass GOP, 27 March 2021 (Communications Director Evan Lips).

Here is the Press Release:

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons issued the following statement today after a recount of last March's election for Second Suffolk Republican State Committeewoman saw totals that dwarfed the count confirmed by the Boston Election Department more than a year ago:

"What does it say about the Boston Election Department that a year after certifying just 40 write-in votes spread across three candidates, today they somehow managed to 'find' 167 votes? This is an indication that the Boston Board of Election Commissioners is either completely incompetent, in the pocket of the Democrat Party machine, or both. Everyone on that commission should have to resign immediately. The recount proves that Boston Election Division actively disenfranchised Republican voters a year ago, and they should have to answer for that.

"Based on this information we can also safely assume this same Democrat electioneering machine successfully worked to knock another Republican write-in candidate, Rayla Campbell, off of the November ballot to ensure that incumbent Democrat U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley wouldn't even have to campaign last fall.

If the Boston Election Division can successfully disenfranchise Republican voters in the March 2020 primary, you have to believe they did the same to voters who wrote in Rayla's (Campbell) name last September."

"They didn't count lawfully cast ballots. The system is absolutely broken, and this is the evidence. Every single member of that commission should resign immediately. Election integrity in the city of Boston is a failure."

Background:

On March 3, 2020, there was no declared winner among the three Boston Republicans competing as write-in candidates for the vacant Second Suffolk State Committeewoman seat, as no candidate satisfied Boston's 50-vote threshold for certification.

After a year's worth of litigation, the Boston Board of Election Commissioners announced on Tuesday that a recount would be conducted Saturday, March 27.

The Boston Election Department's confirmed March 3, 2020 totals saw 25 votes for write-in candidate Nicaela Brady Chinnaswamy, nine votes for write-in candidate Rachel Virginia Kemp, and six votes for write-in candidate Eleanor C. Greene.

Saturday's recount saw Boston election officials certify 65 votes for Chinnaswamy, 52 votes for Kemp, and 50 votes for Greene, for a total of 167 votes, more than four times as many than previously certified following the March 3, 2020, election.

Following the Sept. 1, 2020, U.S. House Republican primary, The Boston Election Division certified 568 write-in votes for Rayla Campbell, who needed at least 2,000 votes spread out across seven municipalities, to have her name certified for the November general election ballot versus incumbent U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley.

Campbell finished with 1,202 certified write-in votes, distributed across seven cities and towns.

The recount rate established Saturday, if applied to Campbell's Sept. 1 totals, would have Campbell potentially receive over 2,000 votes in Boston alone, more than enough to qualify for the November ballot.

Comment from 2020 7th Congressional District Republican candidate Rayla Campbell:

"This is an example of one-party Democrat control that violates my rights, and disenfranchises Black Republican conservative voters in the city of Boston. After learning about the dramatic change during Saturday's recount, how can any Republican voters think otherwise?"

Communications Director Evan Lips can be reached at (617) 523-5005 ext. 245, (press@massgop.com).

The conclusion to be drawn is that not every local town or city election operation is up to snuff.  The will of the People is not being reflected, at least if those Citizens are Republican.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The True Vote

For John, BLUF:  In an age of identity theft there are thousands of politicians and bureaucrats, and media types, who think it is everywhere, except in voting.  This kind of thinking seems strange to me.  Perhaps it is form of mass hysteria.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

On Page A4 of The [Lowell] Sun we have an Associated Press article, Dominion Voting sues Fox for $1.6B over 2020 election claims, which seems to wander into propoganda:

The lawsuit is part of a growing body of legal action filed by the voting company and other targets of misleading, false and bizarre claims spread by President Donald Trump and his allies in the aftermath of Trump’s election loss to Joe Biden.  Those claims helped spur on rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 in a violent siege that left five people dead, including a police officer.  The siege led to Trump’s historic second impeachment.

That second paragraph deserves a fisking.  I will leave that for another day.

Then, on page A8, we have "Democrats assail Georgia law, make case for voting overhaul".

I am not sure the Democrats are making a case, except in their own minds and the minds of Associted Press Reporters.

Democrats have seized on new voting restrictions in Georgia to focus attention on the fight to overhaul federal election laws, setting up a slow-building standoff that carries echoes of the civil rights battles of a half-century ago.

In fiery speeches, pointed statements and tweets, party leaders on Friday decried the law signed the day before by the state’s Republican governor as specifically aimed at suppressing Black and Latino votes and a threat to democracy.  President Joe Biden released an extended statement, calling the law an attack on “good conscience” that denies the right to vote for “countless” Americans.

And our Senator, Senator Elizabeth Warren, tries to make it about racism, with this quote on Thursday♠:

"The Republican who is sitting in Stacey Abrams’ chair just signed a despicable voter suppression bill into law to take Georgia back to Jim Crow," Warren tweeted.

Yes, another move by Democrats to alienate my vote.  I wish for elections that are both free and fair.  Poisoning the well by suggesting I am a throw-back to the Jim Crow era is not just insulting, it is unjust.  The good news for Democrat operatives is that I am old and will soon be ineligible to vote.♥

To make matters worse, here is a Tweet about a quote from CNN, which shows the nonsense being thrown about regarding the "voting rights" act before Congress:

"The bill does far more than expand voting access . . . It also would amend the Constitution to overrule Citizens United, a controversial Supreme Court decision that determined corporations could spend unlimited amounts of money in elections."

The big takeaway is that the US Congress may not amend the US Constitution.  It make kick off an effort to pass an Amendment to the US Constitution, but the States are involved.

Yet here in Lowell we are cracking down on voter rolls and residency requirements, as today's Editorial, "Lay case shows need for election residency review", shows.  The Editorial ends:

In any case, we’d also encourage Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin to undertake a review of what constitutes a candidate’s legal residency, so we don’t have to rely on a judge’s interpretation of competing facts to make that determination.

I think the Commonwealth Secretary of State should take the extra step and check on what constitutes a voter's legal residency.  The scandal of the dead voting has tainted our elections for far too many decades.♦

Regarding the Editorial, the penultimate paragraph reads:

Should Lay eventually prevail in court, we hope he takes advantage of this opportunity to engage in constructive debate on the issues facing this diverse school district of more than 14,000 students.

Exactly.  The education of our youth here in Lowell is much too important to take a laissez faire approach.  Once out in the "real world" our students will have to compete against fellow adults who have had many advantages in life.  We need to be equipping our students for the struggles of adulthood.

In the mean time, we, as the Citizens of this Great Nation, should examine electoral facts with care, demanding the Fourth Estate go down every rabbit hole, and tell our elected representatives that we want fair elections, with everyone having a chance to vote, but no one having a chance to abuse that privilege.

The other thing is we should look into is how the rest of the world votes, from Voter ID to fingers dipped in ink, †o show one has voted.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  To make matters worse, Senator Warren is confronting the solid Democratic Party and Media meme that there is no fraud in elections.  I don't think it is hypocrisy, which would be a harsh judgement.  However, it could be short term memory loss.
♥  Except as a Democrat.
♦  Except in Lowell.

Keeping Secrets

For John, BLUF:  The idea that the 2020 Election was clean, without blemish, is an effort that hopes to cement this view into history.  I think this may be, over the long haul, a view difficult to sustain.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Keeping Secrets: Maureen O’Hara Vs Glenn Kirschner

From Da Tech Guy Blog, by DaTechGuy, 25 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus four:

When screen legend Maureen O’Hara died in 2015 at the age of 95 one of Hollywood’s secrets died with her.

In the final scene of the screen classic Oscar winning movie The Quiet Man Maureen and John Wayne’s character playing Mr. & Mrs. Sean Thornton who have finally resolved a conflict that was tearing their marriage apart are waving to the camera. Mary Kate (O’Hara) whispers something into Sean’s (Wayne) ear. He does a surprise double take and with grin on her face she heads back to the cottage with him in pursuit and the end credits and music end with his arm around them back to the camera as they head into the cottage.

To get that reaction from Wayne he wanted director John Ford instructed O’Hara to whisper a specific sexually vulgar statement into his ear. O’Hara demurred at first but eventually agreed on the condition that nobody outside of her, Ford and of course Wayne would ever know what she said. Ford agreed and Wayne agreed after the fact (since he didn’t know it was coming.) and took the secret with them. O’Hara outlived them both by over 30 years and was often pressed on the subject in interviews but never gave up the secret and to this day it has never come up.

The reason why O’Hara was able to keep this secret successfully was the fact that it was held by only three people and that once Ford (died 1973) and Wayne (died 1979) the only person who could betray that secret was her.

And that brings us in a very round about way to this story at Legal Insurrection’s about the efforts of Glenn Kirschner to compel business’ to state categorically that election 2020 was free and fair.

I think The Quiet Man is a wonderful movie.  With wonderful characters.

I think Da Tech Guy makes a great point.  Given the likely large number of people involved in election fraud in 2020, it is unlikely details will not leak out.

To be straight, Joe Biden was elected by the Electoral College.  Thus, he is the legitimate President.  Fair and square.  However, if it turns out fraud was involved, there will be an asterisk, like for Cyclist Lance Armstrong.

Regards  —  Cliff

Free Speech Defended

For John, BLUF:  This is Meriwether v. The Trustees of Shawnee State University, a First Amendment issue.  "Shawnee State University officials punished philosophy professor Nicholas Meriwether because he declined a male student’s demand to be referred to as a woman, with feminine titles and pronouns (“Miss,” “she,” etc.).".  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

6th Circuit upholds First Amendment rights of Shawnee State professor

Here is the sub-headline:

ADF attorneys represent philosophy professor punished for declining to speak message contrary to his beliefs

From Alliance Defending Freedom, Attorney John Bursch, 26 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled Friday in favor of Dr. Nicholas Meriwether, a philosophy professor at Shawnee State University, reversing a district court’s dismissal of his lawsuit against university officials.  The university punished Meriwether because he declined a male student’s demand to be referred to as a woman, with feminine titles and pronouns.  The court ruled that, based on the allegations in the complaint, the university violated Meriwether’s First Amendment rights.

“This case forced us to defend what used to be a common belief—that nobody should be forced to contradict their core beliefs just to keep their job,” said ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Appellate Advocacy John Bursch.  “We are very pleased that the 6th Circuit affirmed the constitutional right of public university professors to speak and lead discussions, even on hotly contested issues.  The freedoms of speech and religion must be vigorously protected if universities are to remain places where ideas can be debated and learning can take place.”

I was beginning to wonder if anyone was going to speak up for free speech in this woke age.

One thing I worry about is too rigid a set of rules.  I take my clues from what I see around me.  If a person appears male, but is transitioning, I don't wish to stand in jeoprady for a misjudgement.  Or stating what I think is obvious to me.  On the other hand, I don't wish to offend anyone.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The 2020 Election Goes to Court

For John, BLUF:  The 2020 Election is over and Joe Biden is President.  However, the autopsy is just beginning.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Surprise:  Some Courts Are Looking at the 2020 Election

From Stream, by Governor Mike Huckabee, 23 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

Don’t believe the media narrative that court challenges to the 2020 election are over and that we need to “move along; there’s nothing to see here.”  Yes, most courts dismissed their cases without even looking at evidence, but some rulings have been made and there are still cases to be adjudicated.  John Solomon has been keeping up with the activity.

In fact, now that Joe Biden is comfortably situated in the White House and Trump has dropped his own legal challenges, courts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Virginia are starting to rule that the way widespread absentee balloting was handled in these states violated state laws.

Then he touches on Michigan, Wisconsin and virginia.

Yes, due to the miracle of the Electoral College, Joseph Biden is President.  No doubt about it.  That does not mean that 2020 difficulties will not be uncovered.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Where is He?

For John, BLUF:  It is a mystery and Mr matt Drudge does not seem interested in helping us solve it.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Does founder Matt Drudge even work at The Drudge Report anymore?

Yes, this is four months old, but it is still a good question.

From The New York Post, by Writer Armin Rosen, 28 November 2020, 10:06 AM.

Here is the lede plus three:

It was the kind of story that would once have had Matt Drudge deploying font sizes that newspapers used to reserve for declarations of war.  On Oct. 14, Twitter and Facebook blocked users from spreading a New York Post article alleging that Hunter Biden had brokered meetings between his father, then the vice president of the United States, and executives at a Ukrainian energy firm where the younger Biden held an $80,000-a-month sinecure.  The Post’s article included photos of what appeared to be an exhausted and intoxicated-looking Biden in various states of undress.

Yet the controversy over tech companies restricting the spread of a story unflattering to the Democratic presidential contender was nowhere to be seen in the upper half of The Drudge Report — once the most coveted and agenda-setting real estate in right-of-center media.  “RECORD TURNOUT ALARMS REPUBLICANS … BIDEN +7 GA,” screamed the top headlines on Oct. 15.

“People have noticed that Drudge has basically become a liberal site over the past two years,” a senior figure in conservative media told me that week.

“Liberal” might be a stretch, but it’s hard to argue with the claim that The Drudge Report has changed over the past few years.  At the very least, it became an anti-Trump site.  “YOU’RE FIRED!,” the top story on Drudge read on Nov. 7 when Joe Biden’s Electoral College win was first projected, appearing above a full page of links celebrating the former vice president’s victory — Drudge screenshotted the headline in a rare tweet that same day.  During the campaign, the site had touted any and all bad news for Drudge’s once-preferred candidate and sometimes-host at the White House — a fact that didn’t go unnoticed by the Media Critic-in-Chief.

This was four months ago and the "Where's Waldo" question has yet to be answered.

Yes, I do miss the old Drudge.  The new site, the revised site, just does not measure up.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

.Honeymoon Period Summary

For John, BLUF:  The thing about the borders is we privilege some people, but not others.  You could be standing in line in Manila or Bamenda or Chiang Mai, with your paperwork in order, but no "quota" and you are staying put.  But, if you pay some criminal cartel to walk you into the US, you are golden.  Is that fair?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Biden-Presidency-600x264.png

China Going Bust Long Term

For John, BLUF:  Demographics is destiny.  Right now China is the world's most populous nation, with India in a close second.  However, 43 years ago China did something about its population growth.  Now they are seeing the consequences.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Coming Demographic Collapse of China

Here is the sub-headline:

China this century is on track to experience history’s most dramatic demographic collapse in the absence of war or disease.

From The National Interest, by Analyst adn Author Gordon G. Chang, March 23, 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

China this century is on track to experience history’s most dramatic demographic collapse in the absence of war or disease.

Today, the country has a population more than four times larger than America’s. By 2100, the U.S. will probably have more people than China.

China’s National Bureau of Statistics typically releases population data for the preceding year in early March. This year, NBS delayed its announcement because the central government is scheduled next month to announce preliminary results of the 7th national census, conducted in November and December.

The image of Chinese economic and geopolitical dominance will be severely dented when Beijing releases census data. Xi Jinping may believe “the East is rising and the West is declining”—the money line from one of his speeches late last year—but that view will be exceedingly hard to maintain.

It appears that China is continuing to suffer from it's "one child" policy of 1978.  It appears that when a nation changes a social policy unintended consequences follow and reversal of the change is not easy.  It is possible that the head of the Chinese Communist Party, General Secretary Xi Jinping, is whistling through the graveyard.

in order to understand the underlying structure you have to deal in TFR, or Total
Fertility rate.  That is how many children a woman produces in a lifetime, on average.  The usual number is 2.1.  Nine out ten women have two and the tenth has three.  This allows for child deaths at birth or in childhood.  Mr Gordon Chang goes on:

Beijing has not announced births for last year, but early numbers indicate they plummeted from 2019.  Births in the household registration—hukou—system plunged 14.9% to 10,035,000 last year.  Because births so registered constitute about 80% of total births, He Yafu, a demographer, estimates total births for the country last year came in at 12,540,000.

Yi [Yi Fuxian of the University of Wisconsin-Madison] told me that the number of births for the country was in reality about 8 million and could not have exceeded 10 million.

Again, Yi looks correct.  Provinces and other governmental units have reported data ahead of the census, and births were down more than 30% in some locations.

The big issue is China’s trajectory.  Official media is cagey about a critical figure, the country’s total fertility rate, generally the number of children per female reaching child-bearing age.  The official China Daily reports that Lu Jiehua of Peking University believes the country’s TFR, as the rate is known, “has fallen below 1.7.”

In any event, China’s population will shrink fast. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences projects China’s population will halve by 2100 if the TFR drops from 1.6 to 1.3.

China’s TFR, however, is far lower than 1.3.  If its TFR stabilizes at 1.2—1.2 [it] would represent a big increase—China will have a population of only 480 million by the end of the century.

In the US we are handling this with immigration.  A map shows Massachusetts at 1.7, below replacement level.  Since I moved here in 1994 we have gone from ten US Representatives to nine.  That is because we lost population compared with the rest of the nation.  The same thing will be happening to China, slowly at first and then in a rush.  The way Author Ernest Hemingway described Bankruptcy in The Sun Also Rises, "Gradually and Then Suddenly."

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Improving Civics Education

For John, BLUF:  There seems to be a certain lack of civics education, at least as judged by citizen participation in local government and in voting.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

NAS Debuts Coalition to Stop Action Civics

From National Review, by Mr Stanley Kurtz, 22 March 2021, 7:44 AM.

Here is the lede plus two:

The National Association of Scholars (NAS) has announced the formation of a coalition to promote authentic civic education.  The new NAS Civics Alliance will oppose attempts to replace proper courses in American government with politicized “action civics.”  Most conservatives still haven’t even heard of action civics, where K-12 and college students are required to protest and lobby for (invariably leftist) political causes for course credit.  At a moment when the public and legislators are eager to restore long-neglected civic education, radicals are attempting to smuggle partisan leftist activism into K-12 education under the misleading label of “civics.”  The new NAS Civics Alliance aims to block these moves and restore genuine civic education instead.

The NAS Civics Alliance announced its formation with an introductory essay from NAS President Peter Wood, an Open Letter and Curriculum Statement signed by members of the alliance, and a page where anyone can sign the Open Letter and join the alliance.

The Open Letter warns against the rise of action civics in states like Massachusetts and Illinois, and new attempts to nationalize the practice.  The Civics Curriculum Statement lays out a range of positive alternatives, while being careful not to endorse any specific program.  The NAS Alliance, for example, makes no attempt to force a single solution on the complex question of precisely how to balance state-level mandates with local school-district control.  On the other hand, the NAS Civics Alliance clearly endorses the Partisanship Out of Civics Act (which I authored) as a model for legislation which would ban action civics at the state level.  Opposition to the politicization of civic education is the alliance’s unifying theme.

The Author points out that Our Commonwealth is one of the early adapters of the idea to encourage school students to write letters to elected officials.  I am all in favor of that.  I am in favor of it as long as the teacher or the school is not "steering" the student in one direction or another.

for sure, we have to improve our teaching of civics in public schools.  When I was in 9th Grade, in Bucks County, Pa, we have a year long course called "CORE", in which we looked at life as an adult, including examining three separate job options.  We then went on to examine Government at all levels, and about the time my parents pulled me out to go to California, we were embarking on writing a "town charter".  All good stuff.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Vaccine Diplomacy

For John, BLUF:  Once upon a time, and for Centuries, China was the most powerful nation on the planet.  Then they pulled into themselves and fell behind.  Now they are pushing back out, to regain what they see as their rightful place.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

China Declares a Vaccine War on the World

From PJ Media, by Writer Rick Moran, 20 March 2021, 1:58 PM ET.

Here is the lede plus four:

China will allow foreigners to enter the country, but it has directed embassies around the world to only issue a visa if the traveler has gotten a COVID-19 vaccine that was made in China.

“It’s very much at the sharp end of vaccine diplomacy,” Nicholas Thomas, an associate professor in health security at the City University of Hong Kong, told CNN.  “(It’s) essentially saying if you want to visit us, you need to take our vaccine.”

There has been no Chinese-made vaccine approved for human use in America, nor is there likely to be one anytime soon.  China has created 5 different vaccines but none have been approved by the WHO.  This is probably due to the fact that the Chinese government refuses to release the results of Stage 3 trials — a crucial requirement for vaccine approval in the U.S. and other western countries.

China’s main entry in the vaccine race — Sinovac — has an announced effectiveness of 78 percent against COVID.  But Brazil actually conducted a Stage 3 trial and found it only 50.38 percent effective — far less effective than any other vaccine on the market.

Where does that leave the U.S., the UK, and other nations that have not approved a Chinese vaccine for use?

This seems rather cheeky on the part of China.  Not withstanding the Woke scolds in our midst, China, and in particular, Wuhan, does seem to be the source of this pandemic  Now they are playing the offended party, asking the rest of us to dance to their tune.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Cleaning Up After the Election

For John, BLUF:  There has been a small insurrection in the Massachusetts Republican Party, based on the semi-Progressive stance of many GOPers in the Boston Area.  Those of us in the Hinterland want a party that cleaves more closely to the principles of our nation and to true liberalism.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Opinion:  A Revolution is Brewing (and Necessary) in the Republican Party

From The Epoch Times, by Writer Roger L. Simon, 20 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

From several meetings and events I have been to lately, including CPAC, as well as reports from others across the country that I have heard, a revolution is brewing in the Republican Party.

It couldn’t be more necessary.

The leadership is having trouble keeping up with a rank-and-file who are increasingly distressed, even appalled, by the rapid changes in our country being instigated by the new administration and its phony claims of collegiality.

Change in the Republican Party is needed.  In some places it is already underway, in other places not.  Part of the problem is politicians who are about "the process" and not about basic principles of how the People wish to be governed.

On the other hand, we don't want to do to ourselves what the Democratic Party did to itself after the 1968 debacle.  That would be bad for Republicans and for the nation.  Think of the people who walked away from the Democratic Party after 1972.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Hitting Back

For John, BLUF:  The fact that the Perpetrator was on the stretcher is an indication of an assault gone terribly wrong for the Perp.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Witnesses:  Elderly Asian Woman Beats Up Man Attacking Her In San Francisco

From CBS San Francisco, 17 March 2021, 7:31 pm.

Here is the lede plus two:

The incident happened at Market St. and Charles J. Brenham Place near McAllister St. at around 10:30 a.m.  San Francisco police said they are investigating an aggravated assault by a man who appears to be in his 30s on a 70-year-old woman.

Coming upon the scene during his morning run was KPIX Sports Director Dennis O’Donnell.

“There was a guy on a stretcher and a frustrated angry woman with a stick in her hand,” O’Donnell says.

I would think this kind of determination would serve to deter attacks in a given neighborhood.♠  I sure hope so.

A further quote:

“The woman said that she was hit,” O’Donnell says.  “She attacked back.  From what I could see, she wanted more of the guy on the stretcher and the police were holding her back.”

Remenber, the Police are there to protect the Perp from the revenge of the Victims.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  The desire of minorities for peaceful neighborhoods is suggested by a change in voting patterns (greater votes for Republican candidates) following calls for defunding the police.

Battle Lines Among Friends

For John, BLUF:  As talk of eliminating the filibuster shows, there are those who would "destroy the village in order to save it".  That seems foolish, unless the Democratic Party believes HR-1 would give them a permanent lock on elections.  That would be foolish.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

BATTLE LINES BEING DRAWN

From Powerline Blog, by Blogger John Hinderaker, 18 MARCH 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

The conflict in which we are now engaged is stark.  The Left hates America and wants to destroy (or “fundamentally transform”) it.  The Democratic Party, having drunk the Critical Race Theory kool-aid, is now openly anti-American.  So those are the battle lines: on one side, those who love our country and want to preserve it.  On the other, those who hate our country and want to destroy it.

Unfortunately, our public education system is almost 100% in the hands of the haters, organized and mobilized by the teachers’ unions.  Our children are steadily being indoctrinated in anti-Americanism.  But here and there, a few politicians stick up for our country.

Two he mentions are Governor Ron DeSantis, of Florida, and Governor Kristi Noem, of South Dakota.  Both look good to me for 2024.

One thing that needs to be made clear, at the beginning, is the problem with extremism.  If we get to regarding the other side as being impervious to negotiation and compromise, not part of the Democratic process, then we have damaged the thing we value, our democracy.  They may be dirty, rotten, pinko communist blowhards (DRPCB), but they are our Brothers and Sisters.  The may hate our system of Government and our social standards, but they are working within them,♠  and so should we.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Except for ANTIFA, and their ilk.  They wish to go straight to revolution, in order to establish a Bolivarian like revolution, a la Venezuala.  They would be talking violence to establish and maintain such an arrangement.

Guessing the Future

For John, BLUF:  There is a lot we don't understand about the COVID-19 Pandemic.  It would be smart to learn some of those things, to avoid future mistakes.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Everyone Was Wrong on the Pandemic’s Societal Impact

Here is the sub-headline:

In March 2020, a study asked experts and laypeople for their predictions. Neither group came close to being right.

From Foreign Policy, by Messrs Michael Varnum, Cendri Hutcherson and Igor Grossmann, 18 March 2021, 2:40 PM.

Here is the lede plus three:

Soon after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was clear to many that life was about to be fundamentally altered, possibly irrevocably.  Discussions of a “new normal” spread on social media, in the popular press, and in scholarly publications, but it was unclear just what this new normal might look like.  Beyond social distancing or working and learning from home, how would COVID-19 change our ways of thinking and behaving?  Would depression and loneliness increase, or would people prove resilient and adaptable?  Would relationships suffer as couples spent more time together?  Would people become more open to cultural change as they were forced to adapt, or would they fall back on tradition and ritual?

In those uncertain early days, pundits, politicians, and celebrities alike offered their predictions and prescriptions.  So too did some behavioral and social scientists. For us, a group of scholars who share an interest in understanding how social and behavioral science can best inform public policy, it was a golden opportunity to test just how expert experts are.  In a large-scale undertaking beginning last April, we sought to track the extent to which social and behavioral scientists (including social and clinical psychologists, experts in judgments and decision-making, neuroscientists, economists, and political scientists) accurately predicted the impacts of COVID-19 on a set of psychological and behavioral domains—ranging from life satisfaction and loneliness to prejudice and violent crimes—in the United States.  We also asked average Americans to make these predictions as well.  Half a year later, we assessed the accuracy of these predictions.

So, how did COVID-19 reshape people’s psychology?  Surprisingly, a steady stream of research findings suggest that far less has changed than one might expect. Loneliness, if it increased at all, did so by a minuscule amount.  People’s satisfaction with relationships decreased, but the trend was again very small, a far cry from the dramatic change people were predicting last March.  And people’s basic social motivations—to affiliate, or achieve status, or find romantic partners, or care for family—also showed little movement in response to the pandemic.  In a National Science Foundation-funded study involving more than 15,000 research participants around the globe, only the motivation to avoid infectious disease showed a meaningful shift from pre-pandemic baselines.  Unsurprisingly, it increased.  Other ways of assessing change provide a similar picture.  Using survey data from large, nationally representative samples, we found that there was little to no change in 10 diverse domains of human psychology and behavior—ranging from subjective well-being to traditionalism—that might have been expected to show dramatic movement.

These findings were unexpected by many, including the experts in human behavior and social dynamics in our studies, whose predictions turned out to be generally inaccurate.  The majority of forecasts were off by at least 20 percent, and fewer than half of our participants correctly predicted the direction of changes.  In what ways were these predictions off? Typically they were too extreme.  In other words, human psychology and behavior showed more inertia than most of our participants anticipated.  The only exception came in the domain of violent crime, where a 20 percent increase was observed from spring to late fall.  Ironically, this was a domain where our participants predicted almost no change.  How did experts compare with the average person?  Surprisingly, our experts performed no better than the laypeople in our control group, making nearly identical (and equally inaccurate) predictions for the pandemic’s effects on a wide range of phenomena.  Even more nuanced measures of expertise, such as an individual’s amount of social science training or experience studying the specific phenomenon being predicted, did not show any relationship to accuracy.

Here is an interesting comment.  It turns out that those who go against the grain of commonly accepted wisdom do better at forecasting:

How can we become better forecasters?  Here, [Philip] Tetlock’s work on so-called superforecasters, individuals who make highly accurate forecasts, might be informative.  Superforecasters seem to reason differently from others.  They are more willing to acknowledge uncertainty, to seek out opposing viewpoints, and to update their beliefs in the face of new evidence.  Studies suggest that similar reasoning strategies make people better at forecasting their own future emotions and that training in taking the viewpoint of a detached observer can enhance the likelihood this kind of thinking.  Further, recent work by Tetlock and his collaborators has shown that a short training in probabilistic reasoning improves people’s ability to forecast geopolitical events.

There is still a lot to learn in the field of social science, although the desired outcomes from different groups may get in the way of that learning  Some truths may be culturally determined.

Regards  —  Cliff

Confusion in the IC

For John, BLUF:  There was apparently a minority opinion in the Intelligence Community regarding outside influence in our 2020 Elections.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

US National Intelligence Officer Argues China Meddled in 2020 Election to Damage Trump

Wait!  What?  We were told, yesterday, that:

Putin targeted people close to Trump in bid to influence 2020 election, U.S. intelligence says

Washington Post Reporter Ellen Nakashima (17 March 2021, at 6:51 a.m. EDT) told us:

Evanina also said that "China prefers that President Trump — whom Beijing sees as unpredictable — does not win reelection."  He said that China was expanding its "influence efforts" ahead of the November election to "shape the policy environment" and "pressure political figures" it viewed as opposed to its interests.

So China was not directly meddling in our 2020 Election, per Ms Nakashima.

But, back to today's Epoch Times article, there is revealed a descenting opinion.

From The Epoch Times, by Reporter Jack Phhillips, 18 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus one:

A report from the U.S. intelligence community suggests that a minority of intelligence officials believed that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did, in fact, attempt to hinder former President Donald Trump’s chances in the 2020 election, while reporting that the CCP did not “deploy interference efforts.”

A report from the National Intelligence Council (pdf) released March 10 stated that Russia sought to denigrate President Joe Biden and boost Trump during the 2020 election, and that China “did not deploy interference efforts and considered but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome of the U.S. presidential election,” adding:  “We have high confidence in this judgment.”

So, which is it?  Did they or didn't they?  I am thinking our assumption, and our defensive actions should be based on the idea that they did.

We have election system problems and the Bill coming out of Congress will not fix those problems.  If anything, it will make things worse.  For sure, the confidence of the voters is important.  I do not believe we have a high level of confidence.

Regards  —  Cliff

Is Skiing Racist?

For John, BLUF:  No, it isn't, but if those of us who ski are not welcoming of those trying to get on board we are limiting the enjoyment of our non-skiing Brothers and Sisters.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Why don't Black people ski? One prof blames systemic racism

Here is the sub-headline:

• A sociology professor wrote a book alleging that "systemic racism" is to blame for Black people not taking advantage of outdoor activities.
• The book argues that African-Americans are therefore deprived of “aesthetic experiences that are central to the human condition.”