Fair and Balanced - who needs it?

"Fair and Balanced" is Fox "News" slogan. It's a little ironic because that's precisely what it isn't; but maybe Fox thinks that by calling their brand of distorted-realty conspiracy-theory-filled hate mongering is "Fair and Balanced" often enough, some of their viewers may even half believe it?  But that's not my beef here. 

Today I'm at my wits end with The News Hour. First Judy Woodruff, who I believe produces the show as well as presenting it, aired Kevin McCarthy spewing is usual ridiculous nonsense, about no evidence for this and infringement of freedom there.  We know his shtick now so we don't need to hear it again; in Nancy Pelosi's words he's a complete moron. But she didn't air much of Biden's speech (or any of it now that I think about it). We heard more from the mouths of habitual liars than from the President. How crazy is that? 

Ms. Woodruff, I understand you're trying to put "fair and balance" into practice instead of using it as a slogan, but frankly if one "side" is sensible science based policy and the other is wacky pot stirring and hate-filled garbage, you really don't need to be "balanced".  As Maggie Thatcher said of the IRA many years ago, they need to be deprived of the oxygen of publicity.  If you are going to report GOP nonsense, just foot-note it; mention that some nut-ball said more stupid stuff (don't air them saying it) and move on. The only people who might accuse you of being unfair are the dildos at Fox and they'd say that wherever you do; so screw them. Just report the facts and leave all the nonsense for the brain dead Fox viewers.  

Dusty Hill

Yesterday music lost Dusty Hill, ZZ-Top's bass player.  I wasn't a huge ZZ-Top fan, that is until I want to see them play. My wife, thinking I was a fan, bought the tickets and it was a bit of a surprise to both of us when we arrived - I think it was at Shoreline - and I found out who was playing and she found out I didn't like the band as much as she thought I did. But anyway, we settled in and before very long I was hooked. Just three guys, a great sound and a show. What a show! From the furry guitars, the huge chrome mic stands, the lighting. 15 years on I can't put my finger on why I was so captivated, but I remember telling my musician friends afterwards what an impression the band had made. I only listen to them occasionally these days, but I still remember how in awe I was of the show they put on. RIP Dusty Hill.

Carrying the can

 

Today the CDC is recommending that the vaccinated mask up again when indoors; that's infuriating. It means that not only did I take the precaution of getting the vaccine, I am also having to mask up to protect the unvaccinated who are too stubborn or too stupid (or both) to get a shot. More annoying still, many of those unvaccinated are almost certainly wandering around without a mask because 'wearing a mask (or getting vaccinated) is an infringement on their personal freedom'; To which I say this: your piss-ant behavior is impacting my freedom, you ignorant, selfish, whiny troglodytes.  

Why is the GOP is resisting vaccination?

 

They say it's about personal choice. Bull. It's about not wanting covid to be controlled during Biden's fist two years so that they can win back the House in 2022. Trump screwed up the initial response which left half a million Americans dead. If Biden were to been seen to have gotten covid under control and the country almost back to normal that would make him look good and Trump and his acolytes (i.e., almost the entire GOP) look like the incompetent, self-serving, spineless douche-bags they really are. So the GOP wants to keep vaccination rates down and covid alive November 2022. 

Jims Jordan and Banks, comedians

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vetoed two of minority leader McCarthy's nominations to the select committee investigating the January 6th insurrection yesterday.  As apparently "shocking" as this was, it was completely predictable. First, McCarthy has made it clear that he is completely beholden to Trump.  So anyone who might be even mildly non-partisan was not a contender for the Republication slots on the committee.  

Jim Jordan had made it clear from his Emmy-nomination-worthy theatrical performance on the Benghazi hearings during the House's "investigation"  into Hilary Clinton's emails that he was not remotely interested in fact-finding, but sees committees as opportunities for partisan grandstanding. He'd also been instrumental in promoting the Big Lie and was involved in the organization of the insurrection, allegedly.  

Jim Banks had also made clear from his comments this week that like Jordan, he was intending to use the committee as a platform to peddle a revisionist version of events. “Make no mistake, Nancy Pelosi created this committee solely to malign conservatives and to justify the left’s authoritarian agenda. I will not allow this committee to be turned into a forum for condemning millions of Americans because of their political beliefs.”  Hardly a voice of a serious open-minded thinker. 

So the two Jims' rejection was entirely to be expected. And equally predictably, McCarthy announced the the Republicans would do an "investigation" of their own, obviously an attempt to preempt the select committee with its own distorted version of events. We'll have two documents, one saying Trump was to blame and the other saying it was Hilary, George Soros, BLM, Antifa, and, of course, the Jews.

Indeed, one might have imagined that this was precisely what McCarthy had intended from the get-go were it not for the fact that he was apparently taken off guard by Pelosi's decision, all of which only seems to show how McCarthy, like many of his Republican colleagues, misread his political opponents and Nancy Pelosi in particular.   

Why Republicans should take climate change seriously

One of the effects of climate change appears to be the reduction in predictable precipitation in areas nearer the equator; in the Americas this means Central America. Since many Central American countries have economies that are significantly agricultural, increasingly frequent droughts will create an economic incentive to move north to places not as acutely affected by climate change.  At the same time economic hardship will lead to unrest and repression resulting in civil rights abuses, creating additional pressure to flee to less repressive countries. The result will be an increase in the number of people trying to enter the USA and the blurring of any distinction between economic migrants and political refugees. That makes climate change as much a priority for Republicans as for Democrats. 

Border walls and ramping up enforcement will only lead to greater a humanitarian disaster; the problem needs fixing at its source. Historically the emphasis has been on political intervention to support friendly (and sometimes) democratic governments south of the border but that is no longer enough. The US will need to address climate change both at its root, for the longer term through curbing of carbon and methane emissions, and through mitigation in the shorter term with initiatives to help countries whose economies are being adversely impacted by climate change.     

Republican climate deniers may have no compunction about going down in history as the cult that destroyed life on earth as we know it, but perhaps they may take notice when they realize that failing to fix the climate problem might increase the "browning of America" of which they seem mortally afraid. 

Trump and vaccines

The Economist notes that the one thing Trump's administration did get right was the relaxation of regulation that allowed much faster than normal development of a covid vaccine. But now Trunp's  supporter's and his boosters (Fox) are railing against the vaccine Trump heralded as the very thing that would save the country.  While that seems odd, it is in fact in entirely predictable.

Had Trump won the election he would be calling on everyone, his supporters in particular, to get vaccinated, and berating Fox to do the same. He would be touting it as the life-saving solution to all our problems, health and economic. 

But he lost, and now doesn't want Biden't administration to get any credit for rolling out the vaccine (something his administration completely failed to set in motion) and getting the country back to normal. He'd rather the Biden vaccination program fail so that he will have something to berate it for in 2024.  Making his supporters sicker, and more economically distressed as a result, helps stoke the grievance that he hopes will boost his standing and influence in the next presidential election.    

Forever Wars

Biden has been criticized by George W. Bush, no less, for leaving Afghanistan before "Mission Accomplished".  And it is true that the creation of a stable functioning democracy looks imperiled. The Mujaheddin outlasted the Russians in the 1980s and the Taliban (which owes its existence to the tribal conflicts between the Mujaheddin fighters) have done the same to the Americans in the 21st century, using weapons captured from the Russians.

It is fair to say that the US withdrawal may lead to the collapse of the Afghan government and the return of the Taliban theocracy which is indeed tragic for a great many Afghans, women in particular.  While it has been pointed out that we still have troops in Germany, that is a flawed comparison; the US could pull its troops out of German and the Nazis would not return to power. (US forces are there for a quite different Cold War related reason). 

If, as seems likely, the withdrawal of US troops results in the Taliban reimposing their medieval theocratic regime, it will be a sad day, but only seen as a failure by those who view the US' role in exporting its model of democracy and maintaining it by force. (Some might argue that looks a lot like colonialism but that's a digression). If one takes a less paternalistic view of America's role in the world, one that does not include "nation-building", then the removal of Al Qaeda training camps was indeed accomplished some while ago. And the goal of creating a democratic state is perhaps best seen as more of an idealistic after-thought.      

Utilities

Utility, noun: "an organization supplying the community with electricity, gas, water, or sewerage".  Over the course of a century the term "utility" has come to be synonymous with "always on". Yet as PG&E is now demonstrating that is a misnomer and a misconception.  The adjective, "the state of being useful, profitable, or beneficial" (which is closer to its use in economics) suggest that anything which we want or find to be of use has "utility". But to expect it to be "always on" is only a function of habit and a developed country habit at that. There are may parts of the world in which electricity supply is intermittent; and California is now one of those places.