More on "Some People did Something."

Trump and the Post certainly went off the rails over this and while Ilhan Omar's words may not be sinister, they're not all that admirable either.

Let's simply look at an extended quote which, despite claims to the contrary, is not woefully out of context. In fact it's in keeping with the entire gist of the speech.

"Here’s the truth: far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen. And frankly I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognized that some people did something and then all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

First of all she's speaking to CAIR, an organization of questionable antecedents that has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and had an admitted association with the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) charged by the US government with funneling money to Hamas.

When the 1st trial of the HLF ended in a mistrial CAIR defended the organization claiming the charges were "built on fear not fact." All HLF defendants were convicted in the retrial and CAIR was identified as an "unindicted co-conspirator" which caused the FBI to stop working with CAIR.

Second, what civil liberties were Muslims losing? Perhaps they should compare the civil liberties they lost to those lost by the Japanese internees during WW II or blacks in the south that were kept from voting by the Jim Crow culture? More people disliking you, whether justified or not, is not a loss of civil liberties. Even Islamophobic assholes enjoy freedom of speech.

Third, let's cut the bullshit, "some people did something" is no way to refer to the events of 9/11. If we can just agree this was a bad choice of words them I'm all for calling out those distorting what she said. BUT WE CAN'T EVEN DO THAT APPARENTLY. Instead heels have to be dug into the ground and the indefensible must be defended.

Fourth, just as a minor nit, CAIR was founded in 1994 and not after 9/11. She couldn't even get the founding date of the organization she was speaking to right.

Then we can add the "allegiance to a foreign country" crack while criticizing AIPAC a while back into the mix.

But the thing that really stuck in my craw was her comparing her "some people did something" phrase to George W, Bush's "I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people -- and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon" phrase spoken on 9/14/2001, right in front of the rubble of the twin towers, claiming because he used the word "people" it amounted to the same thing she said or at least it was equally respectful or disrespectful.

No, not really, not even close.

Trump and the Post were being unethical but they were scoring lots of political points by going overboard. Trump understands the game. You have to know when to fold a losing hand and I have this bad feeling that this lady is a losing hand and always will be a losing hand.

The Anticipated Netanyahu Coalition

The details of the Likud coalition appear to be taking shape as follows.

Likud - 36 Seats

The Ultra-Orthodox Shas (8) and UTJ (7) - 15 Seats

Small Right Wing Parties Kulanu (4), Yisrael Beiteinu (5), and the Union of Right Wing Parties (5) - 14 Seats

That's a total of 65 seats out of the 120 seat Knesset. The extreme right wing are most likely to press for annexation of West Bank settlements.

In any event the negotiations aren't going to be easy and might take a while.

Some People Did Something!?

The full quote by Democratic Representative Ilhan Omar in a speech to CAIR was

"CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties."

The part of this that has everyone bent out of shape is the description of the terrorist act as "some people did something."

The New York Post went completely off the rails.

Omar has a knack for putting her foot in her mouth. This is the same lady who in criticizing AIPAC implied they were pushing for "Allegiance to foreign country" with is an accusation often made against Jews in anti-Semitic attacks.

Then she implied a GOP representative was being anti-Semitic when he criticized Democratic policies by reading Hitler's quote from Mein Kampf on the "big lie" and accusing them of engaging in that tactic.

While Mein Kampf is one of the most anti-Semitic documents ever produced, there's nothing particularly anti-Semitic about Hitler's tangent explaining the concept of the "big lie."

I can't decide if Omar is just that stupid or whether she's purposely pushing the outside of the envelope to see what she can get away with.

Israeli Election Results

Despite some optimism that Benjamin Netanyahu would be displaced his Likud Party managed 36 seats to Blue and White's 35.

Israel's president will ask Netanyahu to try and form a government for the fourth consecutive time and the fifth time overall.

As usual the Likud Party leader will have to negotiate with the religious and other right wing parties in order to manage the 61 plus votes required.

The issue is what will Netanyahu have to offer those parties in order to get them to sign on? One concern is some may ask him to follow through on his promise in the waning days of the election to begin annexing West Bank territory around Jerusalem that is occupied by Israeli settlements.

It wouldn't be the first time Bibi didn't follow on a campaign promise so I suppose we'll have to wait and see.

I think annexing parts of the West Bank unilaterally without some sort of agreement with the Palestinians is a big mistake and is just going to make things a lot more tense.

The Final Four - Virginia vs Auburn

I don't usually watch basketball and I'm certainly not anything close to an expert but I did play and I do have a basic feel for the rules of the game.

I was bored last night and found a live stream of the Virginia-Auburn game and I figured I'd give it a look.

My immediate reaction was I didn't remember the game being so rough. I mean these guys were banging into each other and engaging in general mayhem while the referees smiled in benign neglect. I like that approach. Let the players play but just keep things from getting out of hand.

Now let's talk about the final couple of seconds.

With about 3 seconds left Virginia had squandered a 10 point lead and was trailing Auburn 62-60. Virginia's Ty Jerome was dribbling up court when the ball hit his heel and he lost control. Jerome then picked up the ball and started dribbling again.

The thought immediately popped into my head "isn't that a double-dribble?" I ignored my thought because I figured the refs knew better than I did.

Then Auburn fouled Jerome well beyond the key because they had a foul to give but, with under 2 seconds left, that seemed like giving Virginia a chance to catch their breath.

Then came the in-bounds pass to Kyle Guy and the 3-point shot. When it bounced off the rim, like just about everyone else, I figured the game was over and Auburn had won 62-60.

Well, not quite, because during the shot Auburn's Samir Doughty bumped into Guy and a three shot foul was called. I didn't see it in real time but the ref was right there and the foul was clear in the replay.

So, with the entire season on the line, and 0.6 seconds left, Kyle Guy goes to the free throw line for three shots.

Now, you would think he might be a tad nervous. Hell, if it were me my knees would be knocking together and my hands shaking. Not this kid. With no hesitation he put the ball up and got nothing but net, Auburn 62, Virginia 61.

They gave him the ball back and, again, with no hesitation he put it up and, again, nothing but net. Auburn 62, Virginia 62.

At that point Auburn called its last time out to discuss its options if Guy made or missed the shot. I suppose they also wanted Guy to think about that final shot.

The resumed the gane and, what think about? Again, with no hesitation he put the ball up and got, you guessed it, nothing but net.

Final score, Virginia 63, Auburn 62. This was one for the ages.

The Israeli Elections

Israelis go to the polls on April 9.

According to the last poll Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party is expected to manage 26 seats in the 120 seat Knesset while Benny Gantz's Blue and White Party is expected to win 30 seats.

So no party, as usual, will be even close to a majority and the coalition negotiations will commence.

Israel's president, Reuven Rivlin, will decide which party leader has the best chance of putting together a majority coalition and that party will have a little over a month to form a government.

The same poll indicates that Netanyahu's right wing block would manage a razor thin majority of 63 seats. If that's the case, Rivlin will probably ask Netanyahu to form a government for the fifth time.

What makes this all so interesting is Netanyahu, apparently concerned by the recent polls, is promising to begin the process of annexing parts of the occupied West Bank.

It's hard to believe Israel would do that without first insuring support from the Trump administration.

Whether annexation talk is just political bull to insure right wing votes or something Netanyahu actually intends to follow though on is not clear.

I'm betting it's all hand waving for votes but you never know. Any such annexation would be clearly illegal according to international law but that hasn't stopped Israel from annexing East Jerusalem and parts of the Golan Heights.

The Green New Deal

My concern with the Green New Deal is it mushes together two things which not only don't necessarily go together but which may be incompatible.

I think attacking climate change is an absolute necessity. I think investing in green technology will have not only climate but economic benefits which MAY or MAY NOT alleviate the economic and social justice issues identified in the bill.

People who are currently flipping burgers aren't going to suddenly be designing state of the art green technology. There's nothing about green technology manufacturing that would reverse the trend of automated rather than labor intensive factories; those same people flipping burgers are unlikely to either design the robots or maintain them.

I suspect a green technology revolution would, like all other economic revolutions, benefit some people, hurt other people and make the richest even richer. There's nothing wrong with this as long as the main goal of getting climate change under control is met.

White supremacists committed the largest # of extremist killings in 2017?

A tweet from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez noted that:

White supremacists committed the largest # of extremist killings in 2017.

According to Statista in 2017 there were 8,584 terrorist attacks worldwide resulting in 18,753 deaths and 19,461 injuries. Many were in the Middle east with 1,951 in Iraq, 1,171 in Afghanistan. There were also 860 in India and 574 in Pakistan. I doubt any of these were perpetrated by white supremacists so I’m going to assume Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is referring to the US only.

Her source is probably articles based upon the ADL’s Annual Report on Extremism such as an article in Quartz whose headline read:

The far-right was responsible for the majority of America’s extremist killings in 2017

According to the report, this is true. The ADL report listed 19 incidents. One possible problem with this report is that it includes criminal incidents perpetrated by people with extremist leanings even if the actions had nothing to do with their extremist politics. But let’s not quibble.

Lafayette, Indiana, January 16, 2017 — Self proclaimed white supremacist murdered a man during a home invasion. 1-0

San Antonio, Texas, January 29, 2017 — A member of the Aryan Brotherhood shoots to death a man over a dispute. 2-0

Denver, Colorado, February 1, 2017 — Convert to Islam who had pledged his allegiance to ISIS kills a security guard. 2-1

Leadwood, Missouri, February 9, 2017 — KKK leader murdered by his wife and son. 3-1

North Judson, Indiana, March 3, 2017 — Aryan Circle member shot and killed man who was dating his ex-girlfriend. 4-1

New York City, New York, March 30, 2017 — White supremacist who wanted to stop white women from engaging in interracial relationships stabs and kills homeless man. 5-1

Fresno, California, April 18, 2017 — Black Nationalist kills a security guard and then kills three more people over several days. 5-5

Dallas, Texas, May 1, 2017 — Black Nationalist kills his godfather. 5-6
Broadwater County, Montana, May 16, 2017 — Anti-government extremists kill a sheriff. 6-6
Tampa, Florida, May 19, 2017 — White supremacist kills two of his roommates for making fun of his conversion to Islam (!?). 8-6
Portland, Oregon, May 26, 2017 — White supremacist stabs to death two men who tried to help an African-American girl and a girl wearing a hijab being harassed by the guy. 10-6
Putnam County Georgia, June 13, 2017 — Member of a white supremacist prison gang and another inmate killed two guards while trying to escape. 12-6
Century Correctional Institution, Florida, June 19, 2017 — White supremacist inmate stabs African-American inmate to death. 13-6
Samish Island, Washington, July 14, 2017 — Alt right theorist murders his father in argument over his beliefs. 14-6
Charlottesville, Virginia, August 12, 2017 — White supremacist drives car into crown killing 1 and injuring 19. 15-6
Greeley, Colorado, August 16, 2017 — White supremacist gang member, along with his wife and sister, murdered his uncle. 16-6
New York City, October 31, 2017 — Islamic extremist drives a rental truck down a bike path killing 8. 16-14
Aztec, New Mexico, December 14, 2017 — White supremacist disguises himself and kills two students. 18-14.
Reston, Virginia, December 22, 2017 — An accused white supremacist teenager kills his girlfriend’s parents because they wanted to her to stop seeing him because of his beliefs. 20-14.

So, we have 19 incidents resulting in 34 deaths and white supremacists were responsible for 20 of them. I’m sure these weren’t the only homicides involving extremists because there were 17,284 homicides in the US in 2017. There were 650 homicides in Chicago alone. There were also 135,755 rapes.

But these were the 19 incidents the ADL chose to highlight for whatever reason. The 2018 report was worse with 50 deaths documented. It also updated the 2017 total to 37 but didn’t identify the additional 3 victims.

You'll excuse me if I'm not about to panic over 34 extremist related homicides out of 17,284.

Who Kills Who?

Despite all the gnashing of teeth over police killing young black men and the whole Black Lives Matter thing, blacks apparently kill more blacks every year than whites and police combined.

According to the FBI crime statistics in 2016 blacks killed 2,570 other blacks. Whites killed 243 blacks. It works the other way as well. In 2016 Whites killed 2,854 whites while blacks killed 533 whites.

So it’s far more likely for someone to be killed by someone of the same race than by someone of a different race or by the police.

According to the Washington Post police killed a total of 963 persons in 2016.

So even if all 963 people killed by police were black, and they weren’t, the total number of blacks killed by police and whites combined is less than half the total number killed by other blacks.

Of course crime is not related to race but to economic deprivation and desperation. It’s made worse by easy access to firearms which makes it necessary for police to be armed.

If every two bit hood wasn’t armed to the teeth police might be a lot less trigger happy.

Some Input from Jerusalem

As the Israeli elections come closer, some notes from the Jerusalem Post.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended Israel’s regular allowing of Qatari funds to be transferred into Gaza, saying it is part of a broader strategy to keep Hamas and the Palestinian Authority separate, a source in Monday’s Likud faction meeting said.

Netanyahu explained that, in the past, the PA transferred the millions of dollars to Hamas in Gaza. He argued that it was better for Israel to serve as the pipeline to ensure the funds don’t go to terrorism.

“Now that we are supervising, we know it’s going to humanitarian causes,” the source said, paraphrasing Netanyahu.

The money comes from the Qatar Fund for Development established in 2002 to help the economic development of Arab countries and developing countries. Netanyahu’s response was to opposition by the Blue and White Party who wanted to block the funds altogether calling them mafia style protection payments.

The prime minister also said that, “whoever is against a Palestinian state should be for” transferring the funds to Gaza, because maintaining a separation between the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza helps prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The implication being that Blue and White is strongly opposed to the establishment of a Palestinian State at least in the foreseeable future.

The bottom line is that the Israelis don’t trust the Palestinians including Hamas, Hezbollah and the Palestinian Authority. It’s hard to have a partnership when there’s no trust.

The Blue and White Party is an alliance looking to topple the Likud party as the party with the most seats in the upcoming elections but have slid lightly in the most recent polls. The last poll showed Blue and White with 33 seats and Likud with 29 out of a total of 120 Knesset seats.

Even if they manage to gain the most seats the government will still be created based upon which party leader the President of Israel (Reuvin Rivlin) believes has the best chance of putting together a majority coalition. So Blue and White could win the most seats but Netanyahu could still form the government.

Blue and White appear to have a strategy aimed at solidifying Israeli occupation in the West bank settlements, Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley. Three of its four senior leaders are former IDF chiefs of staff so I’m not expecting a lot of peace making efforts.

Let’s put it this way, neither “Two-State Solution” nor “Palestinian State” appears in the party’s charter. Here’s a direct quote from the charter.

"We will initiate a regional conference with the Arab countries that seek stability, and deepen the process of separation from the Palestinians while maintaining the uncompromising security interests of the State of Israel and the IDF's freedom of action everywhere.”

This is a very divide and conquer military like approach. I’m also reading a soldier’s mentality regarding Hamas in Gaza.

"Hamas, whose capabilities are minuscule in relation to the IDF, is provocative and is embittering the lives of the residents of the south.”

One last quote form the Blue and White Charter.

"We will heal the wounds created by the current government in relations with world Jewry, especially in the United States."

One more time, Israel doesn’t trust the Palestinians and they feel they’re justified in not trusting them. This is the fundamental problem. To be honest I don’t blame them; I wouldn’t trust them either.

The Emergence of the State of Israel

Given all the flap over anti-Semitic tropes being thrown around by Muslim members of the Hpuse of Representatives and the general ignorance being expressed by lots of folks, I think a bit of history is in order.

The establishment of the state of Israel began with the establishment of the Mandate for Palestine in 1923 by the League of Nations. That document ratified the Balfour Declaration of 1917 but also established safeguards for the non-Jewish population.

Britain was placed in charge of the mandate and allowed to establish the boundaries of Trans-Jordan, today the state of Jordan, and Palestine.

Between 1923 and 1947 there was a bloody three way pissing contest in Palestine between Jews, Arabs and the British. Finally Britain gave up and dumped the whole mess in the lap of the United Nations which had recognized existing international documents including the Mandate for Palestine.

The UN established a special committee to recommend actions related to Palestine. The committee came back with the following:

(1) approved the termination of the British mandate,

(2) a majority proposal for the partition of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state with international control over Jerusalem and an economic union,

(3) a minority proposal for a federal union with Jerusalem as the capital.

The Zionist factions accepted the majority proposal. The Arab factions rejected both proposals.

The Jews were allocated more land than the Arabs (53% to 46%) despite Arabs being in the majority (1,270,000 to 610,000) because large scale Jewish emigration from Europe was anticipated.

On November 29, 1947, the UN adopted Resolution 181 which partitioned Palestine based upon the majority proposal.

The shooting started the next day with the ambush of two buses carrying Jewish settlers.

Jewish settlements were attacked by Arab forces including troops from Jordan, Syria and Egypt. Arab villages were attacked by Jewish forces. The Jewish committee told Jewish settlers to hold their ground while many Arabs either evacuated or were forced out by Jewish forces.

Both sides ignored the boundaries of the partition plan and probably committed atrocities. When the smoke had cleared Israel controlled all of Palestine except for the West Bank, which was controlled by Jordan, and the Gaza Strip which was controlled by Egypt. About 750,000 Palestinian Arabs out of an original 1948 population of 1.2 million had become refugees.

Israel took the West Bank from Jordan and Gaza from Egypt in the 1967 war. Israel withdrew from Gaza and dismantled Jewish settlements there in 2005.

Going to the West Bank

Freshman Representative Rashida Tlaib wants to lead a delegation to the West Bank. Basically she says it's only right since congressional delegations go to Israel all the time.

I think one group should go to both Israel and the West Bank.

While they’re in Israel they can:

1. Ask Bibi if the Israeli government continues to magically convert illegal West Bank outposts into legal ones?

2. Get a briefing on current Israeli security concerns and, if they still feel an IDF presence is  required in Area A, then ask them why?

3. Ask if Palestinian requests for permits to develop the undeveloped parts of Area C are still being overwhelmingly refused?

4. Talk to Jews and Druze in the streets and ask about how they would feel being absorbed into a Palestinian Arab majority single state?

5. Ask if anyone has any idea how to solve this mess?

While they’re in the West Bank they can:

1. Tour some of the settlements near Jerusalem so they understand these aren’t frontier outposts but built up suburban neighborhoods.

2. Tour the illegal outposts so they understand that these are frontier outposts.

3. Ask the PA for a response to the Israeli security concerns and about having an IDF presence in Area A?

4. Talk to the Palestinian in the street about how they feel about the continued existence of a Jewish/Zionist state?

5. Ask if anyone has any idea how to solve this mess?

Now, let’s talk about the claim that “Ordinary Americans’ views on Israel/Palestine are changing.”

Actually, they’re apparently not. The poll referenced is on one aspect of the problem. From Pew Research:

”When asked about the dispute between Israel and the Palestinians, 46% of Americans say they sympathize more with the Israelis, 16% say they sympathize more with the Palestinians and about four-in-ten (38%) either volunteer that their sympathies are with both (5%), neither (14%) or that they do not know (19%). The overall balance of opinion has fluctuated only modestly since 1978, when 45% said they sympathized more with Israel, 14% with the Palestinians and 42% could not decide.”

What has changed is that the two parties have become more polarized. You can find the details at the link below but basically Republicans heavily favor Israel and Democrats are split 27%-25% in favor of Israel, 23% say neither and 25% say they don’t know. What Pew calls Liberal Democrats favor the Palestinians by 35%-19%, 22% say neither and 24% say they don’t know.

www.people-press.org/...

Why do People Vote for Trump?

I've been trying to come to grips with the reasons many people voted for him in the first place and will probably vote for him again in 2020.

I’m not really 100% sure about those reasons but over the past two years I’ve heard the following: (Three points to remember: (1) take it for what it’s worth, (2) obviously not everything listed applies to every Trump voter, (3) perception, and not reality, is what matters)

1. Many are tired of hearing how racist the country is when it may not really be that racist. (www.washingtonpost.com/...)

2. Many don’t want people with strange customs and strange ideas entering the country and changing it from what they’re used to. This goes double for Muslims who they look upon as an enemy.

3. Many are adamantly opposed to abortion on demand and won’t vote for a pro-choice candidate.

4. Many look at the LGBT movement and see a constant stream of what to them is weirdness. First it was gays, then transexuals and now something called “gender fluid.” Most of them don’t even know what “gender fluid” means.

5. Many think 4th wave feminists are nuts.

6. Many have had it with Affirmative Action.

7. Many are concerned with what they view as high crime rates among Blacks and Latinos that they believe endangers them and their families. (ucr.fbi.gov/...)

8. Many have had it with what they view as high welfare rates among Blacks and Latinos that they believe they’re paying for while having a hard time making ends meet themselves.(www.census.gov/...)

9. Many are disgusted with what they view as the identity politics adopted by the Democratic Party.

10. Many are fed up with what they view as Political Correctness run amok.

Of course Right Wing radio, fundamentalist preachers, FOX News and the GOP focus on terrifying these people by exaggerating the possible effects of these things to the nth degree well aware that Conservatives are highly susceptible to fear and anxiety. (www.psychologytoday.com/...)

Yes, Trump is a lying, incompetent, son of a bitch but he’s THEIR lying, incompetent, son of a bitch, because he agrees with them (or at least he pretends to agree with them) on the things they view as important.

The 2018 Midterms

OK, I'm not dead yet. The 2018 Midterms felt like kissing your sister at first. It was essentially a tie. But after thinking about it, taking the House was a much bigger deal than the GOP extending its control of the Senate.

So, a couple of thoughts after last night in no particular order.

Kim Davis was booted out of office in Kentucky. That has restored my faith in humanity.

Kris Kobach lost, to a woman, in Kansas.

The Republicans keep talking about turning New Jersey Red. Well, they have a long way to go. Democrats won 10 of 12 house seats, with one still up in the air. They also returned a flawed Bob Menendez to Washington over Bob Hugin with a good old fashion behind the barn butt whipping. Menendez won by almost 10 points. Imagine if the Democrats had put up a good candidate?

Staten Island elected a democrat to the House.

One last thing about Bob Hugin in Jersey just in case anyone had any doubts about the racism of even self proclaimed “moderate Republicans.”

Almost the first thing he did in his concession speech was blame his loss on Essex and Hudson Counties. Essex has a large Black population and Hudson has a large Hispanic population.

Well Bob, you also lost Bergen, Passaic, Union, Somerset, Middlesex, Mercer, Burlington and Camden counties. As a matter of fact, if you don’t count Essex and Hudson at all, you still lost by about 75,000 votes so kiss my...

Brett Kavanaugh

OK, I thought I had retired from this but I can't let this one go by.

Let's start with a simple admission that I'm not at all thrilled with Kavanaugh's legal outlook and I'm desperately trying not to let that color my judgement one way or the other.

We now have three accusations against BK from three different women.

1) That he, with another boy as witness, jumped on top of a girl in high school and essentially sexually assaulted her.

2) That he, at Yale, engaged in exposing himself to a girl at a party and forced his genitals on her.

3) Also I believe at Yale, he engaged with others to get girls inebriated and essentially organize gang rape sessions at house parties.

I believe accusation #1; I believe accusation #2; but I'm having serious problems accepting accusation #3. That strikes me as just way over the top and I find it difficult to believe that sort of action could be kept quiet.

Now when I say "I believe" what I mean is these sound like a reasonable scenario for a drunken rich boy. The third accusation just sounds too extreme.

I think the FBI should thoroughly investigate the accusations, make a report to the Senate and then the Senate should act as it sees fit.

However what I'm seeing is an attempt to railroad the nomination through and that leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Here's hoping the Senate is above that.

The World Cup 6

Oh wow, I whiffed on the last two games. Serves me right for not remaining true to France. I'm so ashamed.

Third Place Game
Belgium - 2 England - 0

Final
France - 4 Croatia - 2

So i finish a rather pathetic 10-6. Ah well, back to the drawing board.

Now we wait until 2022 and Qatar. I'm still a bit concerned about how the games are going to play out in the extreme heat there but these are professional athletes so I suppose they'll work it out.

Then in 20126 they're coming to my neck of the woods with the final rumored to be played in Metlife Stadium just down the road about 20 miles from me.

But the big news is there will be a new format. The tournament will be expanded to 48 teams in 16 groups of three. Two of the three teams will advance to a 32 team knockout round so the group play is simply to eliminate one team from each group.

This means a total of 80 games rather than 64, 48 games in group play and 32 in the knockout rounds but the finalists will play the same number of games 7, except there will be one more elimination game and one less group round game. The tournament will also finish in the same 32 days.

The US, Canada and Mexico will host using existing stadiums. Mexico and Canada will host 10 games each and the US will host the remaining 60 including the quarterfinals, the semifinals and the finals.

Now I have a Personal Seat License at Metlife Stadium and I'm supposed to get early access to event tickets but I'm not sure if this will include the World Cup. We shall see I suppose.

Trump and NATO

Let me make myself perfectly clear. In my opinion Trump has proven himself to be a classless buffoon.

But that doesn't mean he's always wrong but because he has no class, even when he's right, he goes about it wrong.

This is the case with him, NATO and Germany. I have no problem demanding that Germany and the other members of the alliance pay their fair share of the military costs. Germany in particular has been hiding behind the American military while spending domestically.

I've said that a few times myself.

But like I said, there's a right way and a wrong way to do things and the Orange Haired Buffoon always seems to manage to do it in what I would consider the wrong way.

It sort of makes you wonder if he's smarter than he looks and is doing it on purpose because he's convinced that being nice hasn't worked in the past so why should it work in the future?

The World Cup 5

The semifinals are done.

France - 1 Belgium - 0
Croatia - 2 England - 1

I told you Croatia has ice water in their veins and they showed it again coming back from an early 1-0 deficit. In the meantime France takes a big step closer.

At least that brings me up to 10-4.

Belgium vs England - I'm not sure how much these guys care about the third place game but I'm betting England wants it more than Belgium. I'm taking England.

France vs Croatia - Here it is ladies. The big one for all the marbles and the most prestigious title in the world. Decisions, decisions.  I've picked France and Croatia in every game so far. Croatia has won all six matches. France has won five with a 0-0 draw with Denmark.

I feel really guilty about this, but I'm taking Croatia.

The World Cup 4

So the quarter finals are done and the results are:

Uruguay - 0  France - 2
Brazil- 1  Belgium - 2
Russia 2 (3) Croatia - 2 (4)
Sweden - 0 England - 2 

That's 3-1 for this round. Now I'm going to whine a little bit. I SAID I wanted to take Belgium but I let my so-called brain overrule my instincts. Maybe I should stop doing that?

So overall a rather lackluster 8-4. I suppose I should have paid more attention to the Group Round. Anyway, moving on to the semi-finals.

France vs Belgium - I've going to stick with France. Belgium could do it, but I think the French are ready to go all the way this year so I'm sticking with them.

Croatia vs England - I'm thinking Croatia on this one. After winning both knockout round games in a shoot out so far, these guys must have ice water in their veins.

Russian Meddling

Russia has been interfering in elections since at least the first decade of the 20th century when they would bribe French newspapers to write favorable opinions of Russia and its alliance with France.

Modern technology has made it easier and it may not even cost as much because no bribes are required, just some social media accounts.

Of course, they’re probably also filtering money into GOP political campaigns as well.

It’s illegal for foreign governments to buy campaign ads or contribute money to political campaigns. It's also illegal for American politicians to knowingly accept such contributions.

The Russians have been doing it under fake identities and phony news organizations such as RT (formerly Russia Today), a Russian owned “news” agency that operates in Washington D.C. Media organizations are generally exempt from registering but RT was forced to register as a foreign agent in 2017. 

The Russians spent at least $100,000 on Facebook ads targeted at specific audiences who then magnified the result by spreading the misinformation planted and they’ve probably heavily donated to Citizens United protected “Social Welfare Organizations” that can legally spend up to 50% of its money on politics and don’t need to identify its donors.

 And you can be certain they’re still doing it. The Republicans don’t care because all of this illegal activity helps the GOP.

The Trump administration is clearly bought and paid for by the Russians and he’s paying them back. It’s as simple as that.

The problem as I see it is no matter how much evidence is provided that the GOP is essentially owned by the Russians, their base will still vote for them and refuse to ever accept they were ever duped.

The World Cup 3

So the Round of 16 is over. Results of the last four games.

Brazil - 2  Mexico - 0
Belgium - 3  Japan - 2
Sweden - 1 Switzerland - 0
Columbia - 1 (3) England - 1 (4)

I went 3-1 on those games bringing my total to 5-3. Of course it took Belgium coming all the way back from a 2-0 deficit and England breaking its recent penalty kick jinx to do it but hey, I'll take what I can get.

So, on to the Quarterfinals and as tough a group of games as you can imagine especially since nothing seems easy in this tournament.

Uruguay vs France - I'm not deserting France. Vive le France. Sur la victoire.

Brazil vs Belgium - I'd really like to take Belgium here but I don't think that's going to happen. So I have to go with Brazil.

Russia vs Croatia - Yeah, sure, I have no idea but my gut says Croatia.

Sweden vs England - England, all the way.

The World Cup 2

The results for the first four games.

 Uruguay - 2 Portugal - 1 
 France - 4 Argentina - 3
 Spain- 1 (3) Russia - 1 (4)
 Croatia- 1 (3) Denmark - 1 (2)

 So that leaves me 2-2. I thought sure I was going to lose two games on penalty kicks. That's one more than I got wrong in the entire elimination part of the tournament last year where I went 15-1.

I suppose that's what you get when you don't pay enough attention.

The World Cup

It's knockout round time!!!

I got lazy this year and waited for the Group Round to be over. The big shock of course is the elimination of Germany. That leaves the door for Brazil to get some revenge for its debacle four years ago.

Anyway, on to making a fool of myself.

Uruguay vs Portugal - I'm going with Portugal.

France vs Argentina - This is a really tough one but I'm sticking with my friends, France.

Brazil vs Mexico - I think this is a bad break for Mexico following a disappointing outing against Sweden so I'm going with Brazil.

Belgium vs Japan - I have to go with Belgium.

Spain vs Russia - Russia has been playing really well but I have to go with Espana.

Croatia vs Denmark - Hmm, decisions, decisions. I'm going with Croatia.

Sweden vs Switzerland - I'm taking Switzerland.

Columbia vs England - Oh boy. I'm sticking with England but I have a bad feeling about this game.

Justice Kennedy to Retire

Well that's not good. This was always the problem with the 2016 election, the fear that the winner would be able to mold the Supreme Court for decades to come.

Trump will be making a payment on his dept to the Religious Right by nominating an extreme conservative. You can be sure that whomever gets the nod it will place both abortion access and gay rights in jeopardy.

This will probably leave Chief Justice John Roberts as the possible voice of sanity on the court.

The McMartin Trial

I just finished watching an HBO movie about the McMartin trial in Southern California and it terrified me.

Basically the McMartin's ran a child care center and they and teachers working at the center came under suspicion of molesting the children under their care. Questionable techniques used by a social worker led to an avalanche of stories by hundreds of children.

The thing just mushroomed after that with accusations getting wilder and wilder, parents understandably ready to keel haul the accused, the media hyping the sensationalism of the charges without really considering the probability of the accusations and the prosecution under enormous pressure to get convictions.

After seven years and some $15 million spent by the state of California all charges either ended in acquittals or were dropped. Of cou rse the lives of all of the accused were essentially ruined.

How easy it can happen.

Accusations are not convictions. Innocent until proven guilty has to be the basis of our legal system or we might as well go back to mob rule.

This is the danger I see in the feminist #MeToo movement. Yes, jackasses that rape or molest women should be dealt with but it's too easy for this to become hysteria where accusation equates to guilt.

Either the system works or it doesn't and if it doesn't, then we damn well need to fix it.

The Separating of Immigrant Families

Tearing children away from their parents for the "crime" of wanting political asylum in the US is about a barbaric an action as I've seen performed by the US government in decades.

Worse is that the motive for this appears to be political leverage to get appropriations to build that idiotic border wall.

This is really unforgivable and worse is the litany of crap coming from administration officials. First we get told it isn't happening; then we get told it's happening but it's OK because it's legal; then we get told it's OK because it's justified in the Bible and finally Trump tells us it's all the Democrats fault.

Right wing pundits are tying themselves into knots. The wave followed the "no, it's all a lie by the media" party line then it morphed into something like "well, these people shouldn't be coming to the border so it's really their fault."

Then, the worst one, comes from a Fox & Friends host who says "And these are not -- like it or not, these aren't our kids. Show them compassion, but it's not like he is doing this to the people of Idaho or Texas."

WTF is wrong with these people?

Then of course there's the inevitable tu quoque whine of "well Obama did it too."

No, Obama didn't do it too and neither did Bush.

The Obama administration, overwhelmed by the sudden influx of illegal immigrants coming to the border from Central America, was putting whole families into detention centers until their case could be adjudicated by the courts but families were not broken up.

The problem was that the volume involved was so large that the wait stretched into months and the courts said that was unacceptable because there's this little thing about habeas corpus in the US Constitution.

So the policy was changed and people were released under the authority of the civil courts because entering the US illegally the first time is only a misdemeanor and the priority for deportation was given to people with felony convictions. Of course the problem with this "catch and release" approach was people often didn't show up for their civil hearing.

Trump's "zero tolerance" policy changed things and people trying to enter were arrested on criminal charges rather than civil charges. Essentially misdemeanors were promoted to the level of a felony.

Since you can't put children in adult jails, they were taken from their parents and put in detention centers.

Rightfully so there has been a firestorm over this.

The American Psychological Association sent a protest letter to the administration about the harm being done to children due to being separated forcibly from their parents.

All five surviving first ladies, Laura Bush, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rosalind Carter and even Trump's own wife have condemned the policy.

American and United Airlines have refused to fly immigrant children for the government after pressure from the airline attendants.

The King of Holland has condemned Trump.

The pope has condemned Trump.

 Any human being with an ounce of decency has condemned Trump.

 Anyone defending this policy should be ashamed of themselves.

Anyone remaining quiet about it should really look themselves in the mirror and ask themselves why this doesn't upset them?

Wishful Thinking

 I keep hearing how Trump has lost support. I think that's just wishful thinking.

From what I’ve seen Trump’s support has held fairly steady and there are in fact a number of reasons that people keep supporting him.

(1) The economy is good. Much of the good economy is due to Obama but Trump is getting the lion’s share of the credit.

(2) The tax cut did put some extra dollars in the pockets of ordinary Americans. The fact that the ultra rich were the primary beneficiaries and the deficit is ballooning which will probably result in an economic disaster down the road is just not on most folk’s radar.

(3) Feminists and other SJW types have created a lot of enemies and these people see Trump as standing up to them. Hell, even I don’t like feminists.

(4) Evangelical Christians support Trump because he is making their wildest fantasies come true in the culture wars.

(5) Muslims are disliked and feared in this country because the overwhelming majority of Americans have never met a Muslim and only know what they hear on the news and the internet. Trump has played on that dislike and fear.

(6) A lot of people have bought into the idea that immigrants take jobs away from Americans or have lowered wages for Americans by working for less. Trump also plays on that idea.

All of these “reasons” upon closer inspection are an illusion but most people are working too hard every day to do a lot of closer inspection. The biggest success of Trump and the Republicans has been to undermine the reputation of those, such as the media, that can do a closer inspection.

Trump and North Korea

I'm going to give Trump some credit here. he may not have resolved all the issues, and he probably gave up a lot more than he got, but meeting face to face with Kim Jong-Un was a BIG step in the right direction and the journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.

Agreeing to stop joint military exercises with South Korea without getting anything that we know of in return and not letting the South Koreans in on his plans looks more than a little weak.

Where did this guy even get the idea he was a great negotiator?

Paul Ryan Calls it Quits

There are days when you wake up to little rays of sunshine and this is one of those days.

Paul Ryan, Ayn Rand aficionado and hypocrite extraordinaire, will not run for re-election in November.

This doesn't mean another Republican won't step in and we could end up with someone worse as Speaker of the House, but for the moment, let's enjoy the image of Ryan going away.

Palestine

What is Palestine and who are the Palestinians? I see so many horseshit arguments essentially claiming the people who call themselves Palestinians have no claims to land in the Middle East.

The idea of 1,000 year ancestral lands is hyperbole at best but doesn't really enter into the picture. What occurred in the 19th century is irrelevant as well. What matters is what has occurred starting with the Mandate for Palestine in 1922 which is the first internationally recognized legal document associated with the area known as Palestine. What is Palestine? It is the area defined by the British and ratified by both the League of Nations and the United Nations. Who are the Palestinians? They are the descendants of some of the Arab population of Palestine in 1948 that fled the fighting. The name "Palestinian" didn't really come into widespread use until the 1960s. The Mandate for Palestine incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 in which the British government declared support for a Jewish homeland. The preamble of the Mandate states "Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." Note the "it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" part. Based upon 1914 Ottoman statistics there were approximately 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews in the areas of the Ottoman empire that made up the League of Nations definition of Palestine (there was no political subdivision called Palestine in the Ottoman Empire). The formation of a Jewish homeland was formalized in Article 2. Article 25 gave the Mandatory, Britain, with the approval of the league, the right to define the actual area covered by the Mandate which they did in the Trans-Jordan Memorandum in September of 1922. The memorandum excluded Trans-Jordan from articles 2, 4, 6, 7, 11 13, 14, 22, 23, and parts of the Preamble. The exclusion included all the articles of the Mandate concerning a Jewish National Home. The memorandum was also approved by the league so Jordan is not, and never was, intended to be the Palestinian homeland. It is important to remember that Britain, in the 1920s, was still operating according to its own imperial ideas and for its own perceived benefit. The League of Nations was little more than a toothless rubber stamp for those ideas. If Russia or the United States (or Germany for that matter) had been members of the league in 1922 perhaps things would have been different but neither of them were. From 1922 to the 1940s there was on again off again Jewish migration to the Palestine area where they bought and developed the land to everyone in the region's economic benefit. There was also what amounted to a three way pissing contest, sometimes violent, between Jews, Arabs and the British. Article 14 of the Mandate laid the following responsibility upon the British "A special commission shall be appointed by the Mandatory to study, define and determine the rights and claims in connection with the Holy Places and the rights and claims relating to the different religious communities in Palestine." This was something the British never got around to doing. Finally in 1947 Britain dumped the whole mess into the hands of the United Nations. At that time there were 1,180,000 Muslim Arabs, 143,000 Christian Arabs and 630,000 Jews in the area known as Palestine. The United Nations came up with a horse defined by committee and partitioned the area into an Arab controlled portion, a Jewish controlled portion and an international zone comprising Jerusalem and Bethlehem. The Arabs rejected the partition and the shooting started shortly after the UN passed the partition resolution and hasn't stopped since. It's a mess. It's an absolute mess. I'm not sure what makes sense but technically, based upon the UN partition plan, the people who call themselves Palestinians may well be entitled to a homeland. On the other hand, also based upon the UN partition plan, the Jews are entitled to a homeland. Both are entitled to live in peace. The sooner the two parties recognize these realities the sooner things can start moving toward a permanent solution.

Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff

Ah yes, the expose on the inner workings of the Trump White House.

I haven't read the book nor do I intend to. Instead, I'm doing my best to ignore the whole thing. Here's the problem, I would have no way of verifying what Wolff says in his book and I know nothing about the author so I can't even use strength of character as a justification for accepting his claims.

I can guarantee you this. Some of the claims are true; some of the claims aren't true and a lot of the claims are partially true but embellished.

You're not going to sell many books if you don't do a really good job of playing to the fears of Trump's opponents.

So this is at the very least the old poison pen trick. It's trial by accusation and it's very, very difficult to refute all of the claims. It would be like getting all the bad stuff back into Pandora's Box.

Even if one could manage to refute all the claims there would still be a lingering stain.

The book sold a million copies in four days. This guy Wolff must be laughing all the way to the bank.

The only thing it's going to accomplish is it will wider the wedge. To Trump's supporters it's just another example of a corrupt media out to get their guy. To Trump's critics it will serve to deepen the puzzlement over how anyone could have voted for him.

I don't need a book to tell me Trump is potentially dangerous. It looks to me like he has Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

People with NPD don't take criticism well, need constant attention and admiration and can act unpredictably if they're not treated as they think they deserve.

This is NOT the sort of guy you want in possession of the nuclear codes.

Have to love those F-52s

Trump has announced that Norway has purchased a number of F-52 aircraft from the US. The only problem is there is no such plane as the F-52.

Norway bought F-35s.

I would give him a pass on this one if Norway has purchased 52 F-35s but they only bought forty. Maybe Trump was thinking of the Norwegians estimate of the life cycle costs of 52 F-35s that was presented in the Canadian House of Commons?

In any event, I don't think it's too much to ask of the Commander in Chief to know the name of his country's premier fighter aircraft.

Except it isn't a fighter. The F-22 is a fighter. The F-35 is a flying sensor platform with muscle. It's capable of bringing to bear punishment from multiple platforms in a network cloud that covers land, sea and air. Plus it packs a wallop all its own with no help from anywhere else.

As time goes on the F-35's array of software will be finding new and ever more destructive ways of bringing maximum violence to bear.

Shithole Countries?

I've decided that there is a real danger of getting "used to Trump."

I've not going to get into a discussion of whether places like Haiti or some African countries are "shitholes, " whatever that might mean, or not.

The issue is the President of the United States should not be using that kind of language in a public meeting.

We all know Nixon cursed like hell in private, and I'll bet Johnson wasn't far behind them, but at least in public were perfect gentlemen.

Now, I've been known to use profanity when the situation called for it, but never in polite company. This guy is a pig and the simple fact that it seems like the countries of people of color are shitholes while those nice white population are just spiffy implies a much bigger problem.

This moron is a serious embarrassment but the fact that people voted for him, and will most likely vote for him again, is an even bigger embarrassment.

We Don't Need No Leviticus

So I recently encountered an apologist that dismissed the need to use Leviticus in condemning homosexuality because Jesus fulfilled the law. This was a way of getting around all the other stuff in the OT that Christians ignore.

Instead he declared that Romans 1: 26-27 and 1 Corinthians 9-10 condemn homosexuality and that's good enough for him.

Except both Romans and 1 Corinthians are written by Paul and we know that Paul often uses his own opinion because he tells us that himself.

Besides, Romans 1:26-27 refers to Pagans as explained in line 22 & 23 and no one is really sure what 1 Corinthians refers to.

Romans 1:22-23 "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles." 

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." 

The problem with this verse are the two words translated here as "men who have sex with men." This translation is from the NIV which also has a footnote which states definitively "The words men who have sex with men translate two Greek words that refer to the passive and active participants in homosexual acts."

Yeah, well, maybe. The two words are "malakos" and "arsenokoites." The KJV is actually better and translates these two words as "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind."

The NKJV is totally dishonest and translates them as "homosexuals," and in a footnote says "that is catamites" which are boy slaves kept for homosexual purposes, and "sodomites."

The NRSV translates them as "male prostitutes" and "sodomites."

So what do they really mean? "Malakos" literally means "soft" but there are examples of it being used to mean "effeminate" as well. Since Paul is listing people who aren't getting into the "kingdom of God" I suppose "effeminate would make more sense than "soft." But "effeminate" is not the same thing as homosexual.

The second word "arsenokoites" is a neologism. There is no evidence of it being used prior to 1 Corinthians and subsequent uses are usually when Paul is being referred to or sinful behavior is being listed. It's a compound word consisting of "male" and "bed" so literally a "male bed."

Since Paul was listing sinful behaviors once has to assume it's a behavior consisting of a male and a bed. But exactly what, no one really knows. Granted, that something related to homosexual sex is very possible, but you would think the All Knowing, All Powerful, Creator of Heaven and Earth could have come up with something a tiny bit clearer.

End of the Year

Well, 2017 is almost done.

I sort of didn't follow College Football this year. Getting lazy I suppose.

Elsewhere Roy Moore lost the election to Doug Jones and then went on a sore loser sort of tear blaming voter fraud and just about anything else for his loss. In the end he decided it was all the Democrats fault. Well, at least he got that one right.

Trump got his tax reform package but any relationship between it and what he's been promising is about non-existent. The one portion of it that really burns my ass is the 2.9% drop in the highest tax rate. If they had left that alone, I could have accepted the rest.

Oh well, onward and whatever. Happy New Year.

Roy Moore and Sexual Assault

Well it's been a long time since I bothered to write about anything and I'm so ashamed but this requires some words.

I've sort of been sitting back and watching accusation after accusation come out about men acting badly. There was Harvey Weinstein, C.K. Lewis, Al Franken, John Conyers and the ever popular Roy Moore.

Some have admitted acting inppropriately and some have denied it. The accusations also span the gamut from trying to be funny to trying to rape someone to taking advantage of a position of power.

So what do I think? I think it depends. It depends on what was supposedly done. Rape, attempted rape, actual assault and demanding sex because you hold a position of authority over someone are either illegal, or should be illegal, and a nice vacation with Bubba as a cellmate strikes me as appropriate.

On the other hand, jokes in bad taste or misreading signals, as long as the misreading doesn't go too far, require no more than a sincere apology and then we can move on.

This of course ssumes the individual owns up to the act or it can be proven in  court.

So what about Roy Moore?

Look, Roy Moore is an asshole and his ideas are even worse but, at least so far, he has denied the accusations and the last time I looked you were still innocent until proven guilty.

Besides, the age of consent in Alabama is 16 and all of the accusations except one involve girls 17 or older. Hey, a 30 year old guy chasing 17 year olds is creepy but not illegal unless he engaged in rape, attempted rape or actual assault which would need to be proven and, at least so far, it hasn't been.

The accusation from the 14 year old, if there was actual sexual contact is a different story. Under Alabama law that would be sexual assault but again, it would hve to be proven. An accusation is not enough.

I wouldn't vote for Moore in any event because I find his politics abhorrent but if I was going to vote for him before the accusations came out, I don't think mere accusations would, or should, change my mind.

Fat Acceptance

There is apparently this thing going around called "Fat Acceptance" or "Body Positivity" which takes the position that you can be beautiful and healthy at ANY weight.

I first tripped over it indirectly when I encountered a video on YouTube of women breaking their scales with hammers. I say women because the movement appears to be overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, composed of females.

I have to admit that I'm baffled by the very idea.

No, if you're morbidly obese you're not beautiful especially if I have to sit next to you on a plane or at the theater,

But we need to be careful quoting "overweight" statistics based upon the BMI. The BMI has all sorts of issues. For instance how can men and women use the same formula? Men have a larger percentage of muscle and muscle weighs more. I'm 6'1" and 192 pounds. That's a BMI of 25.3 so I'm "overweight, something that no one has ever accused me of.

Some folks argue that this is really a discussion about health rather than appearance.

If you really want to turn the discussion toward health then you have to consider that women, because of how they put on fat, can actually handle being more overweight than men. Similarly as one ages one tends to gain weight as their BMR goes down but it doesn't mean they're unhealthy. These are two more issues with the one size fits all BMI.

The bottom line is that weight and it's correlation with health can be complicated. Obesity on the other hand, a BMI over 30, is bad even with as doubtful a scale as the BMI. Morbid obesity, a BMI over 40, is death walking. There's the real danger in this fat acceptance idea. The absurdity that you can be even morbidly obese without detrimental affects to your health.

I do notice that most of the fat women championing this cause are still pretty young and youth can compensate for a multiplicity of ills.

Life is a lottery. It's like a game of Russian Roulette where it all depends upon the luck of the spin. But if you're morbidly obese, it's like playing with five chambers loaded rather than only one.

Las Vegas

A man decides to take a dozen or so of his 42 guns to a room at the Mandalay Bay and then opens fire at a crowded country music concert.

This is nuts.

The big question is why?

'He didn't appear to be a religious whack job or have strong political associations. There was no outward sign of mental illness although some statements by his girlfriend that he would lie in bed screaming and moaning could have pointed in that direction.

He lived in Mesquite which about an hour and a half from Vegas and reportedly engaged in high stakes poker. But I haven't seen anything saying he ran up big debts.

His father was apparently a nut, a psychopath that spent time on the FBI's most wanted list who was captured not far from where the shooting took place after a gun battle with police.

Stephen Paddock's attack on the concert crowd left 58 people dead and 500 injured. I suppose the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

This has re-opened the issue of gun control and even the NRA has indicated they might be willing to accept some additional restrictions on firearm accessories including items which allow semi-automatic weapons to be converted into fully automatic weapons.

I'm a radical on gun control. This formula is 100% accurate. NO_GUNS = NO_GUN_DEATHS. If you ever figure out why it's wrong, give me a call,

So what about those Confederate statues?

Well, it depends.

People don't fight other people. Political entities fight other political entities for political or economic reasons.

Soldiers simply fight to defend their homes and families. With some exceptions, soldiers are the greatest victims of war.

I'm opposed to monuments that celebrate the Confederacy itself. The Confederacy existed and went to war for the simple economic reason of defending slavery. This historical revisionism about state's rights is bunk. The only state's right they cared about was the right to keep slavery legal.

As for monuments memorializing the soldiers that fought for their homes and families, such as those at Gettysburg, those I'm inclined to accept.

Does this includes statues of Confederate Generals such as Robert E. Lee? Yes it does. Does it include the carvings at Stone Mountain Georgia? No it doesn't. Because in addition to Lee and Stonewall Jackson the carving includes Jefferson Davis. Davis wasn't a soldier but the top of the political structure of the Confederacy.

What do I base this on?

First, because on Christmas Day 1868 President Johnson extended full amnesty to Confederate soldiers and restored to them full citizenship rights. He didn't make an exception for officers.

Second, in 1958 Congress passed Public Law 85-425 related to the pension rate for the widows of veterans. This law defined "veteran" for the purposes of the law to include "a person who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War…”

Also in 1958, Congress passed Public Law 85-811 dealing with the procurement of headstones for veterans. This law stated “That the Secretary of the Army is authorized and directed to furnish, when requested, appropriate Government headstones or markers at the expense of the United States for the unmarked graves of the following…” The first category listed is “Soldiers of the Union and Confederate Armies of the Civil War.”

In neither of these two laws does Congress make an exception for officers, high ranking or otherwise.

So while Congress never specifically declared that soldiers of the Confederacy are US veterans, the implication of these two laws is that they should be considered as such.

Extra Biblical Evidence for Jesus

I've done this before but I'm going to do it again in order to provide a safe place to stick my most recent thoughts on the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.

The argument is not that there is no evidence, the argument is that the evidence is weak and better explanations exist for the emergence of Christianity than it originated with a historical figure. I keep running into Youtube videos repeating the same old supposed evidence. Tacitus - There is a major flaw with the Tacitus passage. Pontius Pilate wasn't a procurator, he was a prefect. This makes it almost certain that Tacitus did not get his information from official Roman records. Tacitus was writing in the early 2nd century about the Emperor Nero who had been dead for over 40 years. Tacitus is listing all of the attempts by Nero to dispel the rumors that he was responsible for the great fire of Rome in 64 C.E. He lists these items and ultimately gets to Nero supposedly trying to pin the blame on the Christians. "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace." "Called Christians by the populace" implies he is in fact working from hearsay or common knowledge. Accuracy in describing the Christians or their beliefs is not one of Tacitus' priorities here as it's just one more example of Nero trying to shed blame. Lucien - He is describing Christians and their beliefs. He never mentions Jesus by name. The beliefs of Christians are not in doubt. Suetonius - The position that "Chrestus" is the misspelled title "Christus" of someone not in Rome at the time is no more likely than it is the proper name of someone that was in Rome. Thallus - This is simply Julius Africanus arguing that Thallus is wrong about a solar eclipse he records. Why should anyone believe Africanus over Thallus?  Pliny the Younger - Like Lucien, Pliny is talking about Christians and their beliefs. Again, Christian beliefs are not in doubt. As for their willingness to die, people are dying today in the Middle East for Allah and the promise of 72 virgins. Mara Bar-Sepion - The letter mentions the men of Samos burning Pythagoras but there is no record of this happening. How Pythagoras dies is unknown so how reliable should one consider the rest of the letter? Josephus - Then there's Josephus. Josephus was a Pharisaic Jew. He would never have called Jesus the Messiah so if it actually says that then it is almost certain that the main passage is at least a partial interpolation. If he was recording the beliefs of others then the entire passage is hearsay isn't it?  Yes there is evidence but it isn't very strong and the silence of people such as Philo of Alexandria is deafening. Personally I was always of the position that Jesus was a historical character despite the weak evidence. Recently however Richard Carrier has been winning me over a bit so now I have to say I'm uncertain. The web site you reference presents nothing new. In order to accept that as sufficient evidence one would already have to be a believer.

Charlottesville

Thing just keep going from bad to worse.

I admit that I've been a bad boy. I've haven't done any posts because they're too depressing but I can't let this one go by.

The background is a slow but steady movement to tear down monuments to the Confederacy across the south. The complaint is that they glorify the defense of slavery and slavery itself. The defense is that they are simply representative of "Southern Heritage."

You know, like lynchings and Jim Crow laws.

There is a statue in Charlottesville Virginia that some people want taken down. White Nationalists, including Neo-Nazis and the KKK, emboldened by a Trump White House, rallied in solidarity to protest any removal of Confederate monuments.

Left Wing elements, including Black Lives Matter and a group known as Antifa (Anti-fascist), rallied to counter protest.

Now, I wasn't there; I'm too old for that sort of stuff, so I really don't know what went on and neither do I care. When you put two such groups of people together there are going to be sparks, fist fights and flying debris. The Charlottesville police force would probably quickly find itself out of ideas for keeping things under control.

That seems to be just about what was going on but then something else occurred. A 20 year old right wing supporter from Ohio drove his car into the counter protest crowd killing one women and injuring 19 others.

He's been arrested and is being held without bail to face a 2nd degree murder charge in addition to a dozen or so other charges.

This reminds me of the 1960s and the Civil Rights and Vietnam War clashes but it's different, Those were conflicts surrounding mostly a single issue. This strikes me as a conflict about cultures and covers a broader range of issues.

The other thing that is different, and dangerous, is that we have a major political party in the Republicans that appears to be supportive of right wing radical politics.

Now, I'm going to be honest. I'm not sure if the GOP actually agrees with the extreme right wing or just wants their votes. I used to think it was the latter but I'm no longer so sure about that.

Worse is we have a president that first declares that blame is on both sides, then declares he's opposed to white nationalism, then declares that blame in on both sides and finally declares that there are some "very fine people" among the white nationalist demonstrators.

Someone seriously needs to put a muzzle on Trump. Every time he opens his mouth he sticks his head up his rear end.

Categories of Trumpettes

And now for a completely unscientific analysis.

In my experience I have found that there are two main categories of Trumpettes.

Category #1 — The Greedy. These are people who make a lot of money. They work hard and either through talent or luck have managed to place themselves in a position of wealth. These folks don’t like paying taxes and they don’t like it even more than the rest of us don’t like it because they think their money is going to help people too lazy to work for themselves.

They think they should pay a smaller share of taxes even though they benefit from government activity far more than people of more modest means. If nothing else they have more to lose. When I talk to these people I can’t help thinking of the Phil Ochs song “The Ringing of Revolution.”

“In a building of gold, with riches untold,
lived the families on which the country was founded.
And the merchants of style, with their vain velvet smiles,
were there, for they also were hounded.
And the soft middle class crowded in to the last,
for the building was fully surrounded.
And the noise outside was the ringing of revolution.”

Category #2 — The Spiteful. These are your uneducated white working and lower middle class folks who struggle to pay the mortgage, put food on the table and meet unexpected bills yet they have enough money to buy guns, cigarettes and cases of beer on a regular basis.

They claim to be highly religious but if they ever met the real Yeshua bar Yosef they would be horrified at both his appearance and his ideas.

They think Christianity is under attack by the universities and educated people in the cities and suburbs. To a certain extent they’re right about this but they don’t understand why that’s the case. They don’t understand that hostility to religion is a backlash from Christians trying to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else whether it’s abortion restrictions or raising massive stone tablets of the 10 Commandments on public grounds.

These people look around and think they see blacks, Hispanics, immigrants and basically everyone but them being helped by handouts from the government using their hard earned tax dollars. These people will vote for anyone who will put THOSE PEOPLE in their place even if it means hurting themselves.

Like I said, this is an entirely unscientific analysis based upon my own observations and probably significantly colored by my own prejudices. But I don’t apologize for that. People in these two categories are never going to see the farce and danger the rest of the world sees. One group is blinded by their greed and the other by their hate.

The Obama Economy

It never cease to amaze me when people talk about how horrible the economy was under Obama. The latest criticism had to do with the fact that the number of people within 125% of the poverty line increased under the Obama presidency while real income declined.

They manage this slight of hand by comparing the numbers from 2007, BEFORE the great recession to the numbers near the end of the Obama presidency in 2015 while ignoring everything that happened in between.

If you think the economic meltdown under Bush had nothing to do with those numbers then you need to have your head examined.

The percentage of people below 125% of the poverty level in 2007 was 17.0%. Thanks to the 2008 Great Recession the number ballooned to 19.8% in 2011 and then dropped to 17.9% by 2015. Looks to me like Bush was the problem and Obama was the solution.

Now let's look at real income. The real median household income in the US in 2007 was $57,423. Again, thanks to the Great Recession it dropped to $52,666 in 2012 but by 2015 it was back up to $56,516. So again, the problem was Bush and the solution was Obama. Rather than bad mouthing the man based upon no facts, maybe next time people should check where the real problem was.

When Obama took office the stock market was at 9,000, unemployment was at 10%, the economy was SHRINKING and the deficit was over $1 trillion. When he left office the stock market was over 19,000 (Nov 2016), unemployment was down to 4.7%, the economy was growing and the deficit had been reduced to around $570 billion.

All of this while avoiding a double-dip recession.