The Un-Democratic Nature of US Political Reporting

On January 20, 2021, Joseph Robinette Biden took the oath of office for the Presidency of the United States and in that moment became indirectly responsible for 330 million Americans regardless of who they voted for.  Like every President before him, he swore to uphold the law and protect all Americans. The question he likely asks himself now is How do I protect democracy from the very industry that has turned it into a mash up of polling points, societal  trends, and party loyalty? 

Today's media (social, advertising, print, radio, and television) needs to be "schooled" in what democracy is and how democracy works. Here are a few things they might have missed in their Civics class. 

What is Democracy?

First off, democracy is not about the individual but about a nation that chooses to live under one set of rules for the benefit of everyone. Presidential approval ratings are selfish reminders of what has divided this country. It is not whether people like Biden but whether they see improvement at the end of his four-year term. Shows like The View , Meet the Press and other opinion based talk shows encourage viewers to take a short term, me-me-me view of political problems that cannot be fixed with simple legislation.  Today's media should educate and explain while leaving personal preferences to what takes place in the voting booth.

Next, democracy is not about voting rights or filibusters but about how many people are on the the ballot. Coming from a monarchy, the founding fathers thought having any choice was a luxury. What good does it do to register more voters and make voting easier when there is only one name on the ballot?  No one is reminding Bernie Sanders that he pledged to start a grass roots organization dedicated to preparing candidates to take on the role of elected officials. The Obamas are not working to educate younger voters about how to evaluate candidates. Both parties sow party loyalty based on hot-button topics and push a leftover agenda from past administrations. As if time is stuck in some strange moment that long ago ceased to exist, Congress attacks problems with the same solutions that have been used for over 200 years. Not learning from the past, today's media worships the well meaning but untrained and clueless candidate. These overnight breakout successes like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris and yes, Donald Trump, are better news stories than seasoned professionals that have worked their way up from local government.  What message does that send to voters, and is it really all that surprising that these STARS of the campaign trail fail to do anything more than make headlines? How does it feel to gaslight the public with a constant diet of celebrity-style hype and soft-ball questions?

Finally, democracy is not a popularity contest but about making informed choices without fear, peer pressure or manipulation.  Contrary to VP Harris's take on this country's standing as a free society, our simplistic form of government pales in comparison to some democracies.  While our government declares a winner and sets up a combative environment which rarely achieves much, other countries open the ballot to multiple parties and require the majority party to come to a consensus BEFORE the election is certified. Failure to do so nullifies the election and it begins again. As mass media focuses on the best news story and the most supportive advertisers, they fail to grasp how they warp the voting process in a way that is far more dangerous than requiring a picture ID or limiting voting hours. Their focus on an ever changing future robs the public of the present by distracting them from what is important in the here and now. That isn't democracy. That's propaganda. 

A Bit of History

President Biden is not the only president to be concerned about the integrity of the American election process.  

In March of 2001, just three months after Al Gore lost his final 2000 election challenge, former President Jimmy Carter received the first Jonathan Myrick Daniels '61 Humanitarian Award, at Virginia Military Institute in Lexington VA.  

For a small town reporter, this was a once-in-a-lifetime event.  As Carter explained his work establishing democratic governments around the world, he made a simple but blunt statement about the condition of American elections.  Whether it was part of his acceptance speech or the questions he answered following the ceremony, I do not remember but he very clearly stated his organization would not take on the American political process because it failed to meet the high standards that his group had for democratic leadership. It was such an unexpected and confusing comment that many compared notes before reporting it to readers.  I have no way of knowing if he changed his assessment of this situation or not.

Twenty years and five national elections later, the United States has failed to make any meaningful changes in the political process-- a process that benefits the few and subjugates  the many. Carter, in being a single term president, knew, all too well, the role that television and political reporting had in putting a Hollywood actor named Ronald Reagan in the White House. The same frenetic focus on poise and photo-ops overshadows today's political reporting. Carter brought peace to a region of the World, even for just a short time. Reagan took a global energy crisis and inflation and turned it into a massive change in the tax code that the country has yet to recover from. Which was better?

If journalists want to champion democracy instead of damage it, they need to change their focus from agency ratings, high dollar salaries, Twitter followers and website clicks and begin doing the hard work of report the ugly reality of the election system. Here are a few questions they might begin to ask. 

1. Why is the United States one of the few countries that allows political organizations and fund raising to be considered non-profit or charitable organizations?

2. What percentage of PAC funding goes into supporting the candidate, family and staff? (Remember John Edwards and his hair cuts?)

3.  Is the minimum support rule required to enter debates a form of voter suppression because these events choose to squash the viewpoints of people who mainstream media doesn't give the time of day?

4.  Explain to the public the difference between the one vote-one person process that occurs on election day and the loosely monitored polling methods used through social media. There is no comparison and the results amount to misinformation and voter manipulation. Will agencies be embarrassed to admit they are not a fair representation of national demographics?

Before criticizing any elected officials, media has an obligation to make sure their findings are as objective and factual as possible. Like CEO who blames everyone else for the company's failures, Congress encourages mass media to distract the attention from their irresponsibility. Perhaps that is what voters should understand is the real form of voter suppression.  

Hey, Senator Romney: What's Wrong With "Transforming America"?

Because of host Chuck Todd's rather personal take on the three big news topics (Politics, Climate Change, and Covid-19), my direct knowledge of Meet the Press has dropped off dramatically during the pandemic. It seems I should have been watching on Sunday Morning (1/15/2022) as Senator Mitt Romney offered his insight into President Joe Biden's "bad year". 

Presumably feeling he could speak for the entire population, Romney commented to the show's viewers that Biden was not elected to "transform America".  With all due respect Senator, that is exactly what so many of us did expect and if the two political parties stopped thinking that elections were all about them, they would have realized that "transformation" is exactly what voters have wanted for three decades.  Normal is a dysfunctional group of 535 individuals that simply go from one election campaign to another.  Each time, the hope of America is that we have elected someone with the creativity and skill to ditch the jobs mindset from FDR's passe New Deal era. Biden understands that he needs to go big or go home.  It is our two party system that keep refuses to be creative enough to make that happen.

The "Crazies" Are Loose in Congress

From the perspective of a Washington outsider, each party has its share of "crazies" as you have tagged those who fail to adhere to the status quo.  Have you not realized that Nancy Pelosi has been like a woman possessed in her mission to do anything that would go against a Republican agenda. There is no civility, cooperation or even thought about anything but how to get back at the other side. That's not normal. That's pathetic.  

Americans Deserve More than "Normal"

This country achieved zero unemployment in the mid-1960s. Instead of shifting to higher wages, less production and fewer work hours to keep the numbers up, the country did what it had always done--opened the borders to immigrants willing to work for less.  The result was the same as it had been the 1800s. Racial unrest, political division and a working class that was hard pressed to develop wealth.  Biden repeated that pattern because his party insisted on it. It is not anymore popular with the public now than it was in the 1960s.

This oppressive jobs mindset is not new. Congress applauds companies who are innovative in their business models but refuses to make it part of the overall fabric of working America.  Unable to recognize that voters say they want jobs because that's all they know, elected officials prefer to secure their political positions and focus on wealth creation even though it only exacerbates the problem. 

What Might Transformation Look Like?

It is time for both parties to focus on their country instead of elections. Is winning or losing an election really all that important?  Consider being a responsible leader and work on the following. 

• Praise the States (Yes, all of them) - The Federal government has pushed their responsibilities onto the state and local government for years. It then criticized them for dealing with the challenge in their own way. The states got us through COVID, not the federal government. Change Congresses attitude and you might get more cooperation.
• Ratify the Equal Rights Amendment - The Federal government's focus on protecting tiny sectors of the population increases division. Both parties do it. Republicans protect religions, big business and gun rights. Democrats protect ethnic groups, poverty (yes poverty not those who are impoverished) and cities. No one protects the average citizen who does the work and keeps this country going. Congress created this divided public, they need to come together and signal that they will protect us all. 
  
• Fix the Immigration problem - Bringing in immigrants as a labor source to undermine the rest of the population was heinous a century and a half ago. It still is. Abusing them to keep profits high and labor costs low is not admirable. As for DACA, that is an easy fix if you would just do it (See DACA Citizenship: It Could Have Been So Easy )
• Regulate, Don't Legislate -  While Congress is spending time debating laws we don't need, the federal government fails to do what it was suppose to do--keep us honest.  Renaming mountains does not improve the environment. Recalling thousands of pounds of foods and drugs for a misprinted label does not make us safer. It makes us poorer--both in spirit and financially. Regulatory agencies long ago became instruments of economy growth. It now falls to citizens to  stand up for themselves against businesses Congress promoted.  Protect consumers instead of turning safety into an economic policy.
  
• Stand Up to the Climate Change Lobby- Climate change is a direct result of the World using the environment as a revenue stream.  The EPA has been more responsible for changes in the atmosphere than any carbon-based molecule (See  Air Pollution's the Answer: How Clean Air Policy Compromised the Planet and Public Health )
• Stop Worrying about the Stock Market- The Stock Market does not put food on the table or educate children to with real information.  Before the Stock Market became the ruler by which economic growth was measured, banking favored local depositors. Now they are almost an inconvenience.  Switch focuses and inflation will drop.  
  

If Republicans and Democrats were to come together and change their focus to lifestyle rather than wealth, America would be transformed. Biden has the negotiation skills. Are you and your fellow Republicans willing to be part of the process?  

Voting Rights 2022: Senators, Do You Know What You Are Doing?

Update: 1/18/2021 As the Senate debates voting rights, advocates are rushing to provide documentation that the US is on the verge of another election crisis. Published findings vary based the biases of the news outlet or advocacy group.  It is interestingly that states listed as "Restrictive" make up less than 20% of the country.  In most cases, what classifies as "Restrictive" is how convenient elections are not how fair or secure the process. Unlike the Jim Crowe era, property ownership, literacy, ethnic background and gender are not cited by any of these studies as factors for denying the right to vote.  The danger to democracy is making voting so simple that it becomes meaningless. 

With millions (if not billions) of pages on record that detail how all levels of government work, it is understandable that the average citizen has a minimal knowledge of the rules. Nevertheless, the founding fathers anticipated that unintended consequences were a very real possibility in a representative democracy. Generally speaking, a handful of statutes meant to protect elected officials from honest mistakes, now, seem to contribute to the gridlock, financial obsession and poor decisions common in Congress.  

As President Biden lobbies for another landmark (???) voting rights bill, the question has to be "Do Senators know what they are doing AND what might be the negative impact of this legislation on future elections?"  History tells us, good legislation comes from forethought and consensus, not deals. Bad legislation comes from quick action, personal agendas and legal protection that make officials brazen and irresponsible. 

Why Support the Filibuster?

For discussion here, the  provision of executive privilege (also known as qualified immunity) and a thinly worded non-binding clause that releases future officials from maintaining laws which are no longer financially or socially viable come to mind. Together these two provisions have been held up in the courts to the point that officials cannot be held accountable for much.  It is the provision of qualified immunity that appears to have emboldened several republicans to take actions meant to decertify several state and local elections.  With a do-over clause firmly in the hands of any future official, current officials all too frequently feel justified in passing questionable and often unnecessary legislation for special interest groups.  

In the end, it is the filibuster that only stands between a power driven political party (Democrat or Republican) and serves the majority of American interests. 

Shaming is NOT Professional Behavior

Since the quick demise of the Build Back Better spending package just before Christmas, high ranking Democratic leaders including the President, Vice-President and both Congressional leaders have chosen to resort to the unprofessional teenage tactic of shaming the American people.  VP Harris first told the country it would no longer have the respect of the World and then yesterday, voiced what seemed to be a personal admonishment of stubborn members of congress. Neither plays well for a country that has listened to this prattle for the better part of six years. Threats and recriminations by Schumer, Pelosi and Biden have done little to move the discussion to a more amicable tone. 

New York Times Photo

Blank Check Legislation

While polls are not concerned about Why? Biden's administration has such low polling numbers, this average citizen would say a contributing factor is a "Blank Check/ Trust Me" mentality.  Far too many pieces of legislation are passed without taking the time to discuss how they would work.  This Voting Rights bill as well as the other bills which have foundered during this past year all seem long on promises and short on details.  Some outcomes are a given and are likely to cause widespread difficulties for states which have a long history of fair and safe elections. It should be remembered that nearly three-quarters of the adult population voted in 2020 and no widespread corruption was found anywhere.  Those figures alone question whether this is necessary legislation or just political posturing. 

Federal Micro-rmanagement is Costly and Ineffective

From the implementation of Environmental Protection laws and federally mandated education programs to administration of Medicaid, Welfare and Food Stamps, federal oversight has been costly and bureaucratically top heavy for states.  Rarely providing full funding for the programs that it institutes, local businesses and citizens pay more in local taxes in order to comply with the expense of paperwork and staffing. There is nothing in the Voting Right Act of 2021 that would not put additional burden on the states.  Here are some findings to consider before support a such Blank Check legislation. 

• Making Election Day a National Holiday will not change accessibility but could increase errors. Election officials, as government employees, would have the day off. Those that  are responsible for the security of the election process could open the door to countless challenges if they did not perform their duty. Is this a What was Congress thinking moment?
  

• Most polling sites are open at least 12 hours out of the day, some longer  There are very few people who cannot arrange their schedule to vote if they chose to do so. Remember 150 million people voted in 2020. 

• Mandating mail-in ballots for everyone is costly and time consuming. Mail-in ballots have the greatest chance of being mishandled as we saw in the aftermath of the 2020 election. 

• Many states already meet the minimum standard publicized by advocates of this legislation. As an accomplished negotiator, would it not be a better use of the President's time to target the few states who do not offer these provisions and move toward a common basis of understanding.  Why make all states suffer but allow more conservative states to come around to a more moderate in their own time. Residents of these states have the right to hold their own lawmakers accountable without intervention from the federal government.
  

From what seems to be in print, there is nothing in this bill that offers any real protection to voters that is not already available.  Why our elected officials feel the need to push their will on 330 million people when all that results is more problems makes little sense. American citizens are neither dumb nor mindless but they are tired of being characterized as bigots, racists, gun toting vigilantes, or uneducated puppets.  Until Congress shows respect for Americans and ignores the polls and studies, citizens will continue to be unimpressed with both political parties.  

January 6, 2021: Lesson for Those Pushing Federal Voting Rights Control

 ** This is a copy of a Letter to the Editor I sent to The News-Gazette in Lexington, VA (Published 1/13/2021).  In the last year, my viewpoints have not changed.  I still feel betrayed by the person that was duly elected by this locality.  While I did not vote for Rep Ben Cline, it is my fervent opinion that he owes me the same respect as those who voted for him. Having worked with Ben at the state level since he followed in  Bob Goodlatte's steps, it is this lack of respect for opposing side that keeps questioning this younger Republican. 

Twice in the last 20 years, Republicans were able to put their candidate in the White House without winning the popular vote.  I suppose they thought they could easily challenge the 2020 election to again tip the results in their favor. 

January 6th Capitol Riot Image

As the Senate leadership pushes for more federal control of national elections, January 6th is one of many reasons why the federal government should leave voting oversight to the states.  Not only was Donald Trump able to use his influence as President to enlist the help of hundreds of average citizens (believing they were doing the right thing) who now have federal charges against them, but he also convinced more than a handful of elected officials and government employees to abandon their oath and side--not for the good of the country--put for his personal gain.   Few know of the "delayed" stimulus checks that dropped into the accounts of new Social Security recipients on election day as if they were being bribed to vote in a set manner. Had it not been for state and local election boards who did their job according to the law, we might be in a very different place. 

Certainly changes to the Electoral College are long overdue, but control of elections should remain the  responsibility of the states  Voting should be easily accessible but it should not be easy to do.  A second layer of oversight will not make voting safer, but does have the potential to increase the opportunities of corruption. 

Dear Editor;

Today is January 6, 2021. It is early. I am worried. By the end of the day, will the USA still be the largest democracy on Earth or will it be the latest power to topple due to the efforts of a single charismatic person who has a fondness for power?

As Americans, we do not understand how close we are to losing our place at the top. We  have ignored a years-long, systematic  challenge to our election process with one and only one purpose in mind - to put a dictator in office.  I am ashamed to say that my representatives, State Del. Ronnie Campbell and Congressman Ben Cline, assisted this effort.

By definition, a dictator rises to power through unconventional or forced means and stays in power by keeping those who support him happy. Per Wikipedia, an estimated 50 countries are considered dictatorships. Leaders have titles such as President or Prime Minister. The countries have constitutions, elections, and regional and local governments - just like we do. The only difference is that, in some way, the one in power is able to control the outcome.

A month ago,  NBC12 affiliate in Richmond reported that Cline (6th House) was one of 120 representatives that signed on to a Texas-based Supreme Court challenge. SCOTUS made quick business of the case by saying it “has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections”.

On Jan. 5, WFXR.com reported that Campbell (Va 24th) had signed a letter to VP Mike Pence recommending the House throw out  Virginia’s election results. Such a challenge would also have needed the support of a US Senator to move forward which it do not have.

Neither action appears to be valid under scrutiny.  By supporting measures that have now been rejected by countless courts, the Electoral College and hopefully Congress itself, these two men have remained loyal to the party and its most conservative donors. At the same time, they have avoided the difficult decisions that are required of their office.  Is that what we voted for? Is being a successful public servant nothing more than promising action that is not allowed by law then saying “I tried”?

 

I suppose time will tell.

Media Bias: Would Lois Lane Approve of Modern Reporting

Sadly, the end-of-the-year news coverage trickles down to a steady stream of depressing media posts highlighting the many challenges humans have failed to solve in the previous year.  Regardless of whether it is a printed newspaper, daily news show or radio highlights, the focus is the same--a litany of barely resources articles aligned more with personal perspectives than real life concern.  As I scrolled through coverage by TIME, The Daily Beast, NPR (National Public Radio), The Hill, NBC  and others, a thought came to me. Would Lois Lane Approve of Modern Reporting? 

Original Cast Superman TV Series

While the iconic character has changed with the times (no flowered hat, tailored suit with floral hankie in the pocket and cute pumps for the CW's version in Superman and Lois), Lois Lane represents what good journalists once aimed to become.  From the time she first appeared in DC comics in June 1938, Lois might have been a hapless damsel in distress but she was anything but lacking in her skills as a reporter.  Often rescued because she did her job without fear, Lois shows a tenacity for the truth modern journalism rarely has.  With nothing more than a note pad and her own brain, Lois not only wrote her own copy but did the research and interviews necessary to check and double check the facts before going to press.  She understood her topic on more than a cursory level and would never have submitted a story that she, herself, could not defend.

My guess is that she would be greatly disappointed in an industry that now depends so heavily on TikTok, Facebook, and marketing press releases for content. She felt an obligation to the public and she would expect today's reporters to explain instead of repeating a political or socially accepted perspective.  She would expect reporting--not hearsay.

As the year ends, I can only imagine how Lois Lane would cover topics related to climate change and the pandemic.  Nevertheless, here are a few notes that might be in Lois Lane's notepad if she were reporting today. 

Covid -19

• Computerized records cannot tell the difference between a patient admitted for elective surgery or one needing treatment for Covid symptoms if both test positive for the virus.  This means hospitalizations based on simple data act as exaggerations of the pandemic and look worse than they really are/were. 
• There are 113 COVID-19 vaccines currently being developed worldwide.The three versions used in the US may not be the most effective, just the ones this administration has approved.
  
• As of December, 2021, the actual amount paid to pharmaceutical companies for pandemic supplies is unknown. In support of an already lucrative business, government expenditures to drug companies will likely rival the bank bailouts of 2008-2010 with no strings attached. 
• The Pfizer shot is nearly 4 times as expensive as the Johnson&Johnson shot but does not show any significally better control of the illness.
• There is no way to specifically tell how a person becomes infected with Covid. An air borne virus is just that--air borne. Persecution of the unvaccinated is like all prejudice--rooted in political hype and personal fear.  
  

Climate Change

• A 1.5 degree C difference is less than 3 degrees F. The rate at which ice melts at 35 degrees as opposed to 32 degrees is extremely slow. (Remember that Thanksgiving turkey that took a week to thaw out in your 38degree refrigerator? Enough said) Keep in mind that most of the world's glaciers and ice packs do not even reach 32 degrees-ever. 
  
• Bill Gates wants you to believe the 150 year old notes of a college profession as proof of global warming. He fails to mention that 2+ billion computers, which did not exist in the 1950s (climate change baseline), are giving off heat every time they are used. Which makes more sense--a tiny molecule of gas that has been around since the beginning of time or computers generating heat that has nowhere to go?
  
• According to product testing guides, an electric stove is less efficient and gives off more heat into the surrounding air than a gas stove.  And yet, gas stoves are being banned.
  
• There are an estimated 300 million street lamps which give off heat every night even if they are solar powered. Each gives off some heat increases the air temperature of the World.
  
• Any moving part causes friction and heat regardless of how it is powered. This heat dissipates into the surrounding air and raises ambient temperature. 
  
• An iceberg that breaks off from a glacier might not cause sea levels to rise because water takes up less space than ice. Since most of the iceberg is below water level it may simple disappear into the sea as it melts with little or no change in sea level.
  
• Wildfires started by poorly maintained electric lines, arson, or any human activitity are not climate change. Where electric lines have been put underground the incidence of wildfires and power outages have dropped dramatically
  
• Air conditioning and refrigeration work because they funnel heat to the outside.  Sounds like every time someone cools something they heat the outdoors.  

This year, channel the spirit of Lois Lane and question what TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and news sources tell you. The World will be a better place if we all search for the truth instead of accepting what is put before us.  Have a GREAT 2022!

Maurizio Buratti COVID-19 Bias: Daily Beast Headlines "Facts" Not in Evidence

* This article compares two reports of the same event. One is objectively detailed by a

Daily Beast Logo

European Fe News agency. The second is an updated version of a Daily Beast story that at first included no details other than to link the words anti-vaxxer, dies and Covid-19.  Links to both articles are at the bottom of the page as documentation for this review.  

It is bad enough that the American people have been subjected to a revolving door of conflicting information spread by its own government officials but when a reputable news agency like The Daily Beast chooses to taunt a dead man in hopes of shifting public opinion to a course of action that is as much supposition as fact, the result harms everyone, not just journalistic integrity. 

Opting for headlines rather than fact, even quality media outlets are now leaning into the repugnant practice of verbally hanging the body in the public square as proof that vaccines "save lives" and that vaccination is the only way out of this crisis (an opinion which is questioned by more than few well educated physicians).  Confusing their role in society with marketing or public relations, media has taken on emotion-based rhetoric akin to the old fashioned party line telephone line.  That in itself is dangerous on many different levels. 

According to both articles, an admitted anti-vaxxer, Maurizio Buratt, 61, was diagnosed with double pneumonia and died in a Verona, Italy hospital on December 28. Both state that Buratt stood by his anti-vaxxing position even after being admitted.  Neither article reports a positive COVID-19 test.  Only The Daily Beast article uses the Covid-19 term in its headlines as the cause of death.  

The ANSA article appears to have been researched and written by its own staff.  There is no reference to Twitter feeds or copying and pasting from another website.  On the other hand, The Daily Beast article comes almost entirely from two sources--the ANSA article and a local newspaper (Brescia Today). Interestingly, the local news account admits reporters had to ask the attending doctor repeatedly about COVID-19 before the doctor would "admit" to a COVID connection. As one reads the article however, the doctor's statement was to say it "seems" to be COVID--not to definitively label COVID as the cause of death.  Reporters apparently were looking for that phrase and targeted that information regardless of any other factors which might have come into play. 

Had The Daily Beast looked into the definition of "double pneumonia", it would have found that the condition can be caused by any thing that irritates the lungs to the point the body cannot remove fluid in a timely manner.  According to the World Health Organization (WHO),  an estimated 750,000 children died from pneumonia in 2019, the year before COVID hit. Causes listed on this website include multiple viruses, bacterial infections and even such common contaminants as mold or other fungi.  The webpage does not, however, mention adult pneumonia number but general figures found elsewhere report a case rate of between 15 and 20 cases per 100,000 people in industrialized countries **Italy would expect between 9000 and 12000 cases each year. 

Then there is he habit of news agencies going for the popular conclusion and skipping over other more relevant information. How often do reporters ask any other question that might change the viewpoint of the reader?   Did Buratt have a health directive that prohibited treatment that might have  saved his life? Was Buratt on any of dozens of medications that compromised his immune system? Were there any other health issues that came into play in his anti-vaccine beliefs?  And finally, was his "Communist" comment about healthcare an actual judgement of today's health care system or a cultural ideology left over from Italy's 20 year period of Fascist control?  The story isn't complete until these questions are considered.  To condemn a man for his beliefs without understanding his motivation is not just bad journalism but the sign of a closed minded industry. 

Too often in this political climate, it is the narrow-minded focus of major media that seeks to steer public opinion in one direction regardless of its basis in fact. Only when the news is reported objectively does it serve to educate the public rather than subdue it. 

ANSA News Article (Rome)

 The Daily Beast Article

NBC's Climate Clique: A Future of White Christmases

CNN White Christmas Map

** Several days of snow since Christmas.  It's all in about perfect conditions not the calendar. This year is was just a little late.

More like a high school clique than a knowledgeable group of writers looking to spread good news on Christmas, NBC's climate change reporters share more similarities with the popular kids' table than many would like to admit.  We have all seen it and some of us have even been a part of that highly restrictive, narrow-focused mindset that feigns superiority while being ignorant of even the basic principles of good form. Thursday's Future White Christmas coverage during the NBC Nightly News airing was not only disappointing in its timing but also wildly prejudicial in blaming the unseen and undefined evil of our time--Climate Change.  

Declining White Christmases--Truth or Hype?

Climate change coverage today is a popularity game. There are three things you must have to be considered an enlightened media source. Those three things are simple: 1) Do not offer any scientific explanation, just trends 2) Use math to make things seem awful 3) Find an expert who belongs to the same doom-n-gloom club.  NBC does that very well. It is a shame they are not interested in looking at climate change as a function of changing times rather than the end-of-the-World scenario that gets viewer attention. 

Read on if you would like to get some relevant information that explains why different locations may or may not see snow for Christmas. 

A La Nina Year

On October 14, 2021, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) announced the official presence of the La Nina phase in the Pacific Ocean. La Nina years typically mean warmer and drier weather during the winter months for at least the lower half of the country.  Regardless of climate change, these years have always meant a year with little or no snow for many locations. NBC is well aware of this phenomenon and reported on it in October.  Instead of explaining that La Nina was going to make it more difficult for snow to form, this reporter went to the blame-climate-change format and took the easy, and politically correct, way out. 

Math Misused

To be expected, the reporter and expert compared trends by referring to mathematical differences between now and the 1980s.  Acknowledging that in 1980 ( which just so happens to be one of the most erratic weather years on record), half of the country saw snow while only 40% of the country now enjoys the event, the viewer is left with the impression that the country is losing our White Christmas legacy. While technically correct, using math as factual proof of climate change without understand how those numbers were obtained, amounts to spreading misinformation no matter how accurate the computation. Interestingly, several media outlets have published similar articles based on a NOAA press release which manipulates the number even further to tug at the emotional heartstrings of readers.  (Reminder: President Biden's climate change funding is being held up at the present time and NOAA may have written the piece in support of this funding)

Snow: A Fickle Flake

If you live in the band of the country where the Jet Stream moves up and down on a regular basis, your understanding of weather and climate change is completely different than those who live in the upper Northeast, the Pacific Coast and the Gulf Coast.  You learn early on that snow only happens under the right conditions and it is temperamental a best.  Just the right combination of air movement, temperature and moisture are needed.  If that doesn't sound like a rarity, factor in the weaker upper atmosphere that is the result of Clean Air policies and mining of gases such as oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide for use in the healthcare, cryogenics and food storage industries.  You see snow only occurs in the upper atmospher and when there isn't enough movement and moisture WAY up in the atmosphere, snow simply doesn't have the chance to form.  The future of our White Christmas may have more to do with how strictly the EPA regulates the atmosphere than anything else in the environment. 

Human Interference

 Have you heard the phrase "Comparing Apples to Oranges"? It generally means that people try to treat difference situations as the same (Apples and Oranges are both fruit) when they are basically very different (applies are many different colors, Oranges are. . well. . orange. You get the drift).  This happens all the time with climate change studies which from a science perspective makes most of the findings invalid.  These interesting facts show how we, as in humans, are likely more to blame by our simple presence than any weather related reason for a reduction in snow fall. 

1. One third of the US population wasn't here in 1980. That's 100 million people who are giving off heat in an environment that has not changed that much. A simple one degree increase in ambient air temperature because of all those people would be enough to disrupt snow production. Sad but true.
   
2. There are 80 million more vehicles giving off heat, regardless of fuel source, than 40 years ago. That is in addition to the approximately 175 million cars, truck and other vehicles that were in use in 1980.  A bit of additional heat is the difference between beautiful snow and cold rain. 
3. The increase in buildings needed to accommodate 330 million people that now call the United States home extends into places that have never been used for homes before.  Buildings, like people and cars, give off heat and can warm the air near the ground causing any snow that does form to melt before it reaches the ground.  Larger buildings such as warehouses, high rise apartments and office buildings can break the flow of air that is necessary for crystals to form.  Progress comes with a cost.  

In Conclusion

By now, you are beginning to see that what authority figures and advocates call climate change might just be unrealistic expectations.  The world of fifty years ago was fundamentally different because there was less of all the things mankind must have to survive. The additional 4 billion people of the world have done nothing wrong  There is a price that mankind has paid in poorer health, less wealth and more chaotic lives because of our dependence on every convenience. That price includes less chance for a White Christmas in many areas of the country.  All we have to do to bring it back to reduce our heat signature (not related to carbon footprint) and welcome a more simplistic lifestyle.  

Regrettably, NBC, other media outlets and most of all our government is more interested in economic growth than bringing back predictable weather.  More is the shame that like high school, the kids at the popular table, make life miserable for the rest of us. 

Build Back Better 2022: A Future of Waste and Demolition

 Reminder: This Blog does not support Nikki Haley, Donald Trump or PACs for either party for election in 2024. Any use of this material to do so is done without the consent of the author.

** As of 1.19.2021, Biden has pledged to break BBB into sections. This is encouraging news for inflation and a test of how well the federal government meets its obligation to discuss, cooperate, and plan its actions.
**Written just hours before Senator Joe Manchin pulled the plug on BBB, this article is still very relevant as 2022 approaches. There is no question that this administration will lean into efforts to restore this spending package for no other reason than to say "WE DID IT".  It will not bring America Back (Excuse me? Did it go somewhere?).  It will send it further down the dangerous path of a country living on debt and  ignoring its failings.

 Like the French Revolution, the Fall of the USSR and a half dozen modern countries that have experienced financial collapse as the result of exceedingly high inflation and government inefficiency, it doesn't take a doctorate in Economics to see where BBB will take us.  Every household in America knows what comes from spending more than you have.  The United States is not immune to financial difficulties any more than its massive health care system save 800,000 people from dying of COVID-19.  American families should take steps to prepare for the unexpected.  It's not fear but good sense to take care of your household even if the government doesn't take care of theirs. 

And there it is again! Another politician tossing a line to see if he can reel in support for a political agenda.  With approval for the massive spending bill questionable with citizens, the next place to gain support is from local governments.  While it should not surprise the American people that this still occurs, it continues to be a disappointing feature of a Congress that is more concerned with its personal legacy than the welfare of its citizens.

This morning, President Joe Biden announced a plan to replace municipal water lines commonly called "lead" pipe in the United States.  With nothing more definitive than stronger EPA regulations, a ten-year goal and monies diverted from existing budget lines, the assumption is that those in fear of costly repairs may swing support to Biden's massive spending plan. 

With Biden's focus clearly on special interest groups in his first year, only 7% of all Americans are impacted by high lead levels in water according to the EPA website(15 to 20 million people).  Change the numbers to sections of pipe or distance and the task seems far grander than it is. Still, the potential is there that this move could lead to a decade or more of demolishing the old and re-landscaping every lawn and public served by public water lines.  Leave it to a politician to use a bulldozer and the law to handle a problem that could be solved with a bit of ingenuity and resourcefulness. 

Is Lead Really All THAT Dangerous?

Like most natural substances, lead is beneficial in many situations.  Once believed to be an ingredient in gold because of its weight, softness and resistance to corrosion, lead was one of the first metals used by mankind. Its only danger is when it is ingested in large amounts over a long period of time.

It is true that the metal is so popular that it has been used in many ways that it probably shouldn't have been.  Added to gasoline to stop 'knocking' in early engines, lead changed into lead oxide during combustion and became a primary component of air pollution. Used in early cooking utensils, as water and food storage containers, for children's toys and even house paint, lead quickly found its way into the human body with negative results.  The good news is that blood levels of lead in Americans have dropped by 90 percent since it was declared hazardous in the 1970s (NPR.org, Before it was Dangerous)

NJ.com photo

 

Cost vs. Benefit

But the material cost and labor needed to "dig up" every pipe in America that contains lead is far more invasive than even this country can imagine.  Under the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a condition that has already been heavily mitigated as evidenced by blood tests and one that currently--by its own estimates--impacts less than 10% of the population, could suddenly expand to overly cautious levels. Depending on how the term "lead" is defined, the Federal government could condemn every building constructed before l960 when pipes were first coated with a zinc solution that keeps lead from leaching into the water.  Simply designating an area as one of high lead content could reduce the value of homes, hold up the sale of such properties or force renovations by homeowners who might not be permitted to connect lead-based plumbing to the newer approved systems. The unintended consequences such as removal of mature landscaping and destruction of sidewalks and roadways could well outweigh the expected benefits. 

With all due respect, Mr. President. Is this about improving the health of a truly disadvantaged group of people or diverting funds to create infrastructure that artificially inflates economic growth and employment numbers. 

The Political Value of Building

As a new country plus 200 or so years, the act of building has been the hallmark of America's national economy. Unlike Europe, Asia, India and the Middle East, the New World had land and no restrictions on how to use it.  Settlers built homes, road ways, industries and railroads without so much as a thought as to what might happen when the  population required more resources than could be individually attained.  That tipping point happened decades ago for this country's oldest cities.  Still, the overwhelming political viewpoint of Congress since the end of WWII is to tear down and build back, whether it is better or not. 

Waste as an Economic Initiative

Behind closed doors, economists and stock analysts support corporate inefficiency, large infrastructure projects and natural disasters. Called the "Broken Windows" principle, undesirable conditions, such as aging improvements, weather disasters, climate change and poor management, keep the economy going even though wealth and security are lost.  Both Biden's Infrastructure bill and the Build Back Better bill are based on replacing what this administration deems "broken" even if nothing is actually gained by the expense. Even sadder is that those communities and private citizens which acted responsibly will realize their efforts were wasted and unappreciated in the fight for federal funding that is sure to continue.

As Congress adds an additional $2.5 trillion dollars to the debt limit of this country, it is time to remember that not all improvements bring about a higher quality of life for the average person.  Feelings of safety and security do not come from gadgets and gizmos. Trust in leaders is not founded on a president who creates fear and anxiety to increase his statistical record for the history books.  Replacing all the lead pipes in America will be considered a great accomplishment--except to the minority who will suffer damage to their properties in the name of progress.  That is the minority that never seems to matter to a politician.

Tornado Relief: Reflections and Donation Tips

** Please give to the relief effort for these communities which lost so much. More importantly choose your form of help carefully. See more information about how to give below. 

Getty Image (General)

Forty couple years ago, I lived in Starkville, Mississippi and saw my first tornado.  In the light of day, this barely moving chubby rotation was more a nuisance than a danger. I was at work and stood in the parking lot watching its ghost-like shape move about 50 yards away. As it passed and disappeared into the pines that graced both sides of the highway, I heard the intermittent sound of breaking tree limbs.  I knew I was not in any real danger and went along with my day.  This was not the type of tornado that hit six Midwest states on the evening of December 10, 2021.

In much the same way that other parts of the country deal with Clipper system snowstorms or severe thunderstorms, tornadoes are a frequent occurrence that residents just live with.  Most are the chubby, poorly formed versions that cause some damage but not massive casualties.  But at night, a tornado is more dangerous first because it means it is strong enough to survive the cooling off of sundown and second because residences cannot anticipate the path of the storm. These residents had been well informed but at that speed and over that distance there was little hope anything in its path would remain standing even for the well-prepared.

As the news of the events rolled across my news feed, the media ramped up the donation and calls for action.  Not understanding that this was already a recovery operation before the news even hit the air, media created a scam artists paradise of opportunity to bilk caring people out of their donations.  Before rushing to click on any and every donate button that comes across your phone or email account, take some time to explore the CRT (not that other CRT issue) method of giving: use CAUTION, do some RESEARCH and give over TIME.  Consider the information below as well before giving. 

1. Disasters come on quickly but recovery takes time. If a charity wants money now, back off and research that option. Be cautious of large corporations and businesses that operate within the damaged zone. Giving to the relief effort through them might be considered a conflict of interest and become murky as time goes by.  Understand that you are giving freely with no strings attached when giving money to any for-profit business. There is no limit to the amount of time such businesses can hold on to your money and with a bit of creative book keeping, each of these businesses can profit greatly from your generosity. 

2. Even top quality charities have costs. Before giving research how much of your money will actually go to the cause rather than supporting the organization.  My rule of thumb is that if the CEO makes more in a year than I would make in ten years, its not a good choice for where to put my money. Consider giving locaally, rather than through the national organization. Also, if the charity advertises regularly for funds, question whether their focus is on fundraising or charitable work.  It is unlikely that a media outlet will give free advertising to every charity seen on their platform.  

3. State and local government managed relief funds for disasters are something new. Rising from the ineffective operations of FEMA and other nationally-based charitable sources, time will tell whether they serve the people well. On the plus side, they have fewer restrictions than private non-profit groups that are bound by long standing business models.  

4. Be patient.  Unless you are experienced in this type of recovery or know someone personally, stay home and wait for the dust to settle.  As relief efforts unfold, unique and more personal opportunities will become available.  After a few weeks, consider doing some research and adopting a school, day care or other public service that was destroyed. Even with insurance and FEMA help there will always be something that would be appreciated. A trophy case that was smashed, checks to the school cafeteria to help supply lunches to suddenly unemployed families, a new set of books for a library and the list can go on and on.  Direct giving may take some time but may be far more satisfying. Remember, this impacted a whole region, resources will be limited for the short term and outside funding can help in ways that other systems cannot.

5. Avoid GoFundMe accounts and sites that show up as "AD" in Google or other search engines.  The only way to stop scammers is to be exceedingly cautious even if your heart aches for the victims. 

Like any community, these towns will be changed forever but not necessarily disappear because of this tragedy.  The time for help will be weeks from now when the media goes away and the insurance checks have been issued. Regrettably, sellers will take advantage of this situation and the money will not go as far as it should.  Help will be needed then as much as it is needed now.  Caution, Research and Time are important for your donation to be used effectively.  

Covid-19: Omicron's Here, Nature Says, "I Told You So!"

** Nearly two years into the Covid-19 pandemic, the CDC has finally published an easily accessible webpage that outlines the risk factors for those susceptible to the coronovirus (see here). Please remember steroids are a treatment for respitory disease as well as a risk factor for infection.  Stay informed and healthy. 

** January 10, 2022 -- From Whoopi Goldberg and Savannah Guthrie to several members of Congress, journalists and politicians, alike, are coming to terms with their part in spreading the false narrative that coronavirus could be controlled.  Nature does what it needs to do to keep this planet  viable. It does not harm people without reason. Nature's rules for a health life are not necessarily the same as what popular culture promote. Coronavirus was here before 2020 and will continue to be here long after 2022 is over.  All the vaccines in the world will not change that.  Be Safe. Be Healthy.

**Update: Dec 10,2021 (reuters.com)- As of this date, the CDC has reported that of the 43 persons identified as positive for the Omicron variant, most are fully vaccinated and one third of them have received a booster. 

As I sit here this morning listening to the local and national news go on and on about Omicron, the latest Coronavirus variant, I cannot keep from shaking my head in sad resignation.  From the beginning of this very natural, to-be-expected crisis, Nature was not going to be cornered nor controlled. It had a message for humanity and like a good parent, it was, and still is, willing to cause some pain in order to see that this long over due reality check is delivered. 

No one is sadder about the lives lost than this writer.  In this small rural community, the death count does not make the evening news nor are there cameos of stressed healthcare workers pleading for people to get vaccinated.This community knows the cost of this pandemic--in friends and family that are now gone as well as the delay of future plans and the cautiousness which impacts every decision. 

Neither God nor Nature is punishing humanity for indescribable sins.  The responsibility for this outbreak is firmly on the shoulders of those who, like Dr. Anthony Fauci and public policymakers,  promote expensive healthcare over good health habits. As is taught in public health classes, natural health is a fine-tuned balance of environmental principles.  Cleanliness, proximity (social distancing) and adequate nutrition (not just food) support good health in a way that healthcare alone cannot.  When any of these factors is ignored or substituted with vaccines and drugs, pandemics occur.  This is the point Nature is trying to make. 

With every new variant, Nature says "I told you so!" and it will continue to shake its finger at those in power until modern civilization understands there are limits to how much it will bend for the sake of man's ego. The wish to rid the world of illness and suffering may be a religious goal but in terms of how this Earth operates, it is a desire of man, not a function of Earth's creation. 

In nature, illness has a purpose and that purpose is as much to support life as to hasten death. To live long healthy lives, immune systems must be tested from time to time.  Exposure is not enough for there to be a strong antibody response.  Ironically, modern medicine is based largely on countering the very principles of immunology.  No vaccine, antibiotic or drug works well unless it works in concert with nature. To come out of this, citizens around the globe need to embrace grandmotherly wisdom that served mankind for several thousand years when healthcare was more or less non-existent.

Illness Prevention Through Nutrition

The science of health is neither complicated nor difficult to manage. That said, the current mindset downplays nutritional needs in favor of drugs and strict lifestyle guidelines--neither of which is based on nature.  Health, like most natural processes, works best when moderation and the 'big picture' are kept in focus. Here, three basic suggestions and the reasons they work, are offered as one way to lessen the grip of COVID-19 regardless of vaccination status.

Protein Every Day at Every Meal

For fifty years, medical professionals have fostered a mindset that protein and fat are less desirable than plant based carbohydrates.  The problem, and ultimate consequence of this strategy, is a reduction in the body's ability to repair itself and effectively respond to infection and disease. Like making chocolate chip cookies without chocolate chips, a life without a steady influx of quality protein is missing something important when it comes to overall health. 

As COVID-19 challenges modern medical philosophy, those who follow a "healthy??" diet of fresh fruits, vegetables and grains need to understand that no amount of vaccine or booster shots can duplicate the antibody response fueled by high quality protein. Good protein sources include red meat, fish, poultry, eggs, milk (not almond milk), cheese, nuts and dried beans.  Measurable amounts of protein every day at every meal are the best option for keeping cell tissues in good repair. This can also help avoid the side effects (diabetes) of a carbohydrate heavy diet. Minimum daily amounts should be calculated on weight, not age or caloric intake.  A good minimum for adults is 25 grams per day for every 100 pounds of weight. ( John Hopkins Protein List )

Rethink Alcohol Use

Throughout much of recorded history, fermented liquids such as wine, ciders, ales and spirits, served to supply people with a high quality jolt of micro-nutrients. Both tasty and capable of being stored for longer periods of time, these drinks complemented a meal with water being served as a source of fluid.  Today, however, changes in production and storage methods have altered the drinks themselves. Regrettably, modern vintages offer few benefits other than a mind altering buzz.

Setting morality and social recrimination aside, the bottom line is that today's alcoholic beverages are no healthier than a can of carbonated soda.  They can even cause the body to pause its immune response as it focuses on ridding the system of alcohol (a complex molecule that is broken down in the liver rather than the stomach). This process can increase the risk for contracting any type of communicable disease from Covid and the flu to some types of food-borne illness and hepatitis.  

The question to ask yourself is whether the risk of illness is worth the pleasure gained from the beverage. 

Stick to a Routine

Particularly during this pandemic, the last thing most of us want to do is stick to a routine. That said, as a living entity, the body works best when it can depend on a predictable lifestyle.  A sleep schedule, regular meals and daily down time are far better at preventing illness than public health advocates admit. While cleaning and hand washing have their place in daily life, there is such a thing as being too clean.  Allowing the body to run through its built-in system of prevention allows for the immune system to create antibodies to any and every attack on the immune system.  

As is evidenced by the cultural differences of daily life around the world and throughout history, there is no right or wrong routine as long as it works for the individual and can be maintained with little or no effort.  Do we really believe that for five thousand years, every living person on the planet worked hard enough get his heart rate up to 100 for at least five days each week?  Health comes in many forms as does ways to prevent major illness.

Forever COVID

As the world's mortality rate takes a slight jump and its population is estimated to drop for the first time since the Spanish Flu in 1917-18, what health professionals quietly keep to themselves is that the COVID virus is neither new nor controllable.  In fact, seasonal variations, like Omicron, happen so regularly during the winter months, no one bothered to test for it, until 2020. 

Moreover, experiments to produce a workable vaccine for animals and humans have been held in many facilities  for well over 40 years without conspiracy theories and wild accusations. No vaccine has ever worked for more than a few months.  That should tell all of Earth's citizen something about the future. COVID has always been here and is here to stay. 

Nature now has another high powered tool to use in its goal to bring human health back into balance with the environment.  As long as pharmaceutical companies promote artificial immunity over natural protection, Nature will be comfortably waiting to say, "I told you so!" when the next health crisis hits Planet Earth.