Trump’s Serious Diagnosis as a Test of Your Humanity

A litmus test of someone’s humanity is whether they celebrate another’s suffering. Even in my limited sampling of less than half an hour, it’s clear a lot of people on social media are failing that test today.

In case you’ve been under a rock or detached from news for 24 hours, several people who were at the Rose Garden event for Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination have come down with the Wuhan-originated (factual statement!) coronavirus. This includes President Trump and Melania, the First Lady. Also infected: presidential adviser Hope Hicks (the spreader?), Kellyanne Conway, RNC chair Ronna Romney McDaniel, Sens. Mike Lee and Thom Tillis, Rev. Ron Jenkins (President of Notre Dame University, where Barrett matriculated), and a few others. So far, VP Mike Pence has tested negative, with no word on Barrett. Since this disease skews its harm toward the old, chances are somebody from this group will have serious problems. I hope not, but hope isn’t scientifically falsifiable virology.

Disagreements with someone’s policies (and I certainly have some with this president’s, but that’s irrelevant) don’t justify being glad somebody is sick with coronavirus. This is a serious disease for anyone, much less a 77-year-old out-of-shape male. That’s among the highest-risk profiles. This truly could kill or permanently maim him, and it’s no laughing matter.

I would say the same if Biden caught this disease and “conservatives” celebrated. Given recent contacts, Biden just might; so in case he does, refer to this same post as well. It applies equally.

There is no valid rationalization for wishing personal misery on someone because you don’t like their governance policies or think they’re a rotten person. There’s also no such thing as Karma. The virus doesn’t care about political affiliation nor your opinion thereof.

I’m not just talking about the obvious hate ghouls you can easily find on Twitter overtly wishing suffering and death on someone else. [There are *thousands*…I am not kidding. It’s not hard to find them right now if you try just a little.] At least the overt haters reveal who they are openly and with brutal honesty. I can respect that (and report it), even as I strongly disapprove of their behavior.

Perhaps more pathetic are the implicit, passive-aggressive expressions from people who preach often about kindness and “empathy”. It’s especially disappointing to see a few self-professed Christians cheering this on, albeit tacitly in a lame attempt to put a smiley veneer over their real sentiments, but who have referred to the President as a horrible person.

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

Heard of that? We’ve all been guilty at some point, including me; regardless, that reminder is sorely needed now for a lot of people. In general terms, it is possible to disagree with somebody and disapprove their sinful *behavior*, without hating them as people or wishing grave misery on them. Try it.

Another character test is if you are willing to pray for Trump despite your disagreements with him. Can you? I won’t know, and don’t need to. However, God knows, and that’s who really matters in all this.

What I told my Facebook “friends” (and I don’t accept requests from people I don’t know and haven’t met) is: “If you’re the sort who will revel in another’s suffering, I should ‘unfriend’ you, but won’t. Why? Because you need to be watched…closely.” So if you know someone behaving this way, keep an eye on them, for real; something pathological and perhaps demonic could be at work.

Scattershooting 200924

Scattershooting while wondering what happened to objective academic rigor in public-school curricula…

NADLER CRAPS HIS PANTS at PELOSI: I’ll start out this posting with some comedy gold, courtesy of Jerry Nadler. Watch this video on C-SPAN of Nadler obviously dropping a big ol’ butt biscuit in his boxers, while introducing Nancy Pelosi. If the video disappears from C-SPAN, you should be able to find it on YouTube by searching for “Jerry Nadler pants”. It’s hard to blame him; indeed, I feel sorry for the guy actually, despite my admitted amusement at the slapstick but ultimately harmless scene. Others’ reactions to Nancy Pelosi have been worse, justifiably.

STEALING OTHERS’ PHOTOGRAPHY DOESN’T PAY, EXCEPT for the PHOTOGRAPHER: It looks like Montana photographer Sean Heavey got a solid settlement (solid enough to be satisfactory to him, whatever its amount) from Netflix. To be succinct, Netflix straight-up stole his wonderful supercell photo for one of their shows, then had the stunningly arrogant audacity to defend their theft with the legally invalid, laughably ridiculous, straw-man claim that you can’t copyright Mother Nature. Good for Sean (and all of us photographers of the vapors aloft). I’m happy he busted Netflix and got a settlement from them. [After learning of their illicit use of his imagery, several others and I strongly encouraged him to do so.] On smaller scales, I’ve done the same, and absolutely will do it again whenever necessary. Gear, fuel & lodging aren’t free. Intangible property is still property; taking it without permission is still theft; and commercializing it still is selling stolen property. Exodus 20:15

CHINA LIED, PEOPLE DIED: A recent Congressional report asserted (rightfully, in my view) that, in essence, the 200,000+ deaths and countless more numbers of severe, debilitating illnesses the U.S. has suffered so far can be laid straight at the feet of the red commie Chinese government. You can argue all you want about our bungling response once their coronavirus got here, but that ignores that it shouldn’t have arrived here to begin with, and why it did. This is disgusting, but not surprising. All of the available evidence (not including what’s been covered up by the Chinese Communist Party that we don’t know yet, of course) has pointed this way all along. Their nationalization of PPE production by foreign companies (including ours):

  1. Directly harmed efforts to contain this disease here and elsewhere around the world, and
  2. Serve as Exhibit A on why the US should be beholden to no other nation for manufacturing of essential medical equipment and supplies.
    Bottom line: collectivist dictatorships cannot be trusted, in any way, shape or form.

CRITICAL THEORY HARMS RACIAL MINORITIES: The struggle over dilution of admissions standards at a top American public school, to accommodate specific racial groups at others’ expense, is a prime example of how the entirely subjective, arbitrary, radicalizing, societally destructive, and diabolically evil thought cult known as “critical theory” undermines excellence. In this case, we have a gifted-student STEM magnet school that already has 79% racial-minority enrollment, with a large fraction of immigrant parents. Yes, PC “woke” infestation of education can hurt minorities, and this shows how. The ideological cancer knows no limits. As a formally published scientist who came from far poorer means than almost all those pushing the “woke” idiocy, married to someone who was an academically gifted immigrant, I insist: facts, reason, logic, and objectivity must prevail…and rigorous excellence must be restored as priority one in STEM education (and all education for that matter).

Scattershooting 200812

Scattershooting while wondering where I can find evenhanded factual reporting in modern journalism…

FALL COLLEGE FOOTBALL and the PANDEMIC: Some conferences have cancelled college football for fall 2020 as of this writing, while others have decided to forge onward? What’s the right answer? We don’t know yet. It’s all a grand experiment. At the administrative level, what we’re seeing here is a struggle between angling for sports revenue by deciding to play (SEC, Big 12-3, ACC) and CYA-driven liability fear of losing money to lawsuits (Big 10+3, Pac-12, lower divisions). The common denominator for both sides? Money. Not health, money. Health for them simply is a PR topic to satiate the concerned masses.

There is no easy answer on the health side. This disease is going to infect ~90% of Americans before we’re done, regardless, based on epidemiology research at Gilead. That will include roughly that proportion of college athletes. Get it now or get it later? While I lean “get it later” to give science more time to come up with more-effective treatments and at least partially effective vaccines, the demographic playing college sports is the second least-vulnerable (behind children). Trevor Lawrence of Clemson has argued, intelligently and persuasively, that team discipline and oversight in that atmosphere can minimize spread compared to the athletes being willy-nilly in the populace at home. Yet we we know (from experience as well as the news every given fall) college students want to gather and party, which will spread this crap. In short, this really is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. Which side you choose is based largely on which form of damnation you prefer.

KAMALA HARRIS VP CANDIDACY: I do admittedly find it amusing that the not-so-far Bernie left already is going after Kamala hard for being a “cop” (i.e., prosecutor). You can see this all over Twitter. And they are asking one quite valid question: why, after attacking Biden for praising segregationists and working with segregationist Senate colleagues like Herman Talmadge and James Eastland, and (rightly, IMO) making statements against his propensity to sniff/fondle women, does she sign on to being his VP? In this sense I do agree with Bernie “Progressive camp” (which really is the left’s mainstream anymore). Of course, she wasn’t a very effective nor evenhanded nor competent prosecutor (below), so perhaps the Bernie leftists who oppose her for “being a cop” don’t have a lot to worry about there — though they are on the mark when it comes to Biden’s (and by extension now, her) presence in the corporatist, Clintonian, military/industrial complex wing of the party. Even though I disagree with the “Bernie” crowd on so many things, at least I can understand them better than the so-called “moderate” Ds, because of their clearer positions and stronger ideological consistency. [I say “so-called” because today’s mainstream D party is so far left on many socioeconomic issues in particular that it would be utterly unrecognizable to the party of Truman and John Kennedy, who by today’s standards, were Tea Party: strong-military, lower-tax advocating, socially conservative Democrats.]

There’s a lot to unpack with this pick, but for kicks, I’d like to start here. During her 13 years as D.A. then attorney general, she failed to prosecute even one case of priest sexual abuse, though during that same period at least 50 major cities had brought charges against priests. Why? That requires explanation and investigation that a fawning, emotionally beholden leftist media will fail to provide. Wait and see if you do not believe me.

According to Peter Schweitzer’s investigation, “Harris had no particular ties to the Catholic Church or Catholic organizations, but the money still came in large, unprecedented sums. Lawyer Joseph Russoniello represented the church on a wide variety of issues, including the handling of the church abuse scandal. He served on the Catholic Church’s National Review Board (NRB) of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The purpose of the NRB was to review Catholic Church abuse cases. Russoniello was also a partner in the San Francisco law firm Cooley Godward. Russoniello donated the maximum amount by law to her campaign, $1,250, and his law firm added another $2,250. He also sat on Harris’s advisory council when she was San Francisco district attorney. Another law firm, Bingham McCutcheon, which handled legal matters for the archdiocese concerning Catholic Charities, donated $2,825, the maximum allowed. Curiously, Bingham McCutcheon had only donated to two other candidates running for office in San Francisco before, for a total of $650. As with Russoniello, their support was unusual. … board members of San Francisco Catholic archdiocese-related organizations and their family members donated another $50,950 to Harris’s campaign.

Follow the money if you want explanations for why politicians do otherwise inexplicable things.

LEFTIST WEAPONIZING of DUNNING-KRUGER: This Dunning-Kruger effect is real. We all have seen or experienced some aspect of it. One of those I’ve seen is that the Left has been weaponizing the concept for a few years now to squash any dissent from its own “I know everything” status. I see it often from certain (not all!) climatologists, most radical social-agenda activists, and those especially on the “Christian Left” who try to sledgehammer their own cherry-picked, sanctimonious, wordly (as opposed to Biblical) version of “empathy” down others’ throats — a very ironic thing, eh?

Next Page →