Rebane's Ruminations
November 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

  • George Rebane

    Our American public mind has been taking some hits in recent decades, and is now in a power dive into the mud if we see what is happening in academe and in content of popular entertainments.  After having devastated K-12 education, the Left is now in the process of delivering a coup de grace to academe where critical thought and dialogue have been replaced by diversity’s dumbth.  But there are some vestiges of opposition left in the public universities as reported by Robert Bellafiore, a millennial student at the Univ of Oklahoma who tells us of a very challenging and yet very popular course ‘Fate and the Individual in European Literature’.  Mr Bellafiore writes, “Give students heights to aspire to, and we will reach them—just as surely as we will settle for mediocrity if that is all you ask of us. Too many students are seeking clarity and purpose and finding only cacophony and aimlessness. The Western canon offers the challenge of a lifetime, and it’s one I believe my generation is willing to accept.” (more here)

    And on the opposite side of the ledger we now have movie after movie coming out with comic book superheroes battling it out in mind-numbing combats, entertainments that are free of science, art, philosophy, or any takeaway other than ringing in the ears from exposure to 120db multiplex theater sound systems.

    Washington’s swamp allegators are having a field day.  (Allegator – a person given to wanton, gratuitous, and evidence-free allegations against prominent public figures, especially when so goaded by third parties or motivated by ideology and/or cash.)  Their latest victim is Radm Dr Ronny Jackson, President Trump’s nominee to head the Veteran’s Affairs Department, who withdrew his name today after a week of pummeling in the lamestream media.  Such attacks are part and parcel of the double (here we have called it ‘assymetrical’) standards applied to Democrats vs Republicans in today’s politics, especially if the Trump administration is involved.  Victor Davis Hanson’s 26apr18 commentary (here) on such double standards highlights some particulars worth noting by those who still consume rather than deflect information.  Dr Hanson reviews the Mueller investigation and makes a case for an impending “investigatory train wreck” as the special prosecutor “searches for hypothetical lawbreaking, the more he ignores the actual lawbreakers.”  And if it touches Trump, the allegators’ cry remains, ‘Guilty, until proven innocent!’

    Americans are fleeing leftwing regressive states.  Connecticut is the latest state to become a posterchild of progressives’ putrid public policies.  Federal income data tells the story of the Connecticut exodus of wage earners that is catching up with what is happening in neighboring New York and, of course, Krazy Kalifornia.  Gov Daniel Malloy’s “eight year experiment in public-union governance saw income grow by a meager 1.5% for the year” well below that of neighboring New England states.  And if you take out dividends and government transfer payments, its wage growth was at a stagnant 0.1%.  The 26apr18 WSJ observes “the fact that Connecticut, which is next to America’s financial capital, has grown so poorly amid an expansion that was especially good for financial assets is a damning indictment of its political leadership. It is a particular tragedy for the state’s poorest citizens who may not be able to flee to other states that aren’t run by and for government employees.”

    [29apr18 update]  As government has become more pervasive in our lives, it is easier than ever to demonstrate that ALL productive approaches to solving social problems should begin with the proviso that ‘Government is guilty until proven innocent.’  The current gun control fiasco is no different.  Here it would pay to again first determine the role government’s derelictions and incompetence played in the recent Parkland and Waffle House shootings.  Since the Left’s objective is gun confiscation by whatever means available, their lamestream media and activists’ literature turns a blind eye to the dereliction and incompetence aspects of enforcing gun control laws already on the books.  The Left’s perennial solution is to never waste the most recent tragedy to roll back the Second Amendment another notch as part and parcel of their overarching objective to fundamentally transform America.  Two recent analyses of government's dereliction and incompetence in the Waffle House (here)  and Parkland (here) killings illustrate my point, the latter done by Kenneth Preston, a heads-up student in Broward County where the massacre occurred.

  • [All those vilifying President Trump should read the latest essay by historian and commentator Victor Davis Hanson on a whole new look at the role of this president in our life and times (here).  gjr]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    Democracy and Morals.  In the 17apr18 WSJ there was an exemplary letter on this topic, and it is posted below.

    It is hard to disagree with William Galston’s contention in “The Perpetual Battle for Freedom” (Politics & Ideas, April 4) that in liberal democracies the preservation of freedom for all rests on a bedrock of fair opportunity for all.

    One guesses that most people agree with Mr. Galston’s all-for-one and one-for-all sentiments, but we might not find as much common ground when it comes to what is necessary and right to heal our country. As we jettisoned Judeo-Christian values and “bourgeois norms,” our culture embraced behaviors that are impediments to achieving the American dream—at least without a massive helping hand from government. It now is deemed offensive to say that a path out of a cycle of poverty is to have children after getting married, finish high school (and, preferably, college) and find a job. Telling someone that religious faith is linked to happiness and personal generosity also is frowned on. Too many in the afflicted groups cited by Mr. Galston don’t want help from individuals doling out charity out of the goodness of their big hearts. They want help that they feel entitled to from a system that they think has let them down.

    It is far easier to address partisan rancor than it is to settle on core values and collective responsibilities in our new secular-progressive culture. I suspect that restoring traditional values isn’t what most progressives have in mind when they define what they know in their hearts is necessary and right to heal our country. Collective responsibility for individuals and individual freedoms for the collective may be an unworkable formula for a secular-progressive society.

    Jay Carter, Silver Spring, Md.

    Mr Carter draws our attention to a society that just a short time ago would have been deemed unbelievable.  Political correctness expands and mutates faster than Newspeak and global alliances did in Orwell’s 1984.  I want to add to your thoughts the consideration of a democracy as a commons that must needs suffer all the weaknesses that Garrett Hardin described in his 1968 landmark essay The Tragedy of the Commons.

    Reckless and criminal parents.  To go along with the above look into progressive insanity that has firmly ensconced itself in our fair land, I draw your attention to another well written summary on today’s draconian principles – enforced by the government gun and prison time and potential loss of your children – that dictate what parents can(not) do with their kids.  And we wonder where all these snowflakes came from.  Here’s an apropos letter from the 16apr18 WSJ.

    Let me see if I have this correct: Contemporary American children as young as five years old are considered educated and wise enough to choose their gender, which will have life-altering affects due to the nature of how the brain hard-wires itself at such a young age, yet allowing children of any age the free range and responsibility to simply play up the street from their own home is a prosecutable crime. (“Parents, You Can Stop Helicoptering” by Lenore Skenazy, March 30).

    It’s the absolute truth to say virtually everything my parents did to raise me and my four siblings back in the 1960s and ’70s is illegal and prosecutable by today’s standards. Who knew my parents and other adults in those days were so reckless and criminal?

    America has become a very sick society, and if the whole of the population doesn’t take a deep introspective examination of itself then the social damage will be too deep to correct. The tragic irony is that all this child-protecting excess in today’s America is having the unintended consequence of creating the exact opposite environment to producing happy, healthy children who grow up to live as well-adjusted adults. It’s tragic.

    Kevin A. Capps, Corona del Mar, Calif.

    Goldberg2018[22apr18 update]  Jonah Goldberg, editor of the National Review and Fox News commentator, has written a new book (see cover image) with an accompanying essay (here) which I just finished reading before ordering the book that comes out this Thursday.  The essay and the book are scholarly extensions of what we have been discussing on RR for over a decade – The death of Western culture, the impetus for a Great Divide, and the assault on the “miracle” of liberal-democracy and capitalism.  For progressives – especially the local liberal worthies who continue believe that all such thoughts are the ravings of the few, the old, the isolated – who really want to know the historical basis for what has rendered us into a polarized nation with no visible means of rapprochement, they should read Goldberg.  There is little/no hope of changing minds, but as we shout at each other over the growing chasm, understanding what the other thinks might be important to know.  (more here and here)

    [24apr18 update]  Lack of housing for the homeless concerns the Rev Becky Goodwin in the 24apr18 Union.  After giving us her lifetime resume of good works, she laments the shortage of needed affordable roofs over the heads of Nevada County’s homeless population (indigenous and imported).  Her best advice is to have rental unit owners lower their rents to charity levels so that those needing low cost housing can afford to live there while the landlord loses money (and can’t get rid of his new found ‘permanent’ renters).  Unfortunately, the dear lady shows no understanding of the difference between market-driven low cost housing and government-mediated affordable housing.  She makes no appeal to our county’s governments to roll back regulations on developers who would gladly supply the appropriate low cost housing that would satisfy demand, and perhaps too well.  But we continue to muddle forward with California’s horrendous self-inflicted homeless problem repeating our Board of Supervisors’ mantra, ‘There’s nothing we can do about building regulations.’

    The animal shelter kerfuffle.  Placer County is bidding against Nevada County’s contractor Sammy’s Friends to become our next animal care and adoption agency.  Placer County’s facility is in Auburn where you would have to go to adopt an animal should you be so disposed.  I haven’t a clue why we just don’t give the contract to the most distant bidder available so as to minimize the somewhat questionable tendency of some people wanting to bring the mutts back to Nevada County.  I suspect that many of them will be recycled into that ‘catch and release’ program when the adoptive owners go through their ‘Oh s#!t’ experience with their new critter sporting a dubious/unknown resume.  To show the unique tinges of insanity in our new progressive culture, Nevada County stores display at checkout counters about three to four contribution boxes for critters for every one for humans.  I guess that’s because it’s the gummint that’s supposed to help humans, and there’s no one else to keep the unwanted animals out of our gasless euthanasia chambers.

    SacBee on the slippery slope to the great beyond.  A correspondent gives us a heads up that this much celebrated liberal rag cannot make it in the capital of America’s socialist vanguard.  The recent round of layoffs cuts through the meat and right into the bone.  Their “job cuts includes (sic) 14 journalists, 12 of whom were represented by the Pacific Media Workers Guild. Another eight positions were cut from the newspaper’s production department, said Ed Fletcher, a reporter at the Sacramento Bee and a representative of the guild.”  They have been a ‘woke’ newspaper in the heart of liberal land, and still nobody gives a crap about the pabulum they continue to spew.  All that their former readers want is more ‘social justice’ that is measured by a bigger government check.

  • George Rebane

    Silly me.  And here all along I thought I knew what is a community dialogue in a town hall format.  You know, a gathering for which they make a big announcement for everyone interested to gather together, hear some speaker(s), and then everyone has a chance to be heard.  Au contraire mon ami.  The gun violence town hall we’ve been talking about here for a week or more is really for a restricted audience, a select and correct thinking group perhaps, one that got the flyer you see here below.  If you weren’t in that group, you’re SOL unless you can squeeze in with a last-minute RSVP.  And, of course, RSVPs only work if you have something to respond to, sil vous plait.  So I hope that some politically incorrect members of the community are also allowed to join that exclusive tete-a-tete this coming Friday, otherwise I’m going to be very lonely and may need an armed escort to exit the building.  Bottom line, it ain’t gonna be announced in The Union.

    GunViolenceTownHall

    [21apr18 update]  The town hall came off pretty much as advertised; attendance was almost at capacity in the Nevada City council chambers.  However, the way that the discussion was framed for the panel was a bit different than my takeaway from the first meeting.  Actually, the discussion was not framed at all save for asking us all to talk about guns and school safety “on the community level”.

    Judge Tom Anderson, who overall did an excellent job a mediator, in his opening remarks specifically stated that this was not to be a discussion on Second Amendment which would “take us all day” to cover.  With this constraint, the rest of the evening consisted of a series of disjointed panel comments and answers that ranged from claiming that we have an ongoing shooting “epidemic” to a “crisis”, to arming teachers or not, to passing more gun regulations since they reduced crime, and on and on.  We were not able to get to any specific problem that the community could get its arms around to solve, and that for the simple reason that none of us knew what acceptable problem domain were we supposed treat or even use as the basis for developing a list.

    Lots of anecdotal comments were offered on how horrible it was to get shot at, have a loved one killed by a shooter, and the students’ fear of a massacre that now permeated schools nationwide, including in Nevada County.  The consensus of the four liberal panelists was that the passing of more gun controls, and perhaps confiscating certain types of guns, would keep the kids safe and reduce crime since their data showed ‘more gun controls, less gun violence’.  In actuality, as cited here previously, “there is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.”

    Jarod Johnson, owner of The Range and ex-LE officer, was the only other apparent non-liberal who strongly maintained that schools should each have an armed policeman on duty to stop massacres.  And he agreed that only guns on the premises will stop people with guns.  He didn’t quite finish with ‘when seconds count, police are minutes away’.

    My interjected points (only one question was actually posed to me during the evening) included attempts to communicate the following.

    • Right and Left agree on neither the facts nor their interpretation. The path toward a solution should start on whatever part of the worldview we do share.
    • The search for a community solution should start with identification of a solvable problem and a specific utility (numerical metric) that measures our progress.
    • Willing teachers should be trained and armed to reduce the loss of life in school massacres.
    • Children learn fear from their elders (parents, teachers, media). Unreasonable fear of in-school massacres has to be carefully taught to young impressionable brains.  Nevada County youth regularly die in traffic accidents at rates at least two orders of magnitude higher than from anything gun related, yet no one is afraid of getting in a car and driving off.  
    • Stricter gun controls do not affect suicide rates – committed suicides find alternate means. (Massachusetts was cited where suicide rates were supposed have dropped with increased gun controls – the fact is exactly the opposite, its suicide rates increased by at least 40% in the 2004-14 decade.  More alternate facts.)
    • Homicide rates are culture driven, not gun driven – London’s murder rate with knives now exceeds NYC’s with guns.
    • The need to include the 2nd Amendment and its core purpose/meaning in ANY discussion of gun ownership, violence, safety, control, … is seminal because that is the basis for half the country resisting gun confiscators and any incremental ratcheting toward that goal.
    • Saving teen lives (i.e. max expected lives saved) in Nevada County should not start with, or perhaps even include, the fortification of schools – drugs, alcohol, suicides, opiates, … should get our first attention and efforts.
    • The next town hall on saving teen lives should define and recommend a locally achievable project or program.
  • George Rebane

    [This is the transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 18 April 2018.]

    Will Rogers, humorist and keen observer of American life, once said, “It ain’t whatcha don’t know that worries me, it’s whatcha know that ain’t so.”

    A lot of government procured science, especially science on which politicians base public policy, is not what Americans have been led to believe.  The mention of ‘science’ as supporting this law or that regulation is too often enough to stifle further critical examination of why we should stop doing this or start doing that, especially if you have never done science or are not that good with numbers.

    While science has given us the technologies that make modern life possible, and often a pleasure, it is far from being a foolproof pursuit.  As we have noted before, science walks on two legs – Occam’s razor and falsifiability.  Occam counsels that the simplest explanation or theory is almost always the correct one.  And falsifiability demands that every scientific proposition or theory must be falsifiable.  That means it must contain elements that can be tested, and if the test fails then the theory is either rejected or raises serious questions that must answered by more experiments and testing.  And experiments that appear to have turned out well must then be replicated and their results reproduced by other scientists before credibility is established and the advancement is acknowledged.

    Now also consider that at least half of the results in published scientific papers will subsequently be shown to be wrong, and we begin to understand why doing good science is really a careful, sometimes tedious, and a grueling slog.  This being the case, there is plenty of room for mistakes where science is involved.  And in recent years as more and more science has been done, we have run into more and more errors and mistakes, especially where science meets the politics of public policy.

    The most obvious symptom of this is that we are informed of wonderous and remarkable discoveries and breakthroughs, on which new laws and regulations are often based, and later it turns out that the science could not be reproduced – it was either misunderstood or was simply a mistake, or even worse.

    Too many so-called scientific results that politicians and regulators demand are fraudulent, delivered by self-serving scientists that bend experiment and /or the resulting data to match what their ‘customer’ providing the money wants.  This kind of practice has become an epidemic as reported by Drs Peter Wood and David Randall of the National Association of Scholars, an organization that researches the practice and delivery of higher education in America.  Their most alarming findings are about reproducibility – many of the important and accepted “landmark” findings in areas such as behavioral psychology, education, and climate change simply cannot be replicated by other scientists.  Nevertheless, their hyped results have been embedded into laws and regulations which determine how we raise our children, educate the nation’s students, and attempt to control our nation’s economy.

    In a recent WSJ essay they present a summary of their research (here).  And since we know that the relevance and immediacy of every social problem is only told by its numbers, here are a few relevant ones.  The journal Science reported that only 39% of 100 prominent psychology studies could be replicated.  Amgen attempted to reproduce 53 “landmark” studies in hematology and oncology, and could only replicate six of them.  A 2015 study estimated that American researchers spend $28B annually on irreproducible preclinical research.  And on and on.

    For the layperson and voter, the advice here is don’t immediately believe every new scientific finding, and then embrace the proposed law or costly regulation that some special interest wants to immediately build on such a hot-off-the-press report.  Instead, dig into the science a little bit, and at least ask your elected representative who else has been able to replicate the claimed landmark results.  After all, the bottom line will inevitably impact your health and wallet.   

    My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on Rebane’s Ruminations where the transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively.  However, my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

  • George Rebane

    My recent commentary on Par Force (here) invited discussion and debate, and the invitation has already been accepted.  PF represents an important perspective which some, like me, consider to be the quintessential reason for the Founders’ inclusion of the Second Amendment in our Constitution.  Others disagree, and their points of disagreement are important and should be understood.  However, as more often than not, many (most?) commenters have a problem keeping the various factors separated that relate to PF.  PF and every other issue that we have dissected over the last 12 years have many parts, and most of them are independent/separate from, or orthogonal to each other and therefore deserve their own focused treatment.

    For various reasons some readers, either through careless thinking, ignorance of the issue, and/or determined cynicism, muddle such factors and essentially derail the debate into a cacophony of arguments consisting of fragments from this or that independent factor to either attempt to make a point, counter someone else’s, or simply mislead.  In any event, the debates here and on other blogs, more often than not, shatter into so many mis-constructed shards that ‘all the king’s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put Humpty-Dumpty together again’, and so the debate withers away without resolution or clear identification of commenters’ views on any of the distinct and separate factors in play.

    So, here is a sampling of some independent factors about PF that would be informative to resolve and/or identify commenters’ divergent positions and supporting arguments.

    1. Should a modern democratic republic maintain the right of its franchised citizens to keep and bear arms so that, in their desperate last resort, they may gather and be able to broadly communicate their grievances before being silenced by local authorities?
    2. Should local government authorities in a modern democratic republic be able to silence dissent so that knowledge of its existence, the identity of the aggrieved, and/or the grievance particulars do not spread over the countryside?
    3. How did our Founders and their fellow American patriots answer #1 and #2?
    4. Since our Revolution, how have successive American generations answered #1 and #2?
    5. What dangers, if any, to America’s traditional way of life does the maintenance of PF rights pose across the land?
    6. ‘Par’ is not intended as crisp definition involving specific armaments and equipments. In today’s American society, how par should Par be?  Given what the constabulary has, what (minimum) PF should a citizen have the right to possess?
    7. How should the resolution of events such as the Branch Davidians’ resistance in Waco, the Ruby Ridge episode, and the Bundy ranch standoffs bear on maintaining the PR interpretation of the Second Amendment?
    8. Given that law-abiding Americans today own over 300 million guns, and the rate of gun ownership in past decades has been higher, and that the presence of guns (in all age groups) was more prevalent in past decades, what has happened in recent years to elevate concern about ‘gun violence’?
    9. Given the 20th century ‘death by government’ history, and the continuing rise of authoritarian states, is America immune from such a future? If so, why?  (American exceptionalism?  Americans are simply better at governance? …); if not, what alternatives, if any, to PF should Americans have?
    10. If the label Par Force is not suitable, what are some better labels?

    Please recall that this is a little meta-missive about debating PF, and not an invitation to debate these factors here; that should be done under ‘Par Force in the Second Amendment’.  However, I do solicit feedback on the inclusion of the above numbered factors, and any appropriate edits and/or additional factors for how we should dissect this issue.

  • [Well, the topics du jour are Comey and Cohen,…, well OK, throw in the Syria attack, lame as it was.  gjr]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    MinuteManOn the morning of 19 April 1775, the communities surrounding Boston were awakened by riders alerting the colonial Americans that a battalion of British were marching out of Boston toward Lexington and Concord.  They were coming to confiscate a cache of arms and ammunition that the colonials had collected for the anticipated mounting resistance to years of tyranny by the Crown in distant England.  Later in the day the British regulars would be met by an ad hoc militia who would drive them back toward Boston while taking heavy losses before the colonials, out of ammunition, had to withdraw.

    Word of the successful armed resistance spread throughout the colonies like wildfire.  The demonstration of what armed citizens could accomplish against arguably the best army in the world was simply inspirational and communicated the very hopeful art of the possible.  The battle marked the beginning of our Revolutionary War, and was soon followed by equally inspirational pitched battles such as that on Bunker (Breed’s) Hill a few weeks later.  The revolution was on.

    In the early part of the war, all citizens forming into militias were required to provide their own weapons, ammunition, and generally their entire kit for operations in the field.  They were required to respond to the call to arms “at a minute’s notice”, hence they became known as Minute Men.

    (more…)

  • [How much you truly 'believe' in something is revealed through the level of your manifestly risky behavior that the belief supports.  gjr]

    Posted at

    in

  • George Rebane

    ‘No Labels’ is a mighty effort by some Washington DC types from both sides to propose what they see as carefully crafted bipartisan solutions to our nation’s problems.  The activities of these good-hearted people have been covered here before.  But it appears they have overstepped their Left-approved bounds endorsing the wrong Democrat candidate in an Illinois congressional district, and consequently were severely vilified by the “far left” (more here).  Apparently it is OK to be ‘bipartisan’ as long as you toe the approved line, and don’t get carried away with moderation. 

    That blacks now practice a racist attitude against whites in academe – seeing “white privilege” everywhere – is recounted (here) by Zachary Wood, president of Uncomfortable Learning that promotes free speech on campuses.  He describes his conversation with a noted African-American historian at Harvard who is “not interested in negotiating with racists”.  These racists are whites considered not to be “woke”, the new term of art describing people who accept the progressives’ worldview and, if white, acknowledge their intrinsic racism and guilt in an obligatory preamble to every conversation with a black.  It seems that black elites have now consigned the rest of their genetic peers to the kingdom of eternal victimhood from which the way out is not known.

    Smog is NOT made up mostly of vehicle exhausts.  That’s a new shot in the shorts for our econazis who most recently got on President Trump’s case for rolling back Obama’s fuel-mileage regulations.  A new study by the Univ of Colorado, and published in the prestigious Science, showed that gasoline fuel and exhaust contribute to and make up less than a third of the ozone and smog which have plagued cities in the past.  It’s illuminating to find out all the other contributors to smog, including dirt, which according to another recent study reports that “cropland and natural sources contribute up to 40% of California’s NOx emissions – about 10 times as much as the California Air Resources Board has estimated.  Motor vehicles make up about 30%.” (more here)

    [10apr18 update]  So far the Dems in Congress have initiated 50 cloture votes to deny committee vetted candidates for various offices nominated by President Trump.  There were only 15 TOTAL of such clotures for the previous four presidents – Obama, Bush2, Clinton, Bush1.  The Dems are sowing the wind and we know what they will reap.  And all of it abets the Great Divide.

    Calexit and the Great Divide.  Does anyone else notice how easily the Left welcomes the calving of a state from the Union when it is done to promote the cause of socialism, and weaken the United States?  And California’s socialists are using the same argument that is used by the State of Jefferson movement to create Northern California WITHIN the Union – namely, that the aggrieved are not properly represented in the next highest jurisdiction of governance.  But when SOJ proponents advanced their arguments about the absence of representation in Sacramento – a controlling one-party, super-majority legislature under a hyper socialist governor – then the Left filled the pages of our media, including RR comment streams, with accusations that characterized such an enterprise, as somewhere from foolish to treasonous.  (google ‘Calexit’)

    A dominant superstition of the Left is “the belief in the miraculous powers of the mighty state and its institutions” (N. Taleb), the misplacement of which has been demonstrated countless times; to which progressives respond, ‘Yes, but this time it will be different.’  Einstein had something to say about such hopeful assessments.

    [14apr18 update]  Union columnist Darrel Berkheimer tells us how “Republicans (are) facing decline to irrelevancy” (here).  We have covered some previous contributions of Mr Berkheimer who continues to expose his historically sheltered side to the public.  While his intended audience joins him in the clueless class, many of us remember similar celebrations in 2014 and most recently in 2016.  These pages serve as a handy record of offerings from the devotees of a one-party state.

    Syria gets a wee slap on the wrist to satisfy required international political optics as the US, Great Britain, and France pepper three inconsequential facilities with precision missile strikes so as not to hurt anyone too badly, or maybe at all.  Nevertheless, as Ramirez points out, there are a bunch of bad actors in the Levant and mid-east who have yet to be dealt with.

    Ramirez_180414

    We’re honored: The Union wins 16 California Journalism Awards, including first place for General Excellence

    Here’s one to frost the external plumbing of certain alt-Left extremists hereabouts.  The Union, much denigrated by those who consider themselves journalists several notches above our mighty little Nevada County trumpet, has pulled down some impressive accolades.  Much credit to the our paper’s publisher and editor, and the fine staff that they manage to pull the whole thing together.  We are proud and fortunate to have such a newspaper right here in River City – Congrats guys and gals!  

73 comments on Scattershots – 26apr18 (updated 29apr18)