Author: haroldblackphd

Did you hear Joe Biden’s speech in New York on guns? Referring to the Second Amendment he stated that “no amendment was absolute” and that preventing the sale of certain firearms “doesn’t violate anybody’s Second Amendment rights.” He also said that “You couldn’t buy a cannon when this amendment was passed, and so nobody with the money should be able to buy certain assault weapons.” My reaction was “who writes this stuff for him?” I went on the internet and found that I could purchase a cannon. An article in the National Review (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/americans-can-still-buy-cannon/) tells me that if the cannon were manufactured prior to 1898 I can buy one without regulation. I can buy a later model but subject to certain regulations. So Biden was wrong and his speech writer should get fired. I also found that I can buy a tank (https://militarymachine.com/military-tanks-for-sale/) or even land mines (https://www.buymilsurp.com/ordnance-grenades-munitions-landmines-c-3075_3181_3184.html). 

Thus, it is obvious even to the most casual observer who factchecks that Biden is misinformed on this issue and is spreading misinformation. Given his penchant for fabrication, perhaps he should be deplatformed from social media or at least there should be a qualifying statement to all that he utters. However, when I looked at the news coverage of the speech, the media mostly gave him a pass and did not question its accuracy. Some literally gushed saying it was “emotional” and “forceful”. Unfortunately it was also wrong. Part of the problem is that Biden is attacking guns and not criminals. The speech was devoid of criticism of “progressive” DAs who have weakened penalties, bail and sentencing. The basic question that is never addressed is why has crime and gun violence surged? New York has seen a surge in gun violence directly related to its dismantling of its anti-crime unit. Given its progressive DA, I wonder if this unit will be reinstated after the election of an ex-cop as mayor. Recall that New York has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. 

It is also illuminating that some of the most vocal advocates for stricter gun control laws live in gated communities and often employ security guards. One of the “squad” Cori Bush (D-MO) is a staunch advocate of gun control yet is reported to pay $200,000 for gun-toting private security guards.

Gun control is one of two national perplexing issues. The other is drug control. Although there are strict laws regarding drug control, there is evidence that such laws have failed to decrease drug use and crime associated with drugs. This is being displayed prominently with the fentanyl crisis. The drug has become the number one cause of death among those aged 18-45. Between 2020 and 2021, over 79,000 deaths were attributed to fentanyl. In contrast there were 45,000 gun related deaths of which 19,000 were murders and 24,000 were suicides. This is not to lessen the importance of dealing with gun crime but it does give one pause about our thinking about crime and its prevention.

February 4, 2022

Recently there was a headline on India Hicks and a fluff piece entitled “India Hicks at home.” I was expecting :

1. seeing a woman in a sari smoking a corncob pipe
2. guys throwing huumus cans out of pickups
3. people ordering light bread pita sandwiches
4. elephants with “88” painted on their sides
5. Ravi Shankar-Dolly Parton Grand Ole Opry videos
6. trailer parks in New Delhi
7. reruns of the Mumbai Hillbillies
8. sales reports on white socks and Blue Ribbon beer in Bangalore
9. Jeff Foxworthy routines of “you might be a brown neck”.
10. cobra handling

But no. It turned out to be an article on an interior designer of that name who is Prince Charles’ cousin.

I love to hunt deer and turkey. Having spent significant time growing up on my mother’s family farm, I loved walking through the woods with my grandfather hunting small game with my 22. There were no turkey in Georgia during those days and precious few deer. We hunted squirrels, racoons and rabbits. He would have loved to hunt bigger game but got his meat from the animals he grew and slaughtered. He and my grandmother grew cr9ps, made their own soap, churned butter and were essentially self-sufficient. My mother talked about lean days growing up but she said that they never complained and remembers being happy with what little she had. The farm now belongs to me. It is fully of good memories and I get no greater satisfaction than being on my ancestors’ land.

1. The wind will always be at your back (this is different from running where the wind is always in your face).

2. If by some miracle the wind is in your face and you suddenly hear a deer, the wind will shift to your back.

3. Murphy says that “if it can go wrong, it will”. Harold Black says “Murphy was an optimist.”

4. Deer will always pick the least assessable place to die.

5. If your gun (or bow) breaks, your 42 blade leatherman’s tool will not have a tool that fixes it.

6. When you take it go get it fixed, the repairman will say “In my 30 years I have never seen this happen.”

7. In bow season the deer will be in muzzleloader range. In muzzleloader season the deer will be in gun range. In gun season, the deer will be nowhere to be found.

8. If you can shoot a doe you will only see does with fawns.

9. If you can only shoot a buck, you will be overrun with does.

10. Deer calls never work. The best way to call a deer call is to take a leak.

11. Anyone who claims to have success grunting and rattling is lying.

12. If you see the buck of a lifetime walking down a path, you will only have a lefthanded shot (if you are righthanded you will only have a lefthanded shot).

13. If you see the buck of a lifetime when you are muzzleloading, the gun will misfire.

14. If you see the buck of a lifetime and you are bow hunting, the arrow will fall off the rest when you draw.

15. If you see the buck of a lifetime and you are gun hunting, you will sneeze.

16. If you hunt a road where deer always cross, they will only cross when you are looking in the other direction.

17. If the outfitter has a success rate of 100%, it will be lower when you leave.

18. Animals shrink if you shoot them.

19. If you only shoot deer 8 points or better, you will only see six pointers and spikes.

20. Deer only look up if you are in a tree stand.

21. A turkey always struts one foot past the exact distance that number 6 shot can travel.

22. Camo is about as effective as a deer with a sofa painted on its side can hide in your living room.

23. Hunting clothing billed as no-scents makes no sense.

24. Buck lures only to attract hunters to buy them.

25. The only hunters who swear by grunting and rattling for bucks are the ones who sell them.

26. Primos calls if they work at all must only work on Mississippi deer and turkeys.

27. If you decide to leave your stand at noon, the deer will walk by at 12:01.

28. The only purpose of scouting before the season is to find out where the deer were.

29. A person who looks down their nose and sneers “You kill bambi!” isn’t worth knowing.

30. If you go on a hunting trip with a group, expect to be the only one who doesn’t kill anything.

31. If you are hunting your own land without seeing anything all day and suddenly you hear something coming down a path, it will be your dog.

32. No woman is worth your time unless she thinks you look cute in camo.

33. Do you have more success stalking or still hunting? Neither.

34. Is the best time to hunt early, midday or late? None of the above.

35. Deer will always walk down the path you are not hunting.

36. The only camo that works is absence.

37. Anyone who tells you that a deer smells better than a person is obviously European.

38. Anyone who asks you why do you own so many different caliber rifles is obviously stupid because it doesn’t make sense to own ten rifles of the same caliber.

39. Since camo wearers look like trees and grass, I guess this makes them environmentalists.

40. Most muzzleloaders were designed to hangfire only when a big deer shows up.

41. That Al Gore rather than the inventor of the Loggy Bayou climbing stand was awarded a Nobel prize is a travesty.

42. My favorite t-shirt is from Cabela’s and says “Conservation through incompetence.”

43. If God didn’t want you to kill deer he wouldn’t have invented the pickup truck.

44. If God didn’t want you to hunt in the cold rain, he wouldn’t have invented GoreTex.

45. If Al Gore got the Nobel prize for inventing GoreTex, then I guess I am ok with it.

46. Since I have never seen a woman who looks like a Victoria Secret’s model, I presume that all about those women are fakes, the product of many plastic surgeries. Similarly, videos that show bucks called in by grunting and rattling are fake.

47. Those who can smoke in a tree stand and deer will walk by even though the wind is wrong and seem to kill big deer every time are the chosen few of which I am not one.

48. A person who claims not to like venison has never eaten my cooking.

49. Jerky is not a food since it cannot be broken down by saliva and chewing. It must be swallowed whole.

50. That jerky is not a food was proven when after I tried to eat it, I gave it to my dogs – who also refused to eat it.

51. Just like when I fish I only catch small fish (I’m a small fish specialist), I only see immature deer (which I let walk).

52. Anyone who says that if you kill a trophy animal every time you hunt then it would not be fun is a fool.

53. The hunter the outfitter describes as being “the luckiest hunter I have ever seen” will always be a person in camp. That person will not be you.

54. Recurve bowhunters are snobs and are hunting’s equivalents of fly fishermen.

55. The longest week I ever spent in my life was in a camp in Alberta hunting for bear and all the other hunters shot recurves.

56. There are 6 things that every bow hunter must do in order to shoot accurately. When a trophy deer approaches you will do five of them.

57. If you believe that nonsense about buying all that expensive no scents gear so you can “Forget the Wind – Just Hunt”, let someone release your dogs one hour after you go in the woods.

58. Game cameras tell you where to hunt at 2:03 in the morning.

59. The one hour before sunup is the longest time of the hunt – much longer than the 8 hours or so that follow.

60. Nothing is more satisfying than being able to furnish your own food.

61. I kill animals. I wear fur. I am not the least bit apologetic about being at the top of the food chain.

62. If spending days in the woods in camp with your dogs away from cell service, the internet and tv, hunting by day, smoking cigars and listening to night sounds is not heaven then what is? 

63. Sure most times you can kill just as many deer sitting at your kitchen table as you usually do in the woods, but coming home even empty handed to your dogs makes it all worthwhile.

---

This essay and subsequent ones can be found at https://oll.libertyfund.org/page/liberty-matters-the-legacy-of-walter-williams#61

Perhaps the greatest compliment paid to Walter Williams is that Thomas Sowell considered him his oldest and closest friend. [1] Like Sowell, Williams used common sense – the basis of economics – to address contemporary problems.  Economics tells us that price controls such as minimum wages, rent control, and usury ceilings may help a few individuals but will harm many more. Such facts led both to embrace capitalism and free markets as the mechanisms best suited to improve the well-being of the poor. Both cited historic and modern examples to illustrate their points. Williams’ use of common sense was often devastating and generated the usual chorus of wails from those who disagreed. However, Williams could not have cared less. On issues such as education, limited government, democracy, income redistribution, welfare, and race, Williams provided wit, logic, and reason in areas where there was often very little. To the chagrin of his critics, they could do little to prove him wrong. 

When writing about the education of Black children and their tragic performance in reading and math Williams stated that such performance was not always the case. Citing Sowell, Williams reminds us that all-Black schools during segregation demonstrated academic excellence. [2] Frederick Douglass High in Baltimore, Paul Laurence Dunbar High in Washington, DC and my alma mater, Booker T. Washington High in Atlanta excelled in an era where Blacks were poorer and overtly discriminated against. Williams implies that the education of Black children did not benefit from integration, and the evidence supports him. The question is why? During segregation, school teaching was an honorable occupation when the only jobs available to college educated Blacks were in the government or self-employment. A high percentage of primary and high school teachers were men. Discipline was enforced. Times have changed. Williams contends that the modern education system is a failure in large part due to the laxity of discipline and lower academic standards. Today the educators and “elites” have replaced what worked with what sounds good. Williams once said he was 74 years old and was glad that he had received most of his education before it became fashionable for white people to like Black people which meant that he was obligated to live up to higher standards. [3] 

Williams would point out the obvious when the obvious was being ignored. He was a skeptic of “systemic racism” and stated that the plight experienced by many Blacks had little to do with systemic racism or with the actions of the police. He noted that in many of our major cities, Blacks control many of the elected positions, police departments, and school officials. These cities have dreadful schools and high rates of crime, especially murders. Williams asks where the systemic racism is when Blacks are in control? It’s a question that the left avoids answering. Williams also implies that the left and the mainstream media conspire to keep Blacks distracted from addressing the main sources of their discontent by focusing on subjects like shootings – however infrequent – by the police. A poll asked how many unarmed Blacks were killed by police in 2019. Twenty percent answered 10,000 or more! The correct answer was 13. [4] The situation is not helped when famous Blacks, like LeBron James, tweet “I’m so damn tired of seeing black people killed by police.” To date, James has said very little about Black people being killed by Black people. In Chicago alone there were 769 homicides in 2020. Moreover, record homicides of Blacks are being recorded in most of our major cities. Where is the outrage?

Williams was a fierce advocate of limited government and opponent of forced income redistribution. He famously stated, “Let me offer you my definition of social justice: I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Do you disagree? Well you tell me what I earn belongs to you – and why?” [5] He also stated “No matter how worthy the cause, it is robbery, theft and injustice to confiscate the property of one person and give it to another to whom it does not belong.” [6] As such, Williams added to the debate of reparations and paying one’s “fair share” and did it in a manner that was intentionally provocative. Williams’ prescription for lessening poverty was simple: “complete high school; get a job, any kind of job; get married before having children; and be a law-abiding citizen. Among both Black and white Americans so described, the poverty rate is in the single digits.” [7] A controversial statement in today’s “woke” climate but again one that cannot be proven wrong.

Although Williams was labeled as a “conservative”, he was even handed when it came to criticizing both liberals and conservatives in government. Both liberals and conservatives advocate the confiscation of one person’s property to give it to another. The difference was in who was to get the spoils. In essence, taxationwas theft, and since the government is essentially nonproductive, it has to seize the property of others to function and to reward its friends and not its enemies (which change with each election). To quote Williams, “The compelling issue for both conservatives and liberals is not whether it is legitimate for government to confiscate one’s property to give it to another, the debate is over the disposition of the pillage.” [8]

Williams loved America and warned about the dangers inherent in democracy.  In his “The United States is not a Democracy, Thank Goodness” [9] he liberally quotes the Founding Fathers arguing that democracy leads to the tyranny of the majority. A democracy is where 50+1 percent can confiscate the property of the other 49 percent. John Marshall noted that “between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”  Thus, Williams was an advocate for a limited federal government, individual freedom, the separation of powers, and institutions such as the Electoral College. For Williams, the Electoral College prevented national elections from being determined by a minority of states – those with large populations – and imposing their politics on the rest of the country.

Williams reminded us to weigh costs and benefits. During the COVID-19 pandemic Williams chided governments for often taking actions without the benefit of any scientific justification and with no consideration of costs and benefits. He quoted then New York governor Cuomo who said that any action is justified so long as it saved one life. As Williams said, “Cuomo knows that many Americans buy into such a seemingly caring statement that would be easily revealed as utter nonsense if one had just a modicum of economic knowledge. Prudent decision-making requires one to compare benefits to costs.” [10] The example he gives is clear. He notes that there were 36,120 traffic deaths in 2019. Most could have been saved if there were a mandated speed limit of 5 miles per hour. When the costs and inconvenience of such a mandate are considered, it is clear that the benefits of saving those lives are outweighed by the costs. The same can be said about the shutdowns and mandates during the COVID panic.

Lastly, Williams was a vocal skeptic of man-made climate change. He cited the numerous grossly inaccurate predictions of doom and gloom related to climate change that proved not to be true. Here, Williams is at his acerbic best, deriding those who say it’s “settled science.” [11] He stated that “mounting evidence suggests that claims of manmade global warming might turn out to be the greatest hoax in mankind’s history. Immune and hostile to the evidence.” [12] Williams points out that earth went through a period of global warming which ended the Ice Age. Although there were a few humans on the planet, Williams notes that the end of the Ice Age was not caused by “coal-fired electric generation plants, incandescent light bulbs and sport utility vehicles tooling up and down the highways.” [13] Williams further states “there is much at stake in getting people to subscribe to the global warming religion. There is so much at stake that some scientists, using government grants, are fraudulently manipulating climate data and engaging in criminal activity.” [14] Lastly, he states “The absolute worst case of professional incompetence and dishonesty is in the area of climate science.” Needless to say, such a statement did not go unchallenged. However, a careful reading of both Williams’ criticisms and the rejoinder show that Williams is not referring to all climate scientists but only those who have adopted climate change as a religion and as a vehicle for enriching themselves. Which side is right?  The important thing to remember is that Walter Williams loved to poke the bear and provoke controversy. He succeeded and he will be missed.

---

[1] Sowell, “Walter Williams’ Memoir: Up from the Projects, The New American, December 8, 2010.

[2] Williams, “Black Education Tragedy is New” December 2, 2020, in Selected Syndicated Columns, walterwilliams.com.

[3] Williams, “Liberals Confuse Me,” The New American, September 29, 2010.

[4] Kevin Drum, “How Many Unarmed Black Men are Killed by the Police? Poll says Conservatives have the Best Estimates,” February 23, 2021, jabberwocking.com.

[5] Walter E. Williams (https://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/3104-walter-e-williams) 

[6] Walter E. Williams (https://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/3104-walter-e-williams)

[7] Walter E. Williams (https://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/3104-walter-e-williams)

[8] Walter E. Williams (https://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/3104-walter-e-williams) 

[9] Williams, Creators Syndicate, February 1, 2020.

[10] Williams, “Insane News Tidbits,” The Daily Wire, May 31, 2020.

[11] Williams, “Global Warming,” Town Hall, March 11, 2015.

[12] Williams, Climate Change Advocates Update and Invalidate Themselves,” Washington Examiner, February 23, 2010.

[13] Williams, “It’s Arrogant to Say Humans Cause Global Warming,” Desert News, January 13, 2010.

[14] Williams, ibid.

Knoxfocus.com

January 31, 2022

“One cannot hope to reason people out of those things they haven’t been reasoned into” – Jonathan Swift

After Joe Manchin said “no” to the Left’s latest attempt at transitioning the country to quasi-socialism, the Left lost its collective mind. Representatives, senators, the White House and their sycopaths in the media wailed that Manchin was a “threat to democracy”.  Biden was then implored to authorize as many of the “Build Back Better” provisions as possible through executive fiat. Huh? The Left somehow thinks that government through fiat is not a threat to democracy? Obviously, the Left must think that we all are stupid because they should know that the country is not a democracy nor was it ever intended to be one.

The Left is un-American. It wants to get rid of the foundations of the country and turn us into something different. Many of their number have advocated the following: abolishing the Senate, abolishing the Electoral College, packing the Supreme Court, federalizing elections, eliminating the filibuster and restructuring the House of Representatives to reflect one person one vote and abolish the Constitution. Doing any or all of these things will fundamentally alter how we are governed.

America is not a democracy and never has been. The Founding Fathers feared a democracy as much as they feared a totalitarian government. In fact, they stated – like Plato – that “tyranny arises naturally out of democracy”. The Founders feared the “tyranny of the majority” where the current whims of the majority could discriminate against the minority. Thus, they formed a government of checks and balances – a government that is a representative republic. It is significant that the word “democracy” does not appear in either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. None of the three legs of government are the result of unfettered democracy. The judiciary is not elected but is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The president is elected by members of the Electoral College. The members of the House of Representatives and the Senate are elected by the people but neither body reflects one person one vote. In the senate, each state gets two senators regardless of population. In the case of Joe Manchin, the left wailed that he comes from a state with a small population and can stymie the wishes of fellow senators who hail from more populous states. However, he cannot do this by himself. I guess they don’t count the 50 republican senators who were also opposed. Doesn’t 51 and possibly 52 senators opposed outnumber the 48 senators who would vote for the bill? Even the House of Representatives is not equally proportioned. District sizes within states vary. In California the difference between the population in the largest and smallest district is 121,000, yet each elects one representative that gets one vote. Therefore, shouldn’t the Left demand that each resident of California be equally represented? Clearly if the Left wants a total democracy, then they should advocate the abolition of both the House and the Senate. 

However, no election reflects one person one vote. In any election, only a fraction of the population votes. In the last presidential election, 67% of all citizens aged 18 and above voted. While this was a record turnout, 33% did not vote. This means that 83 million eligible voters did not vote. Of course, state and local elections have much worse numbers. For example, Knoxville has a population of 186,000 and voter turnout in city elections is around a dismal 29 percent of those eligible, meaning that a mere 10,000 votes can determine the mayor and city council races. Is this fair?

It is evident that those who wish to destroy the foundations of the country are shortsighted. When the democrats changed the rules of the senate to allow more Obama nominated judges to be confirmed, they did not envision the election of Donald Trump and republican majorities in the House and Senate, resulting in the seating of three conservative Supreme Court judges. Despite evidence to the contrary, they think that the whims of the electorate will always be in their favor. At a minimum, the Left wants the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico admitted as states. Hawaii and Alaska were admitted together so as not to upset the party balance in the senate. The Left assumes that the two new states will always vote democrat assuring the party of a majority in the senate although the addition of two new representatives will not likely  affect the House. Nonetheless, the overall objective of the left is to blow up our system of government. Perhaps they are wishing for what is transpiring in Latin America where many of the democracies have elected leftists and are moving toward authoritarianism. Yet be careful for what you wish. To quote von Mises: “The worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have his country ruled by socialists who are not his friends.”

I’m an academic – an academic who reads divergent viewpoints. In my doctoral classes I would have students read studies testing certain propositions and then compare them with contrasting studies looking at the same issues. I would then have them tell me which were the most plausible and why. I do the same with everyday events and not just academic esoterica.

Therefore, the censorship in social media of certain views claiming “misinformation” is disingenuous at best. What constitutes “misinformation”? Consider that social media is more likely to deplatform and censor conservative views while leaving misinformation on the left. Social media will censor Trump but not the Ayatollah. One of the latest dustups is the pressure on Spotify to oust Joe Rogan. Now I have never listened to a podcast and was unfamiliar with Rogan. From what I read, his sin is to present alternative views concerning COVID resulting in such faded musicians like Joni Mitchell and Neil Young pulling their music from the streaming service. As one wag wrote, at least Young has let us know that he is not dead. Spotify ditched Young as per his request because his music is long past popular while keeping Rogan. Take that! Of course if a truly popular Canadian musician (Young is Canadian) like Drake had pressured Spotify it would have been interesting to see the result. I never cared for the whinny singing of Young and was amused by his politically incorrect group Crazy Horse – which contained no Native Americans. I wondered why there were no protests. Certainly if the group were called “Aunt Jemima” there were have been indignant howls.

We don’t expect evenhandedness in today’s world, but if social media were so with “misinformation” it would deplatform and censor Anthony Fauci. He is the font of misinformation. He was against masks before he was for them. He calls himself the science while contradicting scientific evidence. He has steadfastly denied gain-of-function research funded by his agency at the Wuhan lab in the face of emails and correspondence to the contrary. He warned us not to celebrate holidays with family before changing his mind. He contended that the lockdowns saved “millions of lives” when there are over 60 studies showing that the lockdowns had no impact on COVID mortalies. I could go on and on. Remember “15 days to slow the spread?” Or “the vaccines will end COVID?” Or “No masks after vaccinated?” Or Biden’s ludicrous “pandemic of the unvaccinated?” Or perhaps the worse is assuring women that the “vaccines would not affect fertility” when there are studies that indicate otherwise.

For whatever reason, the media has bought into the “keep them scared” narrative when the evidence is to the contrary. Fortunately Americans are starting to tune out all the misinformation coming from the governments and their shills and moving toward adopting normalcy. The Canadian truckers are a case in point. While their media wants to paint them as extremists and potentially violent, the evidence is to the contrary. I feel sorry for the Canadians. Not just because I have had two moose hunts postponed but because they have abdicated their freedoms to the urban elites and to their haughty government. Maybe in all fairness, the Canadian government – as well as the CDC and Anthony Fauci – needs to be deplatformed.

Anthony Fauci is a Liar

Anthony Fauci is a liar but that’s to be expected since he is also a life-long unelected politician. Its getting so bad that the old adage applies to him: how can you tell if Fauci is lieing? His lips are moving. If you disagree I am open to arguments to the contrary. If you are convincing, I will issue a retraction. There was the denial of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab. Fauci denied it. He lied. There are hundreds of pages of information from the NIH that showed that federal grant money was used to fund bat coronavirus research in the Chinese lab. One leading scientist has said that Fauci is a “serial liar.”

Then there are his recommendations. At the first he said Coronavirus is not a major threat and it’s not something the citizens should be worried about.” He once said that healthy people should not be wearing masks. He defends his past recommendations on the coronavirus arguing that science changes over time. Speaking of science, recall when he said that to criticize him was to criticize science? I wonder how he justifies saying that children 4-years-old and younger will likely need three shots of a COVID-19 vaccine to complete their regimen. Doesn’t the science say that there is no justification for masking children and for vaccinating young children? It makes me think that he is in the pocket of Big Pharma.

He is the grinch that stole Christmas, urging Americans once not to get together for the holidays and later saying that it is OK if everyone is fully vaccinated and masked. Get serious. Even my democrat relatives did not do this during the first year of Covid.

He also favored lockdowns and shutting down schools. My youngest granddaughter did not have a graduation or a prom. Even though her high school had a large footfall stadium and could have practiced social distancing, they opted not to do so. This isn’t really surprising since she lives in Northern Virginia at the epicenter of wokeness. Weddings were canceled as were vacations. She is now at my alma mater, the University of Georgia where last year she and most of her dorm were quarantined due to Covid. No one got sick. The only bright spot for me was that when I went to visit my mother in Atlanta and go to the family farm in central Georgia, I could drive through Atlanta at 75 miles per hour.

Fauci claimed that if we did not follow his recommendations that we were no better than a serial killer. Those that challenged him were attacked by social media and de-platformed. YouTube just permanently deplatformed Dan Bongino’s channel for his statement that masks were “useless”. Opponents were called racists – the new mantra of the left. You were supposed to wear masks indoors. Reports came in of people being harassed for not wearing masks outdoors even though the science indicated that it was not effective to do so. First the mask wearing was tied to the unvaccinated and lately they are saying that mask wearing should occur amongst the vaccinated. Go figure. That indicates that the vaccines are not actually vaccines. They do not prevent folks from contracting the disease. Rather, if they just lessen the severity of Covid, then they should be classified as therapeutics. 

Then there is the recommendation that people should use a self-test if they are going out in public. If you test positive, this means you have an infection and should stay at home. Fauci said: “One of the things you can do is try to restrict your activities to situations where you know the vaccination status of people.” Well I don’t understand the self-test. I found it somewhat amusing when I saw pictures of long lines waiting to be tested. Why? If you self-test positive and are nonsymptomatic what should you do? Surely you should not run to the hospital. If you test negative, just remember you have been standing in a line with hundreds of people and could be positive the next day.

Even Fauci now says that health care workers who test positive can end their isolation period sooner and get back to work if they don’t have symptoms and wear N-95 masks and other personal protective equipment. However, even Fauci cannot explain why health workers are not 100% fully vaccinated. What do they know about the vaccines that we don’t know? 

Fauci actually said that we may not need an omicron boost. “But I think it’s prudent to at least prepare for the possibility that this may be a persistent variant that we may have to face, even if it’s at a very low level.” 

One thing that I will never understand is the postponing of important medical procedures during Covid. How many died because of lack of diagnosis and operations? Twenty-eight million surgeries were postponed worldwide. Thirty-eight percent of cancer surgeries were canceled. Why was Covid deemed more important than cancer? Someone please tell me.

It’s taken a while but polls indicate that Americans have lost faith in Fauci who has a trust rating of only 30 percent. This means that at long last Fauci has fallen from sainthood and Americans do not trust what he says or the attempts by the media to ignore his lies and misinformation.

What happened to natural immunity? Remember when Fauci said that we would reach herd immunity with vaccines coupled with natural immunity. He is ignoring natural immunity and is going full bore with vaccinations – even for those who have already had Covid. This is despite the evidence that those with natural immunity who get vaccinated may have serious aftereffects. In fact, everyone I know who has had an adverse and sometimes life threatening reaction to the vaccines has previously had Covid. There is also evidence from Israeli studies that natural immunity is 27 times stronger and lasts longer than the vaccines.

There is considerable evidence – cited in the Wall Street Journal – that all of what we have been told and currently being told will actually prolong the disease and may strengthen it. These scientists are now recommend abandoning social distancing and masking. They also recommend against the vaccines except for the vulnerable – mainly the elderly with co-conditions. Since the dominant variant is omicron which is a mild Covid often likened to having a cold, the scientists say that the spreading of omicron will lead to a super immunity and we prevent it at our peril. To date I have not heard Fouci endorse this position but stay tuned.

Lastly, Fauci should be forced to resign. The bombshell report that Fauci deliberately lied to the public and under oath to conceal the origins of the virus leave no doubt of a coverup. Former congressman Jason Chavitz writes that leftist apologists from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg to scientific journals like the Lancet stifled valid questions, censored credible scientific perspectives, and prevented justified congressional inquiry. “Fauci himself was emphatic in his public comments. In October 2020, he told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulous that the lab leak theory “would be molecularly impossible.” Likewise, Fauci told National Geographic in May 2020 that the virus “could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated.” When questioned in Senate hearings, Fauci called his questioners morons and liars.” No Dr. Fauci, your questioners are no liars. You are.

I am not a gold bug. Sure gold has its uses but its just not to my taste. I don’t own any jewelry, I don’t collect coins, and my fillings don’t glitter. Today there are two issues: should I buy gold and should the US go on the gold standard? Should you buy gold? I don’t really care but I won’t. Gold has now ventured into the greater fool territory as in “I know the price is high but there is a greater fool than me out there who will pay more.” If that were not the case then no one would buy it – the old buy high sell low axiom. Sure gold was a good buy when it was $350 an ounce but at $1,832? Not a chance. Throughout my lifetime gold has proven to be a lousy investment. Its natural price seems to be below $400 an ounce so a buy and hold strategy is a losing one. People do not buy gold as an investment, rather they buy it as a hedge against inflation. Thus, knowing when to sell to that greater fool is as important as knowing when to buy. The key is to not be that greater fool. Personally I would rather buy a real asset as an inflation hedge. But do what you think is best but know that you cannot find any evidence that a buy and hold gold strategy is a good one.

Well what about a return to the gold standard? Those who advocate this argue that a gold standard would stop the government from controlling the money supply. All governments it is argued are tempted to inflate the money supply and cause inflation, devaluing the currency. If money creation were tied to gold, the argument goes, then there would be no inflation. Such an argument is naïve at best. Governments under the gold standard have always found ways to create more money. The easiest way is simply to change the value of the currency in terms of gold. Instead of a $1,000 an ounce make it $2,000 an ounce. Voila! The money supply is doubled! Governments have also debased the currency by adding lead to the coin or by decreasing the purity of gold coin. Where there is a will there is a way.

What is more curious is that most of the gold standard advocates profess to favor free markets – that is markets free from government interference. How they can reconcile a gold standard with that philosophy is beyond me. The government would have to artificially set a price for gold and then manipulate prices to maintain that standard. This is the antithesis of the free market. First, what should the price be? What about the market price? Well the market price is the price today. If we set it at that price, then what happens when the market price changes? Do we increase the money supply when the price of gold rises and then decrease it when the price of gold falls? What about economic growth? Historically the US economy grows at about 2 percent real GDP per annum. If the money supply grows at that rate then we have economic growth without inflation. The question is what is the growth rate in gold? It is around 50 million ounces per year. If the gold supply increases faster then we have inflation. If it increases slower then we have deflation. Do you really want economic growth dependent upon how much gold is dug out of the ground or that flows into the US Treasury? I don’t. Next consider that we set the price at around today’s price ($1,842 an ounce). The last time I looked, the US held a little more than 8,900 tonnes of gold (a tonne is 2,204 pounds). If my math is correct, then that would leave the US a money supply of $650 billion. Well currently M2 is $14 billion. US GDP is $20 trillion. This means that velocity is around 1.42. So under the gold standard with a money supply of $400 billion and velocity of 1.5, we would have to shrink GDP by around to around $650 billion. Say what? Moreover, there are around 140,000 tonnes of gold out there which means that US reserves are around 6 percent of the total. If you look at the amount of US debt held around the world, the top fifteen countries hold more of our debt than what would be the US money supply under the gold standard. Any of these countries and many others could show up and say “exchange your debt for your gold” any essentially plunge the US economy into depression. Then there is the famous Gresham’s law – bad money drives out the good”. Historically this is one of the biggest problems of the gold standard in that gold has a price as a commodity which is determined by the market and a price as money which is determined by the government. The two are only equal by happenstance. If gold is worth more as a commodity it flows out of circulation and the economy slows down and deflates. If it is worth more as money, then gold flows into circulation and causes inflation. Lastly, one of the largest private owners of gold lies with the enemy of the right – George Soros who could manipulate the US supply. Do we really want to turn over the fate of the US economy to George Soros. Hum. Maybe he is secretly financing those pushing for a gold standard.

The left is more adept than the right at getting its way with corporate America. Witness the spate of “wokeness” at the largest corporations and the kowtowing to threats by the left. Many large Georgia firms condemned the changes in the state’s voting law after being threatened by the left – even though some had previously voiced no opposition to the law. Consider also the number of firms that have incorporated Critical Race Theory into their training programs even though there is no evidence that such training changes behavior. America’s woke corporations read like a who’s who: Twitter, Facebook, Disney, Nike, Coca-Cola, the NBA, the NFL, PayPal, Starbucks and many others. Firms are advertising using transgender and homosexual themes. In a market-oriented economy, one would think that these ads must be directed at the entire market since so few people are either transgender or homosexual. The question is why? Perhaps it is because “discrimination” as a toxic concept has been thoroughly ingrained in our society’s psyche. Corporations do not want to be labeled as being discriminatory toward minorities. First this was racial minorities, then religious minorities and now sexual preference minorities. Being perceived as discriminatory is bad for business, so corporate America puts on a nondiscriminatory, all are equal, face even if it is a façade. Ask these corporations if wokeness extends to the boardroom or the C-suite or the workforce. Sure there will be some minorities present but are they in positions of power? Maybe but, in most firms, not likely. More fundamentally does wokeness extend to the leaders of the corporations’ personal life – their church, their neighborhood, the schools for their children? Again, not likely. Wokeness is do what I say – not do what I do. Wokeness is trying to impose changes on our language with pronouns being put under the signatures of many academic administrators, eliminating gender-specific pronouns and even trying to force Latinos to call themselves “LatinX’.

Another reason for corporate wokeness is that the “social justice” mantra has taken hold amongst the young, educated cohort with the most purchasing power. That group has embraced wokeness and has given it the appropriate clucking noises. Corporate America has listened and feels that showing social awareness is good for the bottom line. Why else has Nike embraced Colin Kaepernick? Nike obviously believes that it will gain more young customers than it loses in old fogies. It was correct. Marketing surveys report that the Kaepernick ads resulted in a net 28% positive impact on the brand. Michael Jordan once said in response to why he was silent on social justice issues that “Republicans buy tennis shoes too”. But since Jordan’s shoes are a Nike product, then Nike can have it both ways, with the young crowd buying Nikes and the older folks buying Jordans.

In our local Knoxville market, the loud left is grousing over the temerity of some prominent local businesses to actively promote more business-friendly elected officials. Knoxville’s left is advocating boycotting their businesses. The question they make the businesses cower. I guess they assume if they yell and whine loudly enough that they will get their way. As for me, I will patronize these merchants even more. But of course I gave up my membership when Costco canceled my favorite pimento cheese when its owner said truthful things about Black Lives Matter. I had no impact on Costco and hopefully Knoxville’s left will have no impact either. 

Warning: On this topic I am woefully ignorant. 

Vladimir Putin is threatening the Ukraine. What should be the US response? But first, I wonder if Putin would be doing this if Trump were still president? America is in disarray with a weak, incompetent, incoherent president. In the year since the election, the senate is split 50-50 and the House has a razor thin democrat majority. The economy suffers from inflation, supply chain issues, a self-inflicted energy crisis, humiliation in Afghanistan, distrust of our institutions and misinformation resulting in confusion over COVID. Why shouldn’t Putin (and China, Iran and North Korea) feel emboldened?

Again, what should be the US response? Our European allies are split. Britain is sending weapons to Ukraine. France is saying that it should negotiate with Putin without the US – likely because it is still fuming over the submarine deal with Australia. Germany has joined the side of the Russians and is no longer an ally in this space. Consider that Germany will not allow Estonia to supply Ukraine with German-made weapons. It will not even allow Britain to fly to Ukraine over German airspace. Why? The reason is simple and a warning shot to America regarding energy. Germany has made itself dependent upon Russian energy. The Germans are shutting down their nuclear plants and phasing out use of fossil fuels. As a result, despite subsidizing energy costs with over 20 billion euros a year, Germans pay the most for energy than any country in Europe. Russia is the primary source for German imports of oil and natural gas. Although Germany is coal-rich, it is cheaper for it to import its coal from China. Thus, Germany is also shutting down all its coal fired plants. “Renewable” energy constitutes around 50% of energy in Germany. These actions, overwhelmingly endorsed by the German government and its people, belie the old notion that Germans are smart people.

What should be done? Here is my admittedly naïve view. First, we should tell Putin that if he invades Ukraine, we will terminate all economic trade with Russia, impound all financial accounts and terminate Russian access to our markets including financial markets. Second, we should support Britain but make clear that no US ground troops will be deployed. Third, we should give Germany notice that if they do not support Ukraine then we will withdraw all US troops from Germany and permanently close our bases. On the other hand, if they support Ukraine then we will supply German energy needs via shipments and pipelines. Of course, this means that we will have to reverse the idiotic policies that are putting us on the same energy-dependent path that Germany is on. We must open up oil and gas leases, pipeline construction and the use of clean coal and nuclear power.

However, I do not expect our weak Administration to do any of these things. I doubt if it has the spine to confront Putin. I doubt it has the spine to flex its muscles in Europe and I know it does not have the spine to confront the Greenie Weenies on the Left. Let’s just hope that if the Russians invade the Ukrainians will defend themselves enough to make the Russians regret their decision.