Author: haroldblackphd

Balloons over El Paso, Super Ads, Homeland Security Soap Opera, Vaccines, Gunperson (?)

I was at breakfast the other day when one of my friends broke the news that the El Paso airport shutdown was not due to Mexican cartel drones but because of a party balloon. I almost choked on my biscuit. Then the other friend started singing “99 red balloons” – a song that I was not familiar with. The song is about some party balloons being mistaken for enemy aircraft igniting a nuclear war. Talk about life imitating art! The Trump Administration which seems prone to make statements prior to learning the facts – see the Minneapolis shootings – did it again. Transportation secretary Duffy said that the authorities had confronted a “cartel drone incursion” over El Paso and shut down the airport in order to use experimental lasers to counter the threat – only for the threat to turn out to be a party balloon. This sounds like something from the Babylon Bee and Duffy needs to fire whoever it was that made him look like a fool.

Were there any memorable commercials at the Super Bowl other than the Budweiser ad? The one that I thought was spooky was the Ring commercial that tracked lost dogs. I commented that I did not want those Ring cameras surveilling me. Talk about an invasion of privacy. Maybe it was a trial balloon (ha ha) because Ring has announced that it is discontinuing the feature.

Did you see the hit piece in the Wall Street Journal on Kristi (Border Barbie) Noem? It belonged more in the National Enquirer than in the Wall Street Journal mentioning that her relationship with her close “advisor” Corey Lewandowski, Trump’s former campaign manager, implying over and over a romantic relationship between the two. The article mentions their use of a private jet with a bedroom suite in the rear of the plane – the “adultery airplane.” Lewandowski apparently has a very close relationship with Noem and even tried to get Trump to name her as his vice president. Lewandowski has tried to run ads to burnish Noem’s image while the two have cut 80 percent of the original ICE personnel. Then there is the silly episode where a pilot was fired who did not transfer Noem’s blanket from one plane that had mechanical issues to another. The Coast Guard pilot was told to take a commercial flight home but had to be reinstated when no other pilot was available to fly them home. Basically the article points to infighting, dysfunction, and Noem’s obsessive self-promotion. This is embarrassing. Noem and Lewandowski should both be fired.

Speaking of firing, RFK, Jr and his team have done a good job shaking up HHS especially the “health” part. But they are creating chaos in the vaccine industry – and we all know what Kennedy thinks about vaccines. The latest being Vinay Prasad, Kennedy’s head of the FDA vaccine and biologics division, overruling staff recommendations by denying Moderna’s new flu vaccine application, arguing that its clinical trial was inadequate. Prasad has made a habit of overruling staff recommendations. At least nine companies, many of them focused on rare or hard-to-treat diseases, have said that Prasad has rejected their vaccines. 

Prasad must be doing Kennedy’s bidding here. Surely it has his blessing. Rarely had the FDA refused to review a drug or vaccine application. Prasad is making this a habit. Does this mean that potential lifesaving drugs will be denied the public? Will this be a chilling effect on the development of such drugs so long as Kennedy heads HHS? Moderna’s new flu vaccine is a mRNA vaccine which can be quickly adapted and manufactured to match new strains. The FDA also rejected Regenxbio’s gene therapy for the ultra-rare disease Hunter syndrome—which causes deformities and results in death in teenagers—despite the company following the agency’s guidance to win approval. This is the third rare disease drug Dr. Prasad has nixed in as many months. One writer says “It’s hard to recall a regulator who has done as much damage to medical innovation in as little time as Vinay Prasad.” But libertarians rejoice! The private sector is stepping up to certify safe vaccines since the FDA seems no longer willing to do so. Now, the American Medical Association along with the Vaccine Integrity Project at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota will privately evaluate the safety and efficacy of selected vaccines.

Lastly, in the reporting of the shooting in Canada’s Tumbler Ridge, the shooter was a male who identified as female. The reporting initially was binary with the New York Post referring to the shooter as “male/he”, the Wall Street Journal saying “female/she” and the BBC going to pains not to use any label at all. One news report said “An 18-year-old Canadian woman shot and killed her mother and stepbrother at their home before going to the school.” Mind you this 18-year old “woman” is a troubled teenaged boy who wanted to be a girl. The Canadian Royal Mounted Police report’s initial emergency alert to residents described the active shooter as a “female in a dress with brown hair.” Then, later after finding out that the shooter identified as female, the RCMP communications referred to the shooter as a “gunperson.” I guess the RCMP doesn’t realize that “person” had “son” as its last three letters. 

Murder rates down. No funding for Homeland Security

The falling US murder rates

The US murder rate fell in 2025 and like any administration, Trump’s is taking credit for it. Karoline (Lying) Leavitt crowed that “that the murder rate across America’s largest cities plummeted in 2025 to its lowest level since at least 1900. This was “the largest single-year drop in murders in recorded history. This dramatic decline is what happens when a president secures the border, fully mobilizes federal law enforcement to arrest violent criminals and aggressively deport the worst of the worst illegal aliens from our country.” What, no praise for the democrat mayors and police chiefs of these cities? It is true that the drop in 2025 is the largest one year decline. But so was 2024 and 2023 before it. This has been a continuing post-pandemic trend. Now Trump is saying that the 2025 drop is due to being tough on crime, but surely the Biden administration wasn’t tough on crime. So why the fall during Biden’s administration? Trump isn’t going to credit Biden for starting the downward trend. BTW, there has also been a dramatic decrease in violent crime and property crime as well. 

What is the explanation? Who knows? Not even the so-called experts can explain it. The trend is not just in large cities but is nationwide. Some have speculated that it may be due to advances in trauma care, but the numbers do not corroborate that. Others point to increases in funding for intervention. But decreases have occurred where there were no increases in funding. Some have speculated that crimes are being underreported. But that can’t be true nationwide. As one “expert” said, the reasons are multifactorial. Another said “we do not have reliable, multi-sector data or comparable contextual information available across jurisdictions to definitively identify—now or perhaps ever—what drove these declines.” Yet another “expert” said “The consistency of the homicide decline, both across cities and over time, makes me inclined to think this has to do with larger social movements, temporarily disrupted by COVID-19 when the world turned upside down, than with any one particular thing one particular city might be doing.” In other words, the so-called “experts” might be able to explain the causes in each individual case but haven’t a clue why this is happening nationwide. Some experts! Even I can make up a reason and I am no expert. How about there has been an increase in the purchase of handguns resulting in an inverse relationship between handgun ownership and the incidence of murders and property crime?

Homeland Security not funded

As expected Senate democrats blocked the Homeland Security Funding bill over limits on ICE. Apparently the announcement by border czar Tom Homan that the department was scaling back its disastrous operation in Minneapolis was not enough to convince the democrats to approve the funding. The vote was 52-47, when 60 votes were need for passage. John Fetterman was the only democrat to support the measure. Since Homeland Security had been separated from the appropriation bills only that agency will be affected with no larger scale government shutdown. Not just ICE, of course, is affected but also the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service and the Transportation Security Administration. But much to the chagrin of the democrats, federal immigration operations will continue. Republicans allocated $75 billion to ICE the border patrol in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill. Immigration officials have said they would continue drawing the funds during the shutdown. The rest of the agency will likely work without pay for a bit. I wonder under what conditions would the democrats agree to fund ICE? Perhaps firing Kristi Noem?

The Administration loses one and wins one on Temporary Protected Status

The administration is moving to expel from the country all those who entered under the TPS (Temporary Protected Status). It is also shutting down the program – except for white South African farmers. I am not clear under what circumstances are immigrants allowed to enter the country, how long they can stay and especially who is chosen to enter and who pays for it. 

What is TPS? This from the American Immigration Council:

“Congress created Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in the Immigration Act of 1990. It is a temporary immigration status provided to nationals of specifically designated countries that are confronting an ongoing armed conflict, environmental disaster, or extraordinary and temporary conditions. It provides a work permit and protection from deportation to foreign nationals from those countries who are in the United States at the time the U.S. government makes the designation.  A TPS designation can be made for 6, 12, or 18 months at a time. At least 60 days prior to the expiration of TPS, the Secretary must decide whether to extend or terminate a designation based on an assessment of whether the conditions in the foreign country have materially improved such that the reason for the initial grant of TPS no longer applies. Decisions to begin, extend, or terminate a TPS designation must be published in the Federal Register. If an extension or termination decision is not published at least 60 days in advance of expiration, the designation is supposed to be automatically extended for six months. The law does not define the term “temporary” or otherwise limit the amount of time for which a country can have a TPS designation.”

The Administration loses one

The administration is seeking to end the status for various immigrant groups and deport them. When it sought to expel over 350,000 Haitians who entered because of earthquakes in that country in 2010, it was blocked by a Federal judge who delayed the process until there could be a judicial review. Now it seems to me that 15 years is a bit more than temporary which is what the administration was arguing. In his first term Trump attempted to end the status for Haitians, but it remained in place due to court rulings and injunctions. Biden then redesignated the Haitians for TPS in 2021. Homeland Security had said that “Temporary means temporary and the final word will not be from an activist judge legislating from the bench.” The judge had ruled that “Secretary Noem, however, is constrained by both our Constitution and the [Administrative Procedure Act] to apply faithfully the facts to the law in implementing the TPS Program.” The administration has also sought to revoke the status of those from the 12 countries currently eligible for TPS: Burma, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, Lebanon, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen. Also, countries whose TPS status has expired have been ordered to leave the country. These include Yemen, Afghanistan, Nepal, Nicaragua, Myanmar and Venezuela. These cases are also before the courts. So I guess this will be settled at the Supreme Court. 

The Supreme Court had ruled previously that a TPS recipient who entered the United States without inspection is not eligible for permanent residence. In order to obtain permanent residence the person must leave the country, apply for a visa at a consulate. However, exiting the country would bar the person for re-entry for a period of up to 10 years. I have read of cases where TPS holders were preparing to leave the country and leave behind their children who were born here. Their children being US citizens. Of course, the Trump Administration is in court to contest birthright citizenship. But even if the Supreme Court rules for the Administration – which I doubt – it would probably not apply to those already with citizenship status.

The Administration wins one

In a separate case the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a lower court’s order blocking Homeland Security from ending Temporary Protected Status for about 89,000 aliens from Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua. Homeland Security’s Kristi (Border Barbie) Noem said “TPS was never designed to be permanent, yet previous administrations have used it as a de facto amnesty program for decades.” Noem also said “Under the previous administration, Temporary Protected Status was abused to allow violent terrorists, criminals, and national security threats into our nation.” Oh come now. This is a bit much. Why must this administration characterize TPS aliens in this manner? Certainly there were criminal elements admitted in this program but it is ridiculous to assert what the secretary is saying. More fundamentally, a review of the program is warranted without all the vindictive. Moreover, the case is not over for the 9th Circuit Court said in its order that it will determine whether to grant a stay pending appeal if the party asking for a stay has shown a strong likelihood “to succeed on the merits” of the appeal. Stay tuned.

Windsor to Detroit: A bridge too far?

For whatever reason Donald Trump hates Canada. First he imposes tariffs intended to cripple the country saying that the only way that they can avoid the tariffs is to become the 51^st state. Second, when Carney started negotiating a trade deal with China, Trump threatened a 100 percent tariff on Canadian goods. Third, Trump said he would decertify Canadian made Bombardier aircraft unless Canada accelerated the approval of Savannah, Ga made Gulfstream aircraft. Now Trump has seemingly come unglued over the new Gordie Howe international bridge set to be opened from Ontario to Detroit alleviating congestion on the busiest traveled corridor between the two countries.

Trump says the US should be given a 50 percent ownership in the bridge and complained that the Canadians built it using only Canadian products. How dare them! In its entirety here is his rant on Truth Social:

“As everyone knows, the Country of Canada has treated the United States very unfairly for decades. Now, things are turning around for the U.S.A., and FAST! But imagine, Canada is building a massive bridge between Ontario and Michigan. They own both the Canada and the United States side and, of course, built it with virtually no U.S. content. President Barack Hussein Obama stupidly gave them a waiver so they could get around the BUY AMERICAN Act, and not use any American products, including our Steel. Now, the Canadian Government expects me, as President of the United States, to PERMIT them to just “take advantage of America!” What does the United States of America get – Absolutely NOTHING! Ontario won’t even put U.S. spirits, beverages, and other alcoholic products, on their shelves, they are absolutely prohibited from doing so and now, on top of everything else, Prime Minister Carney wants to make a deal with China — which will eat Canada alive. We’ll just get the leftovers! I don’t think so. The first thing China will do is terminate ALL Ice Hockey being played in Canada, and permanently eliminate The Stanley Cup. The Tariffs Canada charges us for our Dairy products have, for many years, been unacceptable, putting our Farmers at great financial risk. I will not allow this bridge to open until the United States is fully compensated for everything we have given them, and also, importantly, Canada treats the United States with the Fairness and Respect that we deserve. We will start negotiations, IMMEDIATELY. With all that we have given them, we should own, perhaps, at least one half of this asset. The revenues generated because of the U.S. Market will be astronomical. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

Good grief. China will terminate all ice hockey being played in Canada, and permanently eliminate The Stanley Cup? Please understand that this is a Canadian bridge, built and paid for by Canadians using Canadian materials that Trump is insisting that we should own half of it. Trump apparently did not know that Michigan actually has an ownership stake in the bridge and that Canada is to recoup the cost of building the bridge with tolls it collects on the Canadian side. Also some U.S. steel and U.S. labor were used in the bridge’s construction.

I am almost getting inured enough to not consider this embarrassing. Of course White House press secretary Karoline (Lying) Leavitt said that Trump’s demand “is just another example of President Trump putting America’s interests first,” which he made “very clear in his call with Carney.” Again good grief.

The democrats have finally been able to get a bill to the House floor to rescind the Trump tariffs on Canada. The bill was sponsored by New York’s Gregory Meeks. The bill passed 219-211 and will pass the Senate given that twice last year the Senate voted to rescind the tariffs. Of course, the president will veto it and there are not enough votes in either the House or the Senate to override.

It is obvious to me that Trump is infuriated that the bridge is named after the legendary Canadian hockey star, Gordie Howe. I bet if Carney changed the name to the Donald J. Trump Memorial Bridge that the president would withdraw his all of his demands.

The Epstein files: Why does Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick still have a job?

I have tried to avoid the whole sordid Epstein mess. It looks like the mainstream media, including the Wall Street Journal, takes every opportunity to link Donald Trump to Epstein and yet there is no vocal movement to have Trump resign. Things are different on the other side of the pond. Britain’s prime minister Keir Starmer is “fighting for his job.” Why? Was he linked to Epstein like Donald Trump? No. It is because one of his ambassador appointments, Peter Mandelson has ties to Epstein. Mind you, Starmer has never met Epstein or been in any way associated with him. Yet Starmer is being pressured to resign. A member of his own Labour Party has said “the leadership on Downing Street has to change.” Starmer’s chief of staff and his communications director have quit but Starmer insists he will not step down. Starmer says he was a victim of Mandelson’s lies regarding his relationship with Epstein and would document it in releasing the files surrounding Mandelson’s appointment. However, the real bombshell is that Mandelson is being investigated over documents suggesting that he passed sensitive government information to Epstein a decade and a half ago. The offense carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.

Zowie! A person implicated in the Epstein sex scandal being investigated for passing sensitive documents to him? Of course there are all those rumors about Epstein being a foreign agent and likely blackmailing all these important figures through the use of his services for sexual favors. There is now an FBI document released as part of the dump of the Epstein files dated October 16, 2020 that says that Epstein was indeed a Mossad agent “trained as a spy” under Israeli former Prime Minister Ehud Barak. There are so many questions tied to the emergence of Epstein from relative obscurity to business and social prominence that heretofore have gone unanswered. One wonders if the full story will ever be allowed to come to light.

Regardless, isn’t it interesting that Britain’s Starmer is close to being ousted over having just appointed a figure tied to Epstein rather than being associated with Epstein himself? Meanwhile, Donald Trump is not yet under such pressure even though he had an association with Epstein. In parallel, one of Trump’s appointees, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is directly linked to Epstein. Lutnick has actually lied about his relationship with Epstein. Lutnick and Epstein were next door neighbors and Lutnick denied having anything to do with him after a visit to his home in 2025. Lutnick had said that “My wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with the disgusting person ever again.” However, Lutnick lied. in a recent hearing Lutnick told the Senate Appropriations Committee that he did in fact visit Epstein’s controversial island in 2012. Lutnick said “My wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies. I had another couple. They were there as well with their children, and we had lunch on the island.” Oops!

Lutnick had previously said “I did not have any relationship with him. I barely had anything to do with that person. OK?” However, on that trip to Epstein’s island, Lutnick sent Epstein an email dated Dec. 19, 2012 saying “Hi Jeff, We are landing in St. Thomas early Saturday afternoon and planning to head over to St. Anguilla on Monday at some point. Where are you located (what is exact location for my captain)? Does Sunday evening for dinner sound good?” Also, In 2017, Epstein contributed $50,000 to a dinner honoring Lutnick and another investor, which was put on by Jewish philanthropic organization UJA-Federation of New York. Epstein was offered a table and 10 seats to attend the event but declined. 

Lutnick is obviously lying about his relationship with Epstein. The last time I looked, Lutnick was still on the job. He had not resigned. Trump had not fired him and Karoline (Lying) Leavitt said “Secretary Lutnick remains a very important member of President Trump’s team, and the president fully supports the secretary.” 

In a very testy House Judiciary Committee hearing, attorney general Pam (Blondie) Bondi was questioned about the relationship between Trump senior officials and Epstein. Bondi was asked if the “Justice” Department planned to investigate Lutnick. Bondi responded that Lutnick “had addressed this himself.” So I guess the answer is “no.” While several democrats were sharply critical of Bondi and her handling of the Epstein files, only one republican sparred with her – Thomas Messie of Kentucky – whom Bondi called “a failed politician.” Bondi also insulted several democrats and had to be chided by Jim Jordan, the republican chairman of the committee to stop shouting over her questioners. Bondi has obviously adopted Trump’s tactic of attacking her inquisitors and insulting them. She even demanded that the democrats on the committee apologize to President Trump.

If this were Britain, Lutnick and Trump along with Bondi and Leavitt would be ousted. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

Bad Bunny and the Influencers: The sad consequence of social media

I keep seeing the term “influencer” and was wondering “what is an influencer” and who does an influencer influence? Wikipedia says “An influencer, also known as a social media influencer or online influencer, is a person who builds a grassroots online presence through engaging content such as photos, videos, and updates.” I also saw this definition: “An influencer is someone who has the power to affect the purchasing decisions of others because of his or her authority, knowledge, position, or relationship with his or her audience. Influencers are usually active on social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, X, TikTok, and Instagram.” 

So I guess that there are at least two types of “influencers”: one who influences opinions and one who influences purchases. But aren’t teachers influencers even though they may not have an online presence? Maybe it is just me and my scope of knowledge but I don’t know anyone who is influenced to purchase stuff because of someone on social media. I also don’t know anyone so addicted to a media personality to be swayed by their opinion either. Yes I know there are those who may be “influenced” but, thank goodness, I just don’t know anyone personally who is. I do remember CBS’s Walter Cronkite being called “the most trusted man in America” and Lyndon Johnson saying regarding the Viet Nam war “If I have lost Cronkite, I’ve lost Middle America.” Is Joe Rogan today’s Cronkite?

What got me thinking about influencers was media reporting on reactions by certain personalities to the Super Bowl halftime show. Of course, those on the right hated it while just as predictably those on the left loved it. But what did us mostly normal folk think? I haven’t seen a poll yet but I can report on a very small sample. As has been the case for a number of years, my other half and I joined the same set of couples for a wonderful gathering hosted by a close and dear friend to watch the Super Bowl. Usually at halftime a few of us gather in the kitchen to engage in conversation when the game is in hiatus. So I did not watch Bad Bunny. In fact, I have only watched one halftime show – Beyonce in 2013. After halftime, I asked “How was the show?” The most common answer was “It was ok – but a bit risqué.” They were referring to the dancers but not the lyrics (no one spoke Spanish). Reports were that many parents were upset over what some called the “excessive twerking and raunchy dancing” during the performance. 

Later when I read the translation of the lyrics, it seems that “risqué” might have been a wee bit understatement. Were the lyrics closed captioned? I hope not. Go see the English translation of “Tití Me Preguntó” and you will see why one republican congressman is calling for the FCC to fine Mr Bunny for vulgarity. On the other hand the Washington Post – which obviously has different standards – said “In general, Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show had the kind of wholesome, traditional family values that would have fit right in with some of the more sentimental commercials that appeared during the game.” Eye of the beholder, I guess. By the way, the most sentimental commercial was the Budweiser one with the eagle and the Clydesdale. How the Post thought that Mr Bunny and the Budweiser commercial were somehow aligned in “wholesome, traditional family values” defies credulity.

What about the influencers? Some people labelled as conservative influencers had a take that I thought called into question their intelligence. Someone named Jake Paul said that Bad Bunny was a “fake American citizen.” Huh? What is a “fake American citizen?” Does Mr Paul think that Mr Bunny and his fellow Puerto Ricans are “fake American citizens” of just Mr Bunny? With an attitude like that I would contend that Mr Paul is the “fake American citizen.” Then there is someone named Laura Loomer, who is reputed to be a MAGA influencer with the ear of the president. Ms Loomer said of the performance “This isn’t White enough for me.” (I thought Mr Bunny was wearing white). She also claimed that she “can’t even watch a Super Bowl anymore because immigrants have literally ruined everything.” If she really said this, Ms. Loomer is a racist fool and anyone influenced by her is also a fool. Was she referring to the eight children of immigrants who were playing in the Super Bowl? Was she referring to the racial mix of the NFL? Maybe she can watch old films of pro football and basketball in the 1950s to see all white sport teams. Or maybe she can watch film of my years at the University of Georgia from 1962-1966 when no black athlete played on the Georgia campus. Or then she probably loves the Winter Olympics – especially the events on snow. Again, anyone who claims to be influenced by this woman should be embarrassed. 

However, on the other side, the laudatory comments were almost as bad and biased – again see the Washington Post. ESPN’s Sportscenter was full of in your face DEI talk and was totally unwatchable. I turned it off. One writer wrote that “the Super Bowl is a color-blind celebration of excellence. It is the exact opposite of the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts that the Trump coalition opposes.” To be kind, this is idiotic. This is not the embodiment of DEI at all. It is just the opposite. The Super Bowl and the world of sport have absolutely nothing to do with “equity”. Equity seeks to normalize outcomes. The Super Bowl is the opposite of that. The Super Bowl is about “equality” not “equity.” No player on the field got there in order to meet a quota – which is what equity is all about. They were on the field because of excellence and because of excellence there is inclusion resulting in diversity. 

We don’t want equity in sports which ideally would result in all teams finishing with equal records. We should not want equity in life either. That is why socialism always fails. Sport is the opposite of socialism because it rewards individual excellence, achievement and in teamwork in team sports. Capitalism anyone?

I have opposed Trump’s war on DEI as being misguided. But I also opposed how DEI was implemented, practiced and abused especially in our universities. Years ago I wrote why the left favored “equity” over “equality.” The mess in higher education is a tribute to equity. The Super Bowl and excellence in sport are tributes to equality. And as to influencer, I don’t if this post changed anyone’s mind. Influencer I am not.

Who is stupider, Russian recruits or the rest of the world?

Excuse me but you don’t look Russian

Does this look like a Russian soldier fighting in the Ukraine? He is actually Kenyan. We know about the 12,000 or so North Koreans that are fighting alongside the Russians but Kenyans? Actually they are not alone.  Fighters from thirty six African countries including Cameroon, Ghana, Senegal, and Uganda are adding a bit of color to the front lines in that brutal war. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that foreign troops from China, Cuba, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, and Nepal are also fighting for the Russians. Shades of the French Foreign Legion! However, there are foreigners fighting for the Ukraine as well – Brits, Canadians, Americans, Colombians and other westerners. The British rented Hessian soldiers during the Revolutionary War. I guess this may be a throwback to when countries like the Swiss leased out mercenaries to both sides of the same war. It’s highly likely to be the case here. Some reports say as many as 35,000 foreigners fighting in this war are from 50 different countries. The media seems to concentrate on saying that many of these fighters are duped into joining the Russian army. If that is true then the Ukraine is a test of Darwinism. It is hard to believe some of the accounts of how the media is portraying these recruits. Call they be that stupid?

The world is getting stupider

Maybe the Russian recruits are that stupid because it seems that everyone else is getting stupider. Literacy levels and math proficiency in this country are falling. Test scores show that almost each generation is less proficient in math and reading that the previous one. But we are not alone! In an OECD report of literacy levels in 31 countries it finds that literacy levels are declining in almost all of them.

https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2024/12/do-adults-have-the-skills-they-need-to-thrive-in-a-changing-world_4396f1f1.html

The report says that in literacy, numeracy and adaptive problem solving proficiency, only Finland, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden excelled in all three areas. Literacy proficiency has declined more strongly among men than women, but men continue to outperform women in numeracy and adaptive problem solving. Chile, Croatia, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Korea, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal and Spain consistently perform below the OECD average in all skills domains. I was shocked to see Israel and Korea listed here. Notably, the lowest-performing adults saw the biggest decline in literacy skills, and on average across only one in five adults is only able to understand simple texts or solve basic arithmetic. Duh. Also adults with college education consistently score higher than those who have no college. But all education is not the same across countries and higher levels of education do not always equate to better skills and knowledge. The study finds that Finnish high school graduates consistently outperform college-educated adults in several countries, including Chile, Israel and Lithuania. Again I am shocked to see Israel on this list of poor performers. In countries with a large influx of migrants, the migrants are typically poorer performers than native residents. I guess that should be expected of the first generation of migrants but I would like to know how subsequent generations fare. I am reminded that almost all high performers at the national spelling bee seem to be children of immigrants.

The study also notes that internet usage has grown to 93. percent of those surveyed. This confirms what I have always said that we are now substituting tik tok and X for knowledge. The world is made up of three types: the three percent who make things happen, the 7 percent who know what’s happening and the 90 percent who haven’t a clue what’s happening. I had hoped that the internet would shrink the 90 percent as they became better informed. The OECD report shows I was wrong. The 90 percent is staying constant but is getting dumber. I was once criticized by a student who didn’t care for my course requirements and said “Why do I have to know anything when I have the internet?” Later in life he probably said “I went to the doctor and got a vasectomy because I didn’t want kids. When I got home they were still there.”

Given the failure of the US education industrial complex to educate our children we are getting dumber as a nation and may be less capable to compete on a worldwide level. But is that really true as the rest of the world is getting dumber along with us in a race to the bottom. The OECD study has opened my eyes but I get little comfort in finding that we are not alone in the march to stupidity. Speaking of marches, when is the best time to have a parade? March 4^th. Someone once said “Life is hard. But it is harder if you are stupid.” It’s even more harder if you are stupider.

Can Trump really be this insecure or this stupid?

It can’t really be true that the president told Chuck Schumer that he would release billions of frozen dollars for a New York infrastructure project if Schumer would get the Dulles Airport and Penn Station to be named after him. What is it with all this naming stuff? He had the board of the Kennedy Center that he had put in place while naming himself president of the board to rename the Center the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts. I thought you only put “memorial” on something if the person were dead. But he is shutting down the Center for two years saying it is for repairs when everyone knows it is because they are having difficulty booking acts to play there. 

Trump just loves to see his name on things. If its his buildings, golf courses, hotels or casinos that’s one thing but he has put his name on a new class of warships, Trump Accounts and Trump Rx. All this is sheer ego running amok. I am certain that we will see the name coming down once he leaves office, unless it was put there by an act of congress. I was surprised that his unilaterally trying to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America wasn’t the Gulf of Trump instead. Trump even wants his name on the new stadium being built for the Washington Redskins (er Commanders). How about the Trump Gold Card?

Politicians curry his favor by proposing to name stuff after him. One proposed June 14 as “Trump’s Birthday and Flag Day.” Another introduced legislation that calls for Washington Metro to be the “Trump Train.” Still another wants to rename Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport. Then there is the Trump Institute of Peace which replaced the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He wants to add his picture to $1 coins set to be minted in celebration of the United States’ 250th anniversary in 2026. He has put his name on the ballroom addition taking the place of the East Wing of the White House (Trump’s House?). Remember Trump University?

Bernie Sanders has introduced legislation barring the naming of any federal building or land after a sitting president. I wonder what the vote in the House would be on such a bill? Would it even pass the Senate? Sanders said “If the American people want to name buildings after a president who is deceased, that’s fine. That’s what we do. But to use federal buildings to enhance your own position very much sounds like the ‘Great Leader’ mentality of North Korea, and that is not something that I think the American people want.” Bernie is just taking a backhanded swipe at the president comparing him to an autocratic dictator. Trump, though he may aspire to be like Kim Jong Un, just is self absorbed with a boundless self-obsession showing a outsized, but very fragile, ego. Am I the only one who after seeing the president’s name plastered on everything is starting to view it as graffiti?

Just to be curious, I wondered how much stuff was named for Trump. AI almost blew up. AI couldn’t give me a specific number because of all the namings in progress. So I went to Wikipedia and the list was 22 pages long. Well be assured, no way I am naming this blog after him (since he passed me over to name someone else chairman of the Fed).

There is a new section of I-95 being proposed to be built in South Carolina and some local politicians suggested that it will be named the Donald J. Trump (Memorial) Highway in hopes of getting federal funding. One of the supporters said “He seems to like his name on things. And if it makes a difference, I’m all about supporting it. I’d just like to have a road paved.”

Well the chances that Trump might support this South Carolina project took a hit when its Senator Tim Scott was critical of a video that the president posted which showed the Obamas depicted as monkeys. Scott said that he was “Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House. The President should remove it.” The president made some lame excuse that he hadn’t seen the video and that it was posted by a White House aide. He said that he wasn’t going to apologize and the aide would not be fired. His press secretary Karoline (Lying) Leavitt was also defiant saying “This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King. Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

Fake outrage my rear end! I am outraged at the sheer stupidity of it all.

American socialism, where Bernie meets Trump

I am sometimes asked by my good friend Hallerin Hilton Hill to appear on his afternoon radio talk show. On more than one occasion he said “You are a republican?” And I answer yes because it is the only one of the two major parties that pays lip service to free markets. But that day may be past. Maybe it should now be that only one party used to pay lip service to the markets. I guess I have always been a conservative. My parents, my college and graduate school education all embraced conservative values. I used to be a fan of the Heritage Foundation under the leadership of Ed Feulner and Edwin Meese. Their mantra dovetailed nicely with my own values: “free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” No more.

Those values are the same that I learned from my parents who steadfastly loved America even though living in the south under Jim Crow and the starkest racial discrimination. But my folks talked of how far we had come as a people, were optimistic about the journey we had taken and realistic about how far we had to go. Both Mom and Dad’s grandparents were slaves giving credence to that journey. Both would tell us of the progress made from one generation to the next and only in America could that journey be made. They were republicans because they could not be in the same party and the racist democrats. Southern republicans were probably racist too but they kept a low profile and were mostly invisible in those days.

So when I went to the University of Georgia and had my first economics course, the text was Alchian and Allen’s University Economics. I still have that book today. In contrast to Paul Samuelson’s text, Alchian and Allen was one of market economics and taught the virtues of free markets, limited government and individual freedom. I knew immediately that I would major in economics. Georgia it seems only had market economists. I went to Ohio State to write under the great Karl Brunner who was an even stronger market economist and was good friends with Milton Friedman. No wonder I am who I am.

But today conservatism has been co-opted by something alien. Most congressional republicans have seemingly gone over to the dark side. The Heritage Foundation has abandoned basic principles and is losing many of its scholars, some going to Mike Pence’s think tank. Heritage is now aligning itself with the principles of Donald Trump. It flew the American flag upside down when Trump was convicted in New York. What Heritage has become is what many who call themselves “republicans” have become and that is a Trump “republican”. This is a new conservative and it is too bad that the term “neocon” is already taken.

Mind you, there is much to like about this president. But this is a president that has abandoned traditional conservatism and has dragged the republican party along with him. This is no leader espousing free enterprise and limited government like Ronald Reagan. This is a president (with Bernie Sanders) who wants to impose a 10% cap on credit card interest rates, have his own version of quantitative easing by buying $200 billion in mortgage bonds (Janet Yellen), buy shares in private firms and dictate their actions (Sanders again), let chipmakers sell to the Chinese but take part of their profits, set pharmaceutical prices (any democrat), confiscate Venezuelan oil and dictate who gets the spoils for its sale, stop investors from buying single family homes (Elizabeth Warren) and stop stock buybacks (again any democrat). 

What bothers me is that Trump in many ways is emulating left wing socialists in feathering his own nest. While in office Forbes says that his personal wealth has increased by an estimated $3 billion. In the rare earth deals where the government has taken a position in private firms, Trump’s son Don, Jr.’s 1789 Capital venture fund invested in one of the companies months before the administration announced its funding and equity stake. Commerce secretary Lutnick said “This investment ensures our supply chains are resilient and no longer reliant on foreign nations.” What Lutnick didn’t say was that Cantor Fitzgerald, which is chaired by his son Brandon was hired to raise private financing. Trump himself bought stock in Paramount/ Netflix while they were engaged in takeover talks. Some call this crony capitalism. I have other names in mind.

All the while most republicans have kept their mouths shut (with the exception of Rand Paul). Bernie Sanders has voiced his approval. Yet the same silent bunch would be up in arms had Joe Biden or Barack Obama done the same things. Republicans have abandoned their principles in the maelstrom that is Donald Trump. Some call this “populism”. I call it American socialism which is embraced by members of both parties and forebodes that future presidents both democrat and republican will likely expand socialism to the determent of limited government and market economics. Ronald Reagan said “The scariest words you can ever hear are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.’” Trump actually believes this. I am hugely disappointed in the republicans for not standing up for their principles but I will never go over to the dark side. I am a Reagan republican will continue to support “republican” candidates because the alternative is much much worse. 

Are sanctuary cities legal?

I’m confused – I know many say that that is nothing new. I was wondering if sanctuary cities (or states) were legal and how can they refuse to assist federal law enforcement. For example, Minneapolis mayor Frey said “Minneapolis does not, and will not, enforce federal immigration law.” Isn’t there the supremacy clause? Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution states that federal laws constitute the “supreme Law of the Land” and thus take priority over any conflicting state laws. Not being trained in legalese that seems pretty clear to me. So why hasn’t Trump sued all the states and cities that have declared themselves “sanctuary cities” to impede the actions of ICE? There are over 200 sanctuary jurisdictions in the country including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis. I asked AI about how can they be legal and was told that local entities have some discretion over law enforcement priorities. But why is it that that discretion trumps the Federal authorities? One must therefore conclude that the supremacy clause doesn’t establish supremacy after all.

The federal case that is relevant here is Printz which was on a provision of the 1993 Brady Handgun Act that required state and local police to enforce federal gun control laws. One of my legal heroes Antonin Scala opined that such “federal commandeering of state governments violated the constitutional principles of federalism that were safeguarded by the 10th Amendment.” Scalia ruled that “The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.” So apparently the anti-commandeering doctrine of the 10th Amendment trumps the supremacy clause of Article VI.

I asked AI about the 10^th Amendment. It said “The Tenth Amendment is part of the U.S. Constitution, and it basically says that any powers that the Constitution doesn’t specifically give to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people. So, it’s kind of a foundational piece for balancing power between the federal government and the states.”

I then asked AI if there were federal statutes banning sanctuary cities. Here is the response. “There’s no overarching federal law that outright bans sanctuary cities. The concept is mostly governed by state and local policies. The federal government has tried, at times, to cut off funding to sanctuary cities, but those efforts have faced legal challenges. Courts have generally ruled that the federal government can’t force localities to enforce immigration law, so it’s a bit of a gray area.”

So why not pass a federal law outlawing sanctuary cities? Of course there is no way such a law would get 60 votes in the senate.