Covid-19: Foreshadows the Price That Will Be Paid for Ignoring Science

Chris Boese@chrisboese

One might consider this the first serious “shot across the bow” that is the result of ignoring the scientists who have been shouting from the rooftops about the fragile nature of our planet.

I say “serious” not to diminish the hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires that take a temporary hold on our consciousness in the 24 hour media loop that we call the “news of the day.” That’s just my point — it is a loop-de-loop of events that impacts pockets of the nation — of the world.

New York’s Hurricane Sandy; Louisiana’s Katrina; Tennessee’s tornado; California’s wildfires — they interrupt our lives (unless we are in their path), and, thankfully, the country tries to rebuild, replenish, reassert our will over Mother Nature. And then the news marches on to the next localized calamity.

Not so with Covid-19.

Disregarding the latest misinformation from President Trump, even Fox News has put 2 and 2 together and realized, “Houston, we have a problem.” This time it touches every one of the 50 states. This time what the scientists and medical experts say has our attention (and it is not limited to 24 hours). This time (cue the dramatic pitch of the orchestra) it really matters.

Yes, the climate is warming because MAN IS MAKING IT SO.

The truth is far from “inconvenient” — it’s toxic. And it will kill whole swaths of the population in every country. According to The New York Times’ David Wallace Wells, in his article “Time to Panic,” Wells quotes a familiar voice of Earth’s stewardship, “At the opening of a major United Nations conference two months later, David Attenborough, the mellifluous voice of the BBC’s Planet Earth” and now an environmental conscience for the English-speaking world, put it even more bleakly: ‘If we don’t take action,’ he said, ‘the collapse of our civilizations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.’”

Ours is to do three things at once: recognize that those in positions of power are not paying attention to the dire predictions of scientists, remove them from authority, and simultaneously try to minimize the human toll.

What can someone take from this worldwide epidemic? Let’s start with the basics: Global Warming is REAL. It’s not a hoax cooked up by the Chinese, who are the current villains the President blames. The Polar Ice is melting — faster than we expected. Yes, it will cause flooding, and we will lose cities like Miami. Yes, the climate is warming because MAN IS MAKING IT SO. (The good news is this nation can start to deal with it by agreeing to continue with the Paris Accords.)

Perhaps the most important thing to be done by our citizens is to elect leaders to the House, Senate, and the Oval Office who believe in science, regardless of their political party.

Who do not pander to the fossil fuel industry.

Who do not believe windmills cause cancer.

Who understand that America cannot “go it alone” in this decade that will surely be the tipping point of environmental survival.

Americans should not elect leaders who tell us falsehoods that are self-promoting. Americans should ignore the short sighted delusions of hucksters posing as “journalists” (who do not even have a college degree!); those who demand the attention of people too tired, too busy, too ignorant (myself, included) about science and the dangers of our energy production. These blowhards who lead us astray with the notion that government is the enemy, yet at the same time they profess undying devotion to that same government (as long at government keeps its hands off their wallet).

Simply put, if we do not change the trajectory of this planet’s occupants who pollute the atmosphere, then the pandemic that has doubled over citizens with a gut punch that has so many gasping for breath, will be to some, just a glitch, a minor hiccup in the machinery of global consumption.

If America’s citizens are not frightened enough to finally listen to scientists, doctors and nurses who understand the real “curve” the planet is facing, then we will be destined to perish. That’s the Inconvenient Truth that is being ignored.

Pulp Thrillers are Just Plain Twisted

Cesar Viteri@multimaniaco courtsey of Upslash

There are books that you just do not want to end. The characters are endearing — you wish, like Holden Caulfield, that you could meet the author and chat about the world as they see it. I felt that way when I read Jeanine Cummins’ American Dirt. Then there are books that you can’t wait to get to the ending, not because you savor the novel, but because the author has teased you so much that you just want to get it over with. Rather than have endearing protagonists, you find yourself enduring those characters. So give the author John Hart and his debut novel of 2006 The King of Lies credit — he does own hook, but his bait will I never take again. Not from him or his ilk. What do I mean by his ilk?

I read some of these novels at my own risk because these writers are so popular that I think there must be something redeeming in their work?

To explain, I love John Grisham. I respect what he stands for and what he fights against. His protagonists face difficult situations — usually ones that are plaguing society whether it is a political, social or judicial issue. Generally, that protagonist has right on his side and flies with one’s better angels. Mr. Hart, like the pulp fiction authors that I have managed to at least try to read (Michael Connelly, David Baldacci and Scott Turow), has mired himself in the thriller-murder-rape-and sex genre. The protagonist is often a sexual titillation-crazed, tormented man who broods his way through a mine field of plot twists {for twists’ sake!}. You just want to shake him from his (often drunken) stupor and tell him to just stop being a coward.

I read some of these novels at my own risk because these writers are so popular that I think there must be something redeeming in their work? And there is with Hart’s novel The King of Lies, if you can handle 300+ pages until one finally gets to one powerful “ah ha moment” — one that you know should have been articulated by a character so much sooner — but no! The reader has to wade through pages and pages of description of southern landscapes and foolish characters that stop just short of speaking their truth. Why? It is so unrealistic.

Ah, but that is the hook. To me it is pretentious and galling. I commend Mr. Hart for writing a “literate” narrative as The New York Times claims back in 2006 when the novel was written. And I understand that evil exists, diabolical evil, but for cryin’ out loud, these authors appeal to the worst instincts that tempt our soul. In my case, I just knew that I was in quicksand about 100 pages in, but Hart just had me fooled into believing that something truly noble would result in the protagonist’s action. It took the hero’s bottoming out (so many times) that in despair I finally said to myself, “Why is this man so dense? So unable to articulate the obvious? Why is the author toying with me? Why…because that is what pulp fiction is. It is disposable. It appeals to the darker part of our psyche.

I tell myself — well, that the last time I’ll read that author. I am reminded why Jane Harper, John Grisham, Kristen Hannah write literary fiction and not just pulp page-turners. Their work plays to Dr. King’s arc of justice; it may not be “a who-done-it,” rather it is about what was done and by whom. These authors create characters one can admire and, in so doing, the reader invests their time and their heart in meaningful, often misunderstood, complex issues.

In that same vein, American Dirt by Jeannie Cummins is a thriller that should create policy that will shake the conscience of Americans who have been hardened against terrorized migrants from “the Americas” south of my hometown of San Diego; conned by a fearful, racist Trump administration that ironically has created its own “American Carnage.” Now, if I could just sit and chat with Ms. Cummins….

Why the Earth Trumps Trump: The Reason All Voters Must Replace Donald Trump

Visuals@visuals

Let’s start with one basic hypothesis:

Global Warming is an immediate threat to America.

Donald Trump does not believe in Global Warming.

Thus, Donald Trump is an immediate threat to America.

Period. Drop the vote in the ballot box. In case one needs to be reminded of Mr. Trump’s positions on global warming, in 2013 he called it a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. As for his more nuanced comments, “Trump, despite his talk about clean air, has given no indication at all that he’s particularly interested in giving much weight to any consideration besides jobs and profit margins. Every time his administration rolls back another set of rules or regulations, the framing is the same: It’s important for the economy,” the Washington Post reported on Jan. 9th 2020 by Phillip Bump.

Bump went on to explain what Trump’s idea of the environment really equates to, “Under President Barack Obama, that mandate had been expanded to include new attention to the effects on climate change. Trump, while claiming to be an environmentalist, wants to loosen environmental rules similar to those which, in another context, he used to tout his own environmentalism.”

“If the Trump administration is confined to four years, basically every single thing that happened during the Obama administration can be protected,”

Now for some ah-ha moments. First, “Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency was decided in a 5 to 4 ruling in 2007. It laid the groundwork for many of former President Obama’s climate policies, including the Clean Power Plan,” according to Richard Lazarus, author of a new book about the case called, The Rule of Five: Making Climate History at the Supreme Court.

Second, due to this key decision, the Obama administration put into place environmental regulations that have mitigated the hazards of man-made elements that are warming the planet. However, President Trump has undone some those rules through Executive Action. But these actions can be reversed with little major impact if Trump has only one term.

Five years from now, the damage will only become more catastrophic. On NPR of March 9th, 2020, Richard Lazarus explains, “If the Trump administration is confined to four years, basically every single thing that happened during the Obama administration can be protected,” Lazarus says. “If there’s another four years, it will be much harder, protect all those regulations, all those rules, and harder to protect the Paris Agreement.”

Which brings us to the Paris Agreement. It is still in force today. It does not ‘term out’ until after this election. Electing a Democrat is critical since even one of the most prominent Republicans admits that global warming just does not seem to register to his fellow Republicans as Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens explained to Lazarus: “What Justice Stevens told me was this was a really important case to him,” Lazarus says. “He could not understand why so many people, including so many Republicans, and he was a Republican, didn’t understand the seriousness of climate change. He wanted to make a statement.” This was in 2007….

But recent studies confirm the stubborn Republican view of global warming and the change in climate. The New York Times in 2017 reported the results of major studies, “Fewer than a third of registered Republicans nationwide say that climate change is caused mostly by human activities, while nearly half say it’s mostly due to “natural changes in the environment,” according to the study, which looked at eight years of opinion data and mapped the results by congressional district. ‘Being skeptical about global warming has become part of Republican or conservative identity,’ said Riley E. Dunlap, a professor of environmental sociology at Oklahoma State University who was not involved in the study.[“How Republicans Think About Climate Change” Nadia Popovich12/14/2017]

“He could not understand why so many people, including so many Republicans, and he was a Republican, didn’t understand the seriousness of climate change.

So that’s that. If you are a Republican voter and you believe that global warming is a serious threat that is not ‘trendy’ then you are in the minority in your party. And if so, you owe it to yourself and your descendants to vote for a Democrat for our next American President even if that person has programs that you don’t cotton to. Why? The Earth Trumps Trump. It is very clear.

Other issues pale by comparison. Abortion: we can debate it out. Civil Rights: let’s keep making progress. Guns: how about a compromise? Taxes: gosh, I wonder what the economic hit will be when we find coastlines under water? Education: let’s start with learning about our endangered planet. Crime: it will get worse as resources get limited. Immigrants: we may all be moving to high ground. See what I mean?

Let me repeat this sober denouement from Richard Lazarus: “If the Trump administration is confined to four years, basically every single thing that happened during the Obama administration can be protected. If there’s another four years, it will be much harder, protect all those regulations, all those rules, and harder to protect the Paris Agreement.” Without the 197 nations in tow as is in Paris’ Agreement, the world will not have much of a chance.

No pun intended, but with a name like Lazarus, we can only hope to rise up from the dead.

Trump’s ‘Intended ‘ Consequences

Samantha Sophis @samanthaspohis from Upspash

I wonder: are people so naive to Mr. Trump’s intentions as a man who wields tremendous power? I hope not. It is about time that all Americans realize what a foolish, dangerous man he is — people of all political persuasions.

NPR’s Steve Inskeep talked to Hugh McColl, ex-Bank of America CEO, on February 28th, and McColl claimed he “is a life long Democrat” and is willing to vote for just about any democratic contender ; he favors Bloomberg. He hopes that a moderate candidate can get America back to a place of sanity, not just financial markets but in the marketplace we seem to have lost hold of: one governed by the rule of law. McColl is certainly not naive.

Of course, Trump’s actions are intended, and they have been from the very start. He’s been attacking the media as the ‘enemy of the people’ as his first priority because anyone who criticizes him fair game to what he calls a ‘counterpunch’. Common sense dictates that the greatest leaders of any company, classroom, or government are only as strong as their ‘team of rivals’; however, for Trump any rival is a threat, which speaks to his own insecurity and shallowness.

His intent is to use ICE and the American military (on the Mexican border) as part of his political power. This is what blow-hard bullies do. They pick on the weakest link (migrants) or those who play by the rules (mainstream journalists) and then do all they can to delegitimize them. He will claim the powerless migrants are the great danger to America since they are “rapists and murders”; and as he claims only “I can solve” these problems. He reminds citizens that “I know more than the generals.” (Of course he does. He has so much military experience that it boggles the mind.) All of this is intentional.

As for journalists, he interviews with only those who lick his boots (a classic Russian TV strategy via Putin). He made a huge (impeachable) mistake speaking with Lester Holt years ago and stupidly admitting that he fired FBI Director James Comey because he was nosing into the “Russian business.” Trump won’t make that mistake again. Or will he? John Dickerson of CBS tried to follow up with a question that required some substance in the answer (other than ‘believeme’), and Trump kicked him out of his office. Meanwhile, proxies like Hannity and Limbaugh, who have no journalistic degrees (not to mention college degrees), spread propaganda over their airwaves.

Make a list of the intentional crimes he would be under indictment for: The Mueller Report listed TEN. The only thing that protected him was that “a sitting president” cannot be under indictment. He is already and “un-indicted co-conspirator” in the case that sent Michael Cohen to the slammer. It is intentional, that he refuses to release his taxes, and he lied about that in gaining the trust of voters in 2015–16, claiming he would release his taxes “once my audit is complete.” Never happened. Never will unless a whistleblower does it.

He fully intended to take resources allocated by Congress for the military (housing, schools, etc.) and ship that money to ‘the Wall.’ This is a decision the courts will rule on soon. He intended to strip down the State Department. He leaves ambassadorships unfilled because he is a nationalist. (We don’t need to get along with other nations; we just tell them what they want and they will do it — or else. Doubt that? Have a conversation with Ukraine.)

He intentionally cut back programs that deal with National Security, the programs that deal with disease and pandemics. According to NBC News: “‘President Donald Trump’s decision to downsize the White House national security staff — and eliminate jobs addressing global pandemics — is likely to hamper the U.S. government’s response to the coronavirus, according to veterans of past disease outbreaks and experts who have studied them. “This is why you have a National Security Council,’ said John Gans, a former Pentagon speechwriter who wrote a book about the NSC, which has long been the principal advisory body inside the White House for national security affairs. ‘The changes have made it much harder for the NSC to do this.’” Now heads of those organizations are not allowed to speak to the American public, unless the science wizard Mike Pence approves it. And that too is intentional.

Ask the typical American if they are in significantly better financial shape, and they will tell you — about the same or worse. Ask them if they got a big tax break. Nope. Most paid more in taxes.

For those voters who think that his intentions are theirs, ask yourself these two questions: 1. Has this President made America ‘greater’ than it was before his term? People are more divided. People do not know whom they should trust. Those with Green Cards are petrified. Dreamers are in danger. Medical costs for all have risen. Millions of people have lost their insurance as the ACA is under attack. In 2018, voters rose up and said enough of the McConnell/ Trump stall game on legislation and the House of Representatives turned deep blue. Does that seem like a nation satisfied with “Make America Great” hats?

Question 2. Is the economy better? Don’t bother pointing to the Stock Market as a sign of progress. As of this writing, it is continuing to free fall for the simple reason that when this administration says not to panic — Americans do NOT believe them. Why should they? They lied about the size of an Inaugural crowd; lied that the tax cut to the richest people would ‘pay for itself’; lied that the Russians interfered in our elections; and all those lies add up to a Congress that demanded Trump’s impeachment.

Hugh McColl, told NPR that America’s deficit, under Trump, is not sustainable. So the rich get richer, and companies like Amazon pay no taxes. Zero. So is America ‘greater’ — financially? Just because unemployment is down does not make a nation great when wages are generally suppressed. Ask the typical American if they are in significantly better financial shape, and they will tell you — about the same or worse. Ask them if they got a big tax break. Nope. Most paid more in taxes. Remember, Trump claims in his new budget he will reduce money allocated for Social Security and Medicare. Great!

In the end, Trump will be seen as a President who rode the Obama success, despite McConnell’s obstruction, into the ground. Republican strategist Rick Wilson was spot on: “Everything Trump Touches Dies.” One day soon, Trump will have a reckoning, and he will claim to be a sad, unfairly treated soul. He will discover no one cares — and he will be alone.

And it is all intentional.

Trump’s Broken Promise: No One Left Behind

Levi Clancy@leviclancy from Upsplash

Unless one is directly involved in the Afghan and Iraq wars — on the battlefield — then you have little chance of hearing about the special immigrant visa (SIV). Please let me take a moment of your time to enlighten you to a shameful saga in the war that began under the heading of the Bush Administration’s “Operation Enduring Freedom.” The irony will not escape you.

According to The Atlantic’s Priscilla Alvarez in July of 2018, “The [SIV] visa program was established in 2009 specifically for Afghan citizens, along with their spouses and unmarried children under 21, who work for the U.S. government in Afghanistan, and many of whom later face reprisals, even death, for their allegiance to America. A similar program was set up for Iraqi citizens in 2008.” So what’s the problem? Why is it that so many interpreters who saved American soldiers’ lives are left behind? One word: Trump.

Since taking office, paranoid that immigrants from the Middle East could wreak terror on the Homeland, Trump’s administration has put a choke hold on SIV visas from the battle grounds of Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2017 alone, according to research by Alvarez and confirmed by politicians on both sides of the aisle, not to mention the State Department, “In the past year, there’s been a sudden drop in arrivals under the special-immigrant-visa program for Afghan and Iraqi citizens, many of whom served alongside U.S. soldiers as battlefield translators.”

Many of the American soldiers have become so frustrated with seeing the local interpreters who stood with them on the battlefield and saved them from taking a bullet from the Taliban that they formed an organization to put pressure on the government agencies do what their organization’s name demands: Leave No One Behind.

It is a dubious battle. Many of the same interpreters who risked their lives and their family’s well being are waiting for more than ten years. These wars have lasted for 20 years and hundreds of thousands of American troops are alive because of the actions of those we promised we would protect.

“It would be impossible to say that these substantial drops are not a part of some policy. These are people who put themselves at risk because they served with U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Yes, it would have been ideal if the wars had produced peace and harmony in those two countries, but the Taliban is gaining strength and the death threats and murders are on the rise. These nations remain fragile and our support is vital. Afghanistan, specifically, is fraught with election troubles and the Taliban is closing in on all sides. The American “Truce” and “Peace Plan” signed on February 29th only means that the Taliban will have more power and will be free to hunt down those they deem to be American spies [more on that in another essay that will speak to the latest handshake agreement].

According to Alvarez in The Atlantic, “Two months into the Trump administration, then–Secretary of State Rex Tillerson directed American embassies around the world to double down on visas and ‘increase scrutiny of visa applicants for potential security and non-security ineligibilities.’ Since then, there’s been a stark decline in SIV arrivals. From January to June of 2017, 10,267 immigrants came to the U.S. on special immigrant visas. Over the same period in 2018, the number had fallen by more than half, to 4,166.’” Lately, the decrease has been reduced to a trickle.

NPR’s Morning Edition on May1, 2019, offered reporting by Quil Lawerance. He interviews Adam Bates, with the International Refugee Assistance Project. “It would be impossible to say that these substantial drops are not a part of some policy. These are people who put themselves at risk because they served with U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

NPR’s reporting on February 28, 2020, told the story of a typical US interpreter who is an Afghan and was promised he would receive an SIV visa. He has waited 10 years. He has to stay on a small USA base for his safety and cannot see his family. When he sneaks out to see them, he worries for his safety but that he will be tracked down and his family slaughtered.

These Iraq and Afghan interpreters believed in American values, American promises. They believed our word was our bond. We told them that we never leave soldiers behind on the battlefield. These people, dressed in our fatigues, speaking for our troops, and hoping against hope that the USA could save their nation, did not let America down.

We let them down. We left them behind. For shame.