The Errors of Sean Hannity, 6 Aug 2020

ErrorsOfSeanHannity_20200806   <– PDF

Mr. Sean Hannity, nationally syndicated talk show on the Fox Network, continued his usual tactic of making fundamental errors of logic today. In his introductory monologue, Mr. Hannity described former Vice President and prospective 2020 Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden has having poor cognitive abilities, and asserted that those “will be on the ballot in November”.  Mr. Hannity also downplayed Mr. Biden’s ability to engage in debates with President Trump.

Mr. Hannity is incorrect on both counts. Let’s first consider the debate issue.  There will not be any in-person debates this year, since the Democrats can claim that doing so would be dangerous to the health of both Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden as well as the Democratic Party moderators, owing to the Wuhan virus.  So, the Democratic Party is likely to demand that the debates be held by video.  Here are the rules that the Democratic Party will insist upon:

  1. Mr. Trump will be standing in the Oval Office, photographed from high above, at a distance to make him look small, and permit the audience to verify that he has no notes or assistants.
  2. Mr. Biden will be at his home in Delaware, seated behind a podium, photographed close-in so that the audience cannot see the teleprompter, his notes, or his assistants.
  3. Mr. Biden will be asked only easy questions (“Are you opposed to racism?”).
  4. Mr. Trump will be asked difficult ones (“Why haven’t you achieved peace in the Middle East?”).
  5. The usual 60 second response time will be changed to 30 seconds, since Mr. Biden’s attention span and coherence length seem to be limited to about 35 or 40 seconds (based on recent appearances).
  6. Mr. Biden will be provided with the questions two weeks in advance, and will also be provided with the focus-group approved answers; all he has to do is read them from the teleprompter. (His assistants will make sure he matches up the question with the answer in the correct order.)
  7. Mr. Trump will have no knowledge of the questions he will be asked by the Democratic Party moderators.

Should Mr. Trump reject any of these demands, the Democratic Party will cancel the debates on the grounds that (obviously) Mr. Trump is trying to steal the election by reverting to the traditional racist and/or fascist methods of conducting Presidential debates. But note that these debate demands will apply no matter who the Democratic nominee is, not just for Mr. Biden.

Regarding the Democratic ticket, let’s not forget that the Democrats only want power. But they are smart enough to know that Biden can get elected only if he is successful in the debates.  Even with these rules, it does not seem likely that Mr. Biden can get through the first one unscathed.  So, the Democratic Party has a choice to make: replace Biden either before or after the first debate.   There are two options.  First, they could break their own internal electoral rules (not a problem), open the (remote-controlled) convention, and select a new slate altogether.  The second is to let Mr. Biden fail in the first debate, allow him to be a sacrificial lamb, and use that to justify removing him from the slate. The next step would then be to elevate his running mate to be the nominee with a new person selected as the running mate.  In either case, Mr. Biden will not be on the ballot in November, except to the extent that some states will not have time to re-print the ballots.

Who will end up on the Democratic Party ticket? Keep in mind that Mr. Biden has adopted most of Senator Bernie Sanders’ platform.  A logical choice would be Bernie Sanders (voter energy) and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (plenty of cash).  A second choice would be Senator Sanders (voter energy) and former First Lady Michelle Obama (personal popularity).  I do not think Senator Kamala Harris is relevant since she is known only in California, which is going to vote Democratic anyway.

Tags: ,
Posted in elections, Famous people, progressive | No Comments »

The Nature of ANTIFA

TheNatureOfANTIFA     <– PDF

The mainstream news may have you believe otherwise, but ANTIFA is nothing more than the usual subversive Marxist street army, similar in makeup and tactics used by street gangs employed by dictators throughout history.  In other words, its name is the exact opposite of what it actually is: it is in fact the fascist street army promoting a totalitarian governing philosophy on behalf of the Democratic Party.  ANTIFA has recently come to the forefront as sponsors of the “mostly” part of the “mostly peaceful protests” that occurred after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Given the public antics of ANTIFA, it is not difficult to assess the characteristics of their leadership and followers:

  1. Mostly wealthy and upper-middle class white people, some of whom possess advanced degrees from Ivy League schools. Some of them are the sons and daughters of the ruling elite.
  2. Mostly financed by powerful global Foundations with the goal of applying pressure from below to convince the public that safety can be gained only by granting the elites more power.
  3. Mostly arrogant enough to embrace the ideology of tyranny; in other words, the belief they can create paradise on earth if only they had sufficient control.
  4. Mostly ignorant enough to believe that street violence can intimidate the general public into accepting a socialist political and economic system.
  5. Mostly homosexual.
  6. Mostly atheist.
  7. Mostly useful morons; easily brainwashed and easily led.
  8. Mostly chant their invectives in English since they cannot pronounce the original German.
  9. Mostly pansies that will run home crying to their Mommies as soon as someone stands up to them.

Currently ANTIFA is mostly tolerated by the Mayors and Governors of our largest states, because said so-called leaders are either on the same payroll as ANTIFA’s or too afraid to object. What we have here is a large number of wimps occupying positions of local leadership.  Unfortunately, we cannot count on those leaders when we need them.  It would be most helpful if these creampuff local leaders ordered the respective cupcake Chiefs of Police to track down the members of ANTIFA and make arrests, so that the fruitcake prosecutors could take them to court.  Don’t count on it.  In the end, as always, the people will either put up with this problem, or it will die out when the bad weather comes, or the people will deal with it directly.  My prediction is that the general public will tire of watching these mental midgets try to destroy our culture and institutions.  They will put some pressure on the creampuff local leaders who will pretend to take some action (maybe even a harrrrumph or two in a finely worded speech).  But most likely someone (not within the government) will find out how to identify the ANTIFA members.  Once the ANTIFA nitwits are publicly exposed, the movement will collapse as the members scamper like rats back to their Trust Fund estates.

 

Posted in progressive | No Comments »

How “Black Lives Matter” Will Fail

How_BlackLivesMatter_Will_Fail   <– PDF

The peaceful riots that began in Minneapolis with the death of George Floyd have spread across the nation in the 35 days since, having begun as peaceful protests by “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) against alleged institutional racism in the Minneapolis Police Department.  They have now evolved into full-fledged destruction of property and an attempt to erase American culture.  The violence was partly the result of opportunists seeking to take a five-finger discount at retail stores, but more importantly, the subversive activities of the street army known as ANTIFA.  ANTIFA is a separate problem; they capitalized on the George Floyd incident as an excuse to make trouble.  Black Lives Matter has problems of its own that will ultimately cause it to fail as a movement.

The real problem with police misconduct is that it is often covered up and papered over. There are some cases, such as the one involving Michael Brown (Ferguson, MO) or Fred Gray (Baltimore, MD) that do require some investigation before an evaluation of misconduct can occur.  But in the case of George Floyd (Minneapolis, MN), nearly the entire engagement was caught on video.   Any non-government employee caught on video doing the same thing to Mr. Floyd would have been arrested for murder within the hour.  But, given that it was committed by a government employee in uniform, the natural inclination of the “oversight” board and “internal affairs” would be to cover it up and make excuses as necessary to justify the conduct of the police.  The real problem is not that misconduct is widespread or racial; the problem is that misconduct is excused and covered up when it does happen.  A similar incident was caught on video in the case of Eric Garner (New York, NY), and although a prohibited hold was utilized by the officer which at minimum contributed to Mr. Garner’s demise, the officer received the usual raise and promotion.

“Black Lives Matter” is a Marxist activist group that uses police incidents as a means to gain attention, donations, and political power, which they use to intimidate politicians and (they hope) the general population. Given that true misconduct is rare, the incident concerning George Floyd in Minneapolis on 25 May 2020 gave BLM their best opportunity in years.

BLM has developed an extensive propaganda system. It is based on the false narrative that every police department consists of 100% white racist cops who spend their entire shift shooting and lynching black people.  The true fact is that between 10 and 20 unarmed black people are killed by police every year; BLM conveniently ignores the other fact that between 4000 and 5000 black people are killed by other black people (mostly in battles over which gang gets to sell crack on what street corners).

BLM claims to desire radical changes in how police departments are operated, but history shows that if any of their recommendations are adopted, the big losers will be black people, not the wealthy activists. The goal for the leaders of BLM is the acquisition of power over society in general, in order to dictate the rules for a new societal order.  The new social order will consist of guilt by association based on race and economic status.

The BLM movement contains the seed of its own destruction. It is already evident that not a single leader of BLM cares about real black people.  The leadership of BLM never explains how a police department staffed by 60% black officers is racist against blacks.  If BLM actually cared about the lives of black people, or their prosperity, or equality, they would start asking some very hard questions of the people (Democrats) who have been running America’s largest cities for 50 years.  Here are some sample questions BLM could ask, but never will:

  1. Why are the public schools so bad in minority neighborhoods?
  2. Why is the local economy in minority neighborhoods so bad that young black men see drug dealing as the path to prosperity?
  3. Why are the occasional incidents of police misconduct so regularly excused and covered up?
  4. Why is it that in minority neighborhoods, the streets are dirty, the potholes aren’t filled, the streetlights aren’t timed correctly, and the city workers can’t get the grass cut on the city-owned property?
  5. Why are local government policies designed specifically to weaken the black family, one of the two institutions (along with Christianity) that preserved black people during the two previous Democratic Party attacks (slavery and Jim Crow)?

The reason BLM will never ask these questions is because they already know the answer: the goal of the Democratic Party, even when local offices are held by black Democrats, is to suppress black people. The fact that BLM cares nothing about actual black people will become obvious sooner or later, when the public finds out that the money donated to BLM is turned over to PACs to run political ads on behalf of Democratic candidates at all levels.  The goal once again, is to acquire political power and ultimately (if successful) to impose Marxism on America.  I am reasonably confident that the general public will tire of being called racists and reject BLM’s basic claim that all whites, Asians, Jews, and Hispanics are racist.   Mostly likely most black Americans will reject the BLM-inspired changes that will cause their quality of life to decline.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

How I got the Wuhan Estimates Wrong

How_I_Got_The Wuhan_Estimates_Wrong   <– PDF

Back on 3 Apr 2020 I made some predictions about the number of fatalities to be expected by the end of May from the Wuhan virus, based on data then existing.  Compare my 3 Apr predictions with the actual numbers as of 30 May 2020:

Predicted,               Actual,

3 Apr 2020        30 May 2020

Italy                        27,000                 33,400

France                   22,000                 28,770

Spain                     21,000                 27,125

USA                       30,000                105,500

So I under-predicted in each case: for Italy, 19%; for France, 23%; and for Spain, 22%.  But the largest error by far was for the USA, where my prediction was low by more than 300%.  How did I get it so wrong for the USA, when the predictions for the other three, although incorrect, were not nearly as far off?

It seems there are several reasons. The most obvious one is that the predictions for Italy, France, and Spain were based on more mature data, given that China used the Wuhan virus to attack those nations much earlier. The general behavior of the disease was more fully developed by 3 Apr and the data then existing was a more reliable foundation for a prediction.  My use of the data then existing for the USA was premature.

The second reason is that the virus progressed differently in three major areas in the USA than any of the other nations and also differently than most other parts of the USA.  These three major areas are New York City and the adjoining states of Connecticut and New Jersey. Of the 105,000 deaths in the USA, approximately 29,000 occurred in New York State, 11,700 in New Jersey, 6,500 in Massachusetts, 3,900 in Connecticut, and 5,500 in Pennsylvania.  I had mentioned in the 3 Apr essay that the virus likely would spread differently in those places because: a) the density of the population, the closely-packed living conditions, and the fact that the Wuhan virus spreads much faster than other similar viruses; and b) the fact that many people in NJ and CT travel to NYC regularly on the filthy subway. I noticed those, but failed to take them into account in the calculations since there was no way at the time to determine the effects.

Third, new data suggests that people of African and Asian descent are more susceptible to the Wuhan virus than those of the Caucasian, Semitic, or American native races.  If so, that would indicate a higher casualty rate in the USA because about 12% of the population of the USA is of African origin, whereas there are relatively few of (black) African origin in the three European nations.

The fourth reason is that the people in many USA states, especially in the Northeast, were subject to “stay-at-home” mandates via Executive Orders by state Governors. A great many people were affected not only by the virus but by loss of livelihood.  It turns out the virus spreads faster indoors than outdoors.  In the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic, people were encouraged to leave the windows open in their homes at all times in order to maximize the circulation of fresh air.  Whether such advice was given this time, I don’t know; suffice to say, keeping people indoors certainly aided the virus and nearly ruined the local economy.  It is likely that the Chinese Communist Party is grateful to those Governors for their cooperation.

Fifth, it appears that people in nursing homes suffered very large casualty rates owing to moronic Executive Orders by Governors in at least three states: New York, New Jersey, and Michigan.  It has been estimated that up to 40% of casualties in those states arose because of these orders; that would amount to 16,400 deaths in New York and New Jersey alone.  Under those orders, nursing homes were required to admit people who had already tested positive for the virus, thus spreading it throughout the most vulnerable population.  Once again, the Chinese Communist Party probably has taken notice and supports those Governors for their cooperation.

These five reasons illustrate the general difficulty in making predictions: there are a great many unknowns and extrapolations from premature data can lead to large errors in the estimates. The original predictions of casualties by the CDC estimated 1,000,000 to 2,000,000 deaths in the USA, later revised (after some precautions were taken by the public at the urging of the CDC) downward to 100,000 to 200,000.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »