Month: January 2025

By on

One of the most annoying things about the Christian Right is that they try to reposition Jesus as an angry warrior for Right-Wing causes. Jesus was remarkably silent about the wrath of God although you would never know this from the Jesus these Christians describe. Sean Walsh, in TCW Defending Freedom, reacting to Bishop Budde’s inaugural church service where she reminded Trump of Jesus’ compassionate approach and urging him to consider it when he makes his decisions, says Jesus was a difficult person who would be reviled by liberal Christians because he advocated for adherence to Hebrew laws.

This is a pretty nice trick. He ties Christians to the Old Testament’s angry God, the punishing God, the God that will send you to Hell for any wrong move. But Jesus wasn’t all that much on punishment. Remember the woman who he saved from stoning. He just wanted her to sin no more. He saved her from death which, according to Hebrew law, was the appropriate end for this woman. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Is Jesus then an angry warrior for Hebrew Law when he actively worked to prevent it from happening?

The reason that Jesus urges compassion is that all humans are sinners. The men with stones. The woman being stoned. Even his own apostles, his most trusted friends, would disappoint him. Every last one of us. Jesus realized that people will sin and keep sinning. Some day, we could wind up on the wrong side of the stone thus the reason for compassion when dealing with sinners.

Walsh ignores another big problem with the Old Testament Law. Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These books are chokablock full of things that modern Christians ignore. Forgive your debts every seven years. How many Christians do that? I am betting none. Christians having been picking and choosing what they follow and what they will ignore for centuries. Jesus would want us to follow the entirety of these laws.

No better example can be found than divorce. Jesus actually talked about divorce so I imagining it was important to him while completing ignoring homosexuality which the modern Christian Right want complete adherence. Jesus had a very ancient Hebrew outlook on divorce. He didn’t like it one bit. Given that there are vastly more heterosexuals than homosexuals, divorce should be a bigger problem for Christians than homosexuality.

So, then, where is the outrage with Trump’s marriage history. Well modern Christians have come to terms with divorced Christians. Second marriages involving a divorced person can even be performed in many churches without a second thought. If Jesus is a cultural warrior for values, Jesus, being Jewish, would want adherence to all Judaic Law. This means the laws detailed in the Old Testament.

Walsh is making a big assumption about Jesus here. Jesus would be offended by immigrants and would strive to keep them out. There is little evidence that this is true. Given what we know from the New Testament, we know Jesus spoke repeatedly about compassion and forgiveness. I think it is safer to say this is what Jesus was concerned about and not the Hell and brimstone prophet that Walsh and his compatriots are so wild about.

By on

One of the mysteries of modern media is how much time is consumed on absolute bull shit. The other day, Elon Musk’s Nazi salute made the headlines and, as far as I can tell, is still creating a bit of a hullabaloo. Some believe he made a Nazi salute; others believe it was just an accidental incline of the man’s arm. Musk denies it. This, as far as I can tell, should be the end of it. But no this tempest is still whipping around the teacup.

The fact is Musk is astute enough to deny it. What are his critics expecting him to say. “You caught me. I am a secret Nazi. I just got so excited that my arm just naturally went into a Nazi salute.” Since he didn’t fall into that trap, the matter should be closed. But it simmers on to what effect. Talking about it any longer is a waste of time and is taking up precious headline space on speculation over a trivial matter.

Distractions seems to be the game Donald Trump is playing. Take, for example, flying the flag at half staff for Trump’s inauguration. This is no big deal to anyone except Donald Trump and maybe Jimmy Carter’s family. If anyone remembers this in a weeks time, it would amaze me. Trump could have been gracious about it because it really is meaningless bull shit. Seeing the flags at half staff would go unnoticed by most and, by those who did, they would wonder who died, thinking that Jimmy Carter died years ago. But Trump knows how to grab headlines and attention. The media promptly fell into line reporting it and we have a controversy.

Now apparently the Trump administration is suspending Black and Women’s history months at the Department of Justice. I disagree with this but, in the scheme of things, this is small potatoes. I am not sure what occurs at the Department of Justice during these months and this is very much the problem. It doesn’t matter to most anyone in the country. But lets, by all means, have a little tiff about the Department of Justice display cases going empty during Black and Women’s History month.

What worries me is that Trump is the master of making controversial statements about meaningless bullshit that consumes the press for days on ends talking about his bullshit and then are immediately forgotten. There needs to be focus on the things that matter as opposed to the things that are nice to have. If I had to choose between Trump’s attack on the 14th Amendment which declares there is no birthright citizenship and the Department of Justice’s Black and Women’s History month. I know what I am going to focus on. Let’s choose our battles wisely because having a conniption fit about everything is pointless and time consuming which is exactly what Trump wants.

By on

Samuel Hammond, writing in the City Journal, complains about the L.A. Water Department deciding:

To take the Santa Ynez Reservoir in Pacific Palisades, with its 117-million-gallon capacity, offline, due to previously scheduled maintenance. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which made this call, effectively ensured that the basin was empty in the middle of wildfire season.

The southern California fire season normally runs from May to November. This means that all maintenance work is done in the winter. January is a good time to take a reservoir off line because it is the start of the southern California rainy season and allows for a couple of months work before the fire season begins again in May. Maintenance work on a reservoir requires some planning. Equipment needs to be in place, materials purchased, water needs to be moved, people notified. It is a complicated process that requires planning and time prior to taking it off line to prepare.

Given these requirements it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Santa Ynez Reservoir was off line in January. If I were planning such an undertaking, January would be the perfect month to do it. I am not sure how officials could have known that the normally wet December would be a continuation of an unusually long dry spell beginning the previous winter. If Hammond was planning to maintain reservoirs and he had to choose a date, what date would he choose?

Hammond, while giving a rather laconic acknowledgement of strong winds and dry conditions, wants to pin incompetence on water officials who put a reservoir off line at the height of the fire season. January is not the height of the fire season. It is the actual low point, at least historically, of the fire season. The problem that Hammond doesn’t acknowledge is that the fire season is increasingly a year round phenomena. The fire season is now year round. Global Warming is cited as a possible reason for this year long season. No, let’s not mention global warming, but DEI yes, bureaucratic incompetence yes. I have yet to see how bureaucratic incompetence and DEI has seriously affected the fire while a year long dry spell and high winds obviously have.

Critics are focusing on side issues, all which maybe could be done better but had very little to do with the resulting disaster, while ignoring the bigger issue here which is a changing environment that makes wild fires more dangerous and more frequent.

By on

Elon Musk is supposed to have raised his arm in what looks like a Nazi salute. I linked to said crime because given the context of what he was saying and how he raised his arm, I am inclined to agree with Musk. This is nothing to get our panties in a twist.

Before I delve into this further, I want to be clear I am no fan of Elon Musk (see here, here, here). As far as I can tell he is an overpaid idiot with authoritarian instincts. I don’t like the man.

On the other hand, it is ridiculous to believe that he, in a widely seen speech, would break out in a Sieg Heil at Trump’s inauguration. It is a complete waste of time to be talking about it. He says he was thanking his audience for voting for Trump. His critics say his raised arm suspiciously resembles the Nazi salute. a

As there is no way to know what is in a person’s mind, I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t think he is that dumb, particularly after denying any Fascist inclinations for years, to suddenly give the Nazi salute because he so imbued with Nazi theology that his arm raises unconsciously a la Dr. Strangelove.

Then there is the matter that calling Trump and his gang Fascists has failed to dissuade millions from supporting him. Trump, Musk and gang have been repeatedly called Fascist to an indifferent audience. People either don’t understand Fascism or don’t care that they are Fascists but continuing to call them Fascists has had little effect on people voting for him. People have heard it a million times and have made their peace with it. Now it doesn’t mean he isn’t a Fascist, but it does mean that calling him one is pointless. Other than giving Trump opponents a strange sense of satisfaction for calling Trump out for what he is, it is screaming into the void. It is time to reach into the election handbook for a new and, hopefully, more effective trope to use against him.

Even if he was intentionally Sieg Heilling, it is hardly the best stone to throw at him. He has plausible deniability as so many people end up giving the Nazi salute that it makes the criticism uniquely irrelevant. See Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez found giving the Nazi salute. Here is Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, giving the Nazi salute. If you search long enough you can find most prominent speech givers caught in this pose. It means nothing. Let’s get him on actual policies and not the accidental position of his arm.

The bottom line here is that Musk appears to be innocent of Sieg Heilling. The media are making a big deal out of nothing. This would be OK if the press were held in high esteem but they aren’t. It amplifies an already widely held sentiment that the press will make mountains out of molehills. More importantly it isn’t changing any ones mind and this is what needs to be done. But, by all means, carry on with the same tired strategy and see where that will take us.

By on

I am finding all of this antagonism towards DEI (Diversity, Equality and Inclusion) irritating. First, let me preface this with no system organized by human beings is perfect. The system needs to be improved as you see how the system is working. DEI is no different from any other system. Let’s look at it and improve it. Make it better.

But tossing it out wholesale though is wrong. The United States has a long history of racial prejudice and this prejudice has had a deleterious effect on people of color. Racial prejudice is still with us and is still a problem.

I am White middle class man. Historically, this means I have had an advantage in my job search. Not necessarily because I am white but because people told me about jobs where they worked. When I went into apply I had a name that gives me a leg up. The hiring manager knew someone who knew me. I have been remarkably successful at getting jobs this way. I never have been out of work for long and generally have had allies already in the company showing me the ropes.

But it isn’t in the least bit fair and it works against people who don’t know someone working for the company.

The counter argument to this is that, of course, people are going to hire friends and family because someone they know is recommending them. It gives the hiring manager an additional element of confidence in this person they don’t know who is looking to work for them. But how is this getting the best person for the job? Why do recommendations from people you do know carry more weight than people you don’t know?

We all know why and we all accept it without question. The hiring manager knows the person recommending the applicant. He is a good guy and he is saying that Tom, this stranger to me, is also a good guy. Now, this other person I am looking at, is just as qualified for the job but I don’t know him and I don’t know the person recommending them. Who gets the job?

Without DEI, this type of unfairness goes unchecked. Friends and family get the jobs while qualified strangers are passed over because they are unfamiliar. The connected get hired while the unconnected don’t. Family and friends get the jobs. Now if they happen to be all White that is just a coincidence. Not all hiring managers who work this way are prejudiced but it does allow for hiring managers who are prejudiced to stack the odds against people of color. DEI allows for imperfect measurement of what your work force should look like and it forces businesses to consider this when making their hiring decisions.

Is it perfect? No, but neither was the system before. There is this notion that in the good old days, businesses only hired the best. Since, in the good old days, people legally could discriminate against people of color and women, it lead to a workforce dominated by White me until DEI added an element of fairness for people who did not have connections. If you remove DEI, it makes it easier for hiring managers to hire people they know over trying to be fair to those without connections. Attempting to create a more diverse work force that includes more people historically discriminated is still important and should not be abandoned because it is imperfect process.

Lastly, please stop harkening back to the good old days when people only hired the best because they didn’t. The game was rigged and the process was unfair. DEI was one way to right that particular wrong. Can it be improved? By all means, every process can be improved. DEI is no different. Eliminating it, however, will only call into question how people of color and women are being treated in a market that historically discriminated against them.

By on

A Philadelphia Eagle’s fan got banned from the Eagle’s Stadium and has lost his job for cussing out a fan from the other team.

First, call me old fashioned but I always thought it was wrong to cuss out anyone – friends, enemies, and particularly visitors from out of town. He says he was provoked. I just can’t see that anything the woman said would justify the bile that came from his mouth. In a stadium full of people of all ages from young children to little old ladies.

Then there is the matter of it being just a football game. At the last football game I attended, I found it remarkable that there are people at the stadium who are there to monitor fans’ behavior to ensure that everyone is behaving appropriately. This is gobsmacking. Grown adults being told how to behave. Even more amazing is that some of these people get angry about being asked to tone it down. They don’t see what is wrong with their behavior and have to be removed. I don’t know about you if somebody ever asked me to stop swearing because I was offending people, I would be mortified. I would have to leave in shame.

Apparently the job is necessary one as there are a lot of adults who don’t know how to behave in a crowd. It is a shame that nobody was able to stop this man from his tirade. He now has lost his job because he was cussing out people at a football game. Try and explain that one to the wife and kids.

By on

DEI is responsible for the Los Angeles fires now on going or so many conservatives believe.

I’m not sure why they believe this. There hasn’t been any evidence that women or people of color firefighters have failed during this fire. The critics keep coming back to an insanely stupid reply from a lesbian firefighter about carrying a big man out of burning building.

I mention that she is a lesbian because I think it added to the animus of the linked article. Hank Berrien, the author, made this ever so innocent statement about the firefighter’s involvement with Girl’s Fire Camps. Right. Important information. I don’t want to besmirch Berrien’s good name here but it was a gratuitous fact that had little to do with the rest of the article. What did her work with girls have to do with his point regarding DEI? Nothing, right. Lesbians. Working with children. Female children. I am not saying anything is wrong with that. Just noting this because it might interest our readers. With his little nudge he effectively lets everyone know she is both a terrible fire fighter and might possibly be a terrible person to boot.

On the other hand, the firefighter was asked a valid question and she botched her response. This hardly condemns DEI as a consideration in hiring as the LAFD is still primarily male, particularly in the fire houses. Males make up 97% of the department. How has DEI made Los Angeles less safe when the numbers reflect a mostly male fire department? All apparently strong enough to carry out a heavier man? Have there been complaints about women failing in their responsibilities? There is remarkably little evidence that there is a problem in this mostly male half white fire department.

No matter what, they focus on DEI as responsible for the catastrophe happening in Los Angeles now. Not 100 winds. Not lack of rainfall. Not unusually large amount of dried vegetation due to a really wet winter. Not that the fire ignited outside of the normal fire season. And, of course, the never mentioned climate change problem which isn’t a problem and no amount of evidence can change their minds. None of the these merit mentioning as causes.

Yet one female firefighter’s inability to give a good answer to a hypothetical question is the problem.

By on

The right wing media is spreading pernicious lies about DEI being a factor in the Los Angeles fires now burning. Forbes magazine, hardly a left wing source, found that there is absolutely no evidence that this is true. Some of this is based on speculation offered by Adam Carolla who when trying to apply to be a fire fighter many years agos was told that he wouldn’t be considered for 7 years because he was white man. Carolla also admits to having a 1.7 GPA which, and I am just speculating on this now, might have something to do with his long wait and the discouraging words he received at the fire house when asking for a job.

Anyway, a quick glance at the graduating class of 2024 proves Carolla wrong. There are a good number of white men in the group. In fact, if you look at the racial breakdown of Los Angeles Fire Department in 2018, Whites are a much larger portion of the fire department than their percentage in Los Angeles population — 49% Whites in Fire Department, 29% whites in Los Angeles and women make up barely 3% of the department with minority women making up less than 1%. So a department made up of 97% men which is important because one of the chief problems conservative critics have is the physical strength needed to fight fire. Men have more than women. There seems to be more than enough men out there working on the fire.

The unspoken subtext here is that somehow non-whites and women aren’t up to the job. Based on what evidence? Is there data that minorities and women are not performing their job? And if so, what are the problems and how do white men doing the same job compare? If someone graduates from the Fire Academy, doesn’t it mean they past the tests required by the LAFD to adequately perform their job? The critics keep returning to the lesbian women who lead the department. Where exactly have these women failed? Somehow the implication is that since DEI has been considered as a part of the hiring process that standards have somehow diminished. It isn’t like the good old days when only white men were running the LAFD.

But, of course, the good old days were not getting the best people available. They were limiting their search to white men and discriminated against people of color and women. How is this better? It is only when discrimination became an issue that women and people of color got a chance to become a fireman. The good old days. You know when Blacks need not apply for jobs they wanted. You didn’t have to consider women at all because they were the weaker sex. You know those good old days when discrimination was OK.

No one wants to hear about past discrimination when DEI is making it impossible for white men to advance now. Right. The thing is if Blacks and Latinos were given a chance 50 or so years ago to join the force DEI wouldn’t have been necessary in the first place. The problem is they were discriminated against and, because of that past discrimination, women and people of color are rightfully suspicious of their ability to be treated fairly. So ultimately DEI is the direct result of bad faith hiring from white men in the first place.

By all means, blame the Los Angeles Fires on DEI putting incompetents on the front line. I am sure it will encourage those brave people fighting the fires to give their all to put them out. Really, it is shitty way, particularly in the absence of evidence, to treat people who are putting their lives on the line.

By on

Yesterday I reported on a terrible fashion trend in men’s underwear and I am seeing more even more outlandish ones today:

It looks like the man is wearing a very large diaper and a too small bra. And the zipper. What purpose could it have but make dressing up in it even more difficult? What in God’s name were they thinking? Why would any self respecting man think that rambling into their bedroom with this on would spark a romantic tryst is beyond me.

This has so much wrong with it I don’t now where to begin. It is aesthetically unpleasing, impractical to wear and it looks terribly uncomfortable. A definite no from me.

By on 1 Comment

A few backs I reported that my spider, who very cleverly incorporated the light cord on our porch into her web, is missing. I looked at the light cord the other day and saw this:

She is back. Or one of her daughters is. Although she has irritated me a little because I now have to stand on my tippy toes to reach the cord but it is a small price to pay to work with such a creative animal.