From JS: 

“Mark, did you see the Feb. 6 press conference the Republicans had defending Donald Trump against claims of ‘insurrection’ and then charging the major media with covering up news that damaged Biden and son? If not, you should check it out. This is the first time I’ve seen so many pols criticizing the media in such harsh terms.”

My Response: Yes, I saw it. And I agree. I’ve never seen so many Republicans take such a strong stance in defending Trump. They were always divided on Democratic-led attacks on Trump, but now that it’s becoming clear that he will not only be their candidate for president in 2024 but that he has a good chance of winning, they are changing their tactics by harshly criticizing the media for supporting the most absurd conspiracy theory – that on Jan. 6, 2021, he incited an insurrection.

Of the statements made in the press conference, the one by Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) got the greatest media response because it had the harshest criticism of the media. In fact, his words were so blunt that I sat there watching it, slack-jawed, half-expecting some guys in jackboots to haul him off the platform!

Note to Readers: I included a link to a video clip of Crane in last week’s blog. If you missed it, here it is again. And if, after watching it and looking up the denotation of “insurrection” in the dictionary, you still believe that what happened on Jan. 6 was an insurrection, and that Trump is guilty of instigating it, please write to me and explain how that could possibly be true.

From CD re global warming: 

“If you doubt the veracity of government figures on unemployment, why do you not question the data on global warming. It seems the scientists are all on the government teat too! Where I live in South Australia, it has been a cool summer for the last three years. Taking the temperature in city areas heated by the infrastructure is surely not an accurate way to gauge temperature. With the northern icecap seemingly increasing, there is some thought that with sunspots decreasing we may be in for global cooling in a new Solar Minimum. Maybe you could take a look when you get time.”

My Response: Thanks for the question. As for me, I doubt everything the government publishes – reports, statements, explanations, and data. That doesn’t mean I think everything the government and its agencies report to us about everything they track is false. But since the government is political and since politics is about power rather than truth, I take everything they say as propaganda, unless my reading and thinking convinces me otherwise.

In the case of COVID, what the government was saying, from the very beginning, was so utterly and evidently absurd that I began calling out the contradictions from day one. And as the lockdowns took hold and the government and its cronies began to silence, by threat and by force, the many scientists that refuted their propaganda, I became increasingly alarmed by how far this was going towards Fascism. And by how many – how most – supposedly educated Americans believed every obvious lie.

In the case of global warming, I distrust the government narrative for the same reason: I see it as politically motivated – i.e., a set of often-unproven talking points to bond with a significant group of voters. I’m also aware of the data and theories that contradict the global warming narrative. If our government agencies were not corrupt, they would consider all contrary information with alacrity and respect, instead of denying it with authoritatively pronounced statements that have little to no basis in science.

In any case, I believe the entire debate about global warming is a useless farce because countries with the largest and poorest populations in the world – India, China, Africa, and South America – need fossil fuels to survive whatever problems are on their way and to increase the quality of life for their billions of inhabitants.

Given the actual science, and the desire of the governments to move their economies into first-world status, there is going to be no pulling back on the consumption of fossil fuels for the next 10 years or so. If anything, there will be an increase in consumption.

Re my Contrary Truths series:

From SC: “I’m looking forward to reading more of this series. The first few contrary truths you shared in the Feb. 6 issue have already been thought-provoking. Point No. 3, particularly: ‘If the universe has any meaning, it is ironic – that life is a joke laughing at itself. All the best art and music is… a recognition of the fundamental irony of life and living.’

“I agree that the ‘universe’ is a neutral force, functioning on and reflecting irony, as that is its nature. And I think the art that rings true is the kind that acknowledges that our efforts to change things is ultimately frivolous. But I think the art that feels most complete, most wholesome, is the kind that urges us to strive anyway. Sure, it might not make much of a difference, but something within our human spirit demands it and feels rewarded just by the effort, not necessarily based on the result.”

From RB: “Your five behavior modification points in the Feb. 12 issue are all ones my wife and I struggle with daily in handling our adult special needs child. And my greatest frustration is that I cannot get my wife to stop doing #2 (‘trying to beat the odds by scolding or cajoling someone into changing their ways’).”