A Balanced View

I've shared the writings of a good friend and Episcopal Priest on other occasions and what we've witnessed in the last few weeks in the Senate seems to call for it again.  He is a wise man who always causes me to think about important subjects.  As usual, his writing is reflective of my views.  It's not an easy subject and I think he treats it fairly.  The only way I would differ with him is that I believe that beyond all of the issues he discusses, the fundamental truth is that the Dems are opposing Kavanaugh based on his being nominated by Trump.  Hatred of Trump is the underlying theme and cause of all that has happened.  They made up their minds the day he was announced and there is nothing that will change them.  So here is his article.

She Said…He Said:

The Quest for Truth and the Pursuit of Justice

This is a controversial article because it deals with a controversial topic: the recent Senate Judiciary stand-off between Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh. I have thought long and hard on whether to write this article because I don’t want to offend my friends, some of whom are males who attended a prep school like Judge Kavanaugh, while others are females who have been the victims of sexual, physical or verbal abuse, mostly from their partners but in some cases not. I, myself, have gone to a Catholic prep school, much like Georgetown Prep where Judge Kavanaugh was a student. I am fully aware of the drinking that occurs among the students in these all-male bastions of patriarchy. Perhaps for that reason, St. Francis Prep, where I went to school, is now co-ed and a much healthier place. 

Whatever your opinion of Dr. Ford or Judge Kavanaugh, I hope you will agree with me that their testimonies was one of the most heart-rending spectacles in American politics. Two people, each apparently sincere and obviously feeling deep pain presented polar-opposite testimonies before the Judiciary Committee. Dr. Ford said that she was 100% certain that 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape her when she was 15-years-old. Judge Kavanaugh was equally insistent that no such event ever happened. He categorically denied, under oath and penalty of perjury, that he had ever sexually assaulted Dr. Ford or any other woman.

One needs the Wisdom of Solomon to discern which of them is telling the truth. But this does not mean that the other is necessarily a liar. It could be that Judge Kavanaugh, who has admitted drinking and enjoying beer, sometimes in great quantities, was so drunk that he has no recollection of the incident. Or, it could be that Dr. Ford is so mentally and emotionally fragile (she had a very troubled past) that with the help of psychological counseling she has come to believe her assailant was Kavanaugh, even if that is not the case. These scenarios are only speculation, I know, but my point is that you need not believe one is lying for the other to be telling the truth. 

Moreover, both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford appear to be flawed individuals – as we all are. By his own admission, Judge Kavanaugh drank, sometimes quite heavily, at social gatherings. And although up to last Thursday he appeared to be a mild-mannered and gentle person with a formidable intellect, we saw a different side of him at the hearing – angry, petulant, indignant and brimming with fury against his detractors. The New Yorker, perhaps unfairly, referred to him as having an “adolescent aggression of conservative masculinity.” However, in all fairness to Judge Kavanaugh, if your reputation was attacked unjustly and detractors tried to destroy you with false, horrific claims, would you not be angry, even furious? His reaction to the allegations is perfectly understandable.  

Then there is the testimony of Dr. Ford. She claimed definitely that Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her, but she doesn’t know when, where, or who took her to the house, or picked her up (she was 15 and could not drive). She has no facts, no corroboration, no medical report, no police report, and no psychological records detailing her memories (she has not released them). There is nothing but a claim from a perfectly nice, sympathetic woman with a bad memory and a story contradicted by all her own witnesses, including her best friend. In fact, there is no evidence that she was at the party at all, much less that Kavanaugh was there or that anything happened between Kavanaugh and her.

We all hope the FBI investigation will resolve these discrepancies and get to the truth of the matter, but I doubt it. Unless there is some kind of corroboration for Dr. Ford’s testimony, we are going to be left where we were last Thursday – an allegation with no evidence. It is simply her word – 36 years after the fact. Judge Kavanaugh has at least produced a calendar that shows his schedule and whereabouts throughout the summer of 1982, but that is not conclusive evidence. He also can claim to have had six FBI background checks and the highest security clearance in the country. During his time in the Bush White House he had access to the nuclear codes. So, what will the FBI discover in interviewing relevant witnesses, all of whom have already given sworn statements under penalty of perjury? My guess is nothing that we don’t know already. 

I do hope the FBI investigates the claims of Deborah Ramirez (reported in The New Yorker) and Julie Swetnick who is the client of notorious porn lawyer Michael Avenatti. Their allegations seem incredible, but both women should be heard. If either of their claims is corroborated, that would deal a fatal blow to Judge Kavanaugh ever becoming a Supreme Court Justice. On the other hand, at this juncture, Judge Kavanaugh has extensive support from female friends and colleagues dating back to his time at Georgetown Prep to his time now on the federal bench. Hundreds of women claim he has treated them with the utmost respect and courtesy, and that includes his many female law clerks. If there had been some allegation against Judge Kanavaugh as an adult, or during his time in either the Bush White House or on the Appellate Court, the charges against him now would have more weight. 

By all accounts Dr. Ford has been a competent and respected professor at both Palo Alto College and Stanford University. If Dr. Ford would release her medical and psychological records, that may shed light on how she is so certain that Judge Kavanaugh assaulted her. For example, if she came to certainty through hypnosis, drugs or auto-suggestion, that may call into question the accuracy of her claim. As of now, her records have not been released.

So how do we discern who is telling the truth in this matter? I suppose if you are a political progressive or a radical feminist, you instinctively side with Dr. Ford. As Senator Hirono of Hawaii said, “Women should be believed” and men “should shut up.” On the other hand, if you are a conservative, you instinctively side with Judge Kavanaugh, see deep flaws and inconsistencies in Dr. Ford’s testimony, and view what is happening to Judge Kavanaugh as similar to what happened to Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas - a partisan last-minute attempt to prevent a brilliant conservative jurist from having a seat on the Supreme Court. If Judge Kavanaugh were a liberal committed to upholding Roe v. Wade, none of this would probably be happening. There would be no high priced lawyers representing Dr. Ford pro bono, including paying for her lie detector test. Yes, I know, this is a cynical view, but in the ruthless highly partisan world of Washington, D.C., I suspect it may be true. 

If you are like me, you are torn between the heart and the head. My heart is with Dr. Ford but my head is with Judge Kavanaugh – at least until there is corroborating evidence for Dr. Ford’s testimony. I am fully aware that people reading my blog are on both sides of this issue: Who to believe? I can’t offer a full-proof formula to answer the question, but let me make a few salient points for reflection that move us beyond simplistic slogans and mindless platitudes.

First, there have been other times in the history of the Senate when witnesses have given sworn testimony contrary to one another. The most notable example was in 1948 when Whittaker Chambers testified against Alger Hiss, a high ranking State Department official with impeccable academic and professional credentials. Chambers, an unassuming and disheveled writer, claimed that Hiss was a member of a Communist cell back in the 1930s. Hiss denied it categorically, but eventually the evidence showed that Chambers was right and Hiss was lying. In January, 1950 Hiss was found guilty of perjury and sentenced to five years in prison. To his dying day, Hiss claimed his innocence, but the evidence against him was overwhelming. Every attempt to exonerate Hiss has concluded that he was indeed guilty. 

In the Hiss-Chambers testimonies, investigators were able to discover evidence that corroborated Chambers’ testimony. Can the FBI discover corroborating evidence in the Ford-Kavanaugh matter? I doubt it. Unless there are credible witnesses who come forward, or some corroborating evidence is found from Ramirez or Swetnick, we will never be sure who is telling the truth.

Second, even in sex crimes, there is a presumption of innocence. Although a Senate hearing is not a criminal trial, the presumption of innocence is at the heart of American jurisprudence – as is due process, fundamental fairness and the right of an accused to confront the accuser, with the burden being on the accuser to prove the allegation and not the accused to refute it. 

We need to keep in mind that at the time of the writing of the American Constitution, the Spanish Inquisition was still in effect, and thousands of innocent Spaniards suffered horrific tortures and even death because of their religious and political beliefs. Following in the path of the medieval Inquisition, the Spanish Inquisition had no presumption of innocence. A person was deemed guilty until proven innocent. The allegation was enough to convict the person of a crime. It was the burden of the defendant to disprove the charges rather than for the prosecutor to prove anything. The accused always spoke first, followed by the accuser. The founders of our country wanted no part of that kind of judicial system. As I learned in my criminal law class, Americans believe it is better for 100 guilty persons to go free than for one innocent person to go to jail.

Moreover, the presumption of innocence does not only pertain to criminal matters. It pertains in civil law as well. You cannot, for example, fire an employee based on a mere allegation alone. There needs to be some corroborating evidence to back-up the allegation. I would argue the same is true even in government appointments, including to the Supreme Court. While you do not need proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” as in criminal cases, you do need at least “a clear preponderance of the evidence.” In other words, it has to be much more likely than not that the allegation is true.

Third, I must respectfully disagree with Senator Hirono that “women are to be believed” and men are to “shut-up.” Neither women nor men are to be believed – only the evidence is to be believed. There are simply too many instances in American history of women making false charges against innocent people who, as a result, suffered prison and even death.

Think of the Salem Witch Trials between February 1692 and May 1693. The trials were started after people had been accused of witchcraft primarily by teenage girls such as Elizabeth Hubbard, 17, as well as several other girls who were younger. More than 200 people were accused, nineteen of whom were found guilty and executed by hanging (fourteen women and five men). One other man was pressed to death for refusing to plead, and at least five people died in jail. 

Or think of all the black men who have gone to their deaths, some by formal execution and others by lynching, because white southern women claimed falsely they were raped or sexually assaulted. There are hundreds of black men in America who have suffered the ultimate consequence by the false testimony of white women. 

I recommend that everyone see the movie Marshall, a 2017 film about the early years of Thurgood Marshall, the black civil rights attorney who would go to become the first black man on the Supreme Court. The film focuses on one of Marshall’s first cases of his career, State of Connecticut v. Spell. 

In 1940, Thurgood Marshall, a NAACP lawyer, went to Bridgeport, Connecticut to defend Joseph Spell, a black chauffeur accused of the rape of his white employer, Eleanor Strubing. Sam Friedman, an insurance lawyer, was forced to become Spell’s lead counsel because Marshall was not a member of the Connecticut Bar. The two of them had the formidable task of defending Spell against Strubing’s allegation that he tied her up in the back seat of her car after raping her and then throwing her off a bridge. Thanks to brilliant lawyering, the charges were proven false and Spell was found not guilty. 

I suppose America is filled with those types of stories of black men getting lynched for having sex with white women. Think of Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, for example, where Atticus Finch defends Tom Robinson, a black man who has been accused of raping a young white woman. Atticus establishes that the accusers – the woman and her father – are lying, but Tom is still convicted by the all-white jury.  Sometimes justice is not done even when the evidence screams for it.  

None of this is to say that we shouldn’t support the women who have been victims of rape or sexual abuse. Of course, we should – and we should thank the “#Me Too” movement for calling our attention to widespread sexual abuse in our culture, from media moguls, TV personalities, movie stars, business executives, and people in every profession and occupation. There has been enormous injustice against women, and it is time to make things right. But making things right for women does not mean making things wrong for men. We should not believe women because they are women. We should believe them because of the evidence. It is the evidence that convicts, not the allegation. To do otherwise would be a terrible injustice.   

Fourth, people accused of sexual offenses are not always guilty. This seems obvious by what I just wrote about black men being lynched for having sex with white women. But sadly, we are living in a time when we no longer want to give people the presumption of innocence, even when the evidence is flimsy or unsubstantiated. 

The perfect example of hasty judgment is the case of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Chicago from 1982 to 1996. Cardinal Bernardin was one of the wisest and most beloved religious figures in the United States who taught a “consistent ethic of life” from womb to tomb – an ethic that appealed to both liberals and conservatives. And yet, Bernardin was accused of sexual misconduct in the late 1980s. Former seminarian Stephen Cook claimed to have been abused by Bernardin in the 1970s. Cook was articulate, persuasive and believable in his certainty that Bernardin was an abuser. Bernardin denied the allegations, even as the press had already convicted him. Fortunately, Cook later admitted that his memories, which had emerged while he was under hypnosis, were inaccurate. Cook later said that he relied on people who told him things that were not true, and asserted that he is now “absolutely convinced of Bernardin’s innocence.”

Oliver Cromwell, writing to the Scottish Assembly declared, “I beseech thee, from the bowels of Christ, think that ye could be wrong.” We need that kind of humility today. We are too quick to condemn, too hasty to judge, too impatient to listen, probe and discern the truth. From my experience, truth is rarely black or white, but much more highly nuanced, requiring an incisive mind and critical thought. Sadly, too few have those qualities.    

Fifth, what is happening in the Senate confirmation process today was predicted back in 1959 by Alan Drury is his political novel Advise and Consent. The novel was made into a film starring Charles Laughton, Walter Pidgeon, Henry Fonda and other notables. It is the best political novel I have ever read, and I commend either the book or the film to you because it shows how ruthless and vile the political confirmation process can become in America. 

In Drury’s novel, it is not a Supreme Court Justice but a Secretary of State nomination that causes contentious political maneuverings. The President nominates prominent liberal Robert Leffingwell as his next Secretary of State, but the Senate must “advise and consent” to it. Leffingwell is viewed by conservatives as too liberal, an appeaser, and too friendly to the Soviets. He, in fact, did have a communist past which he has tried to conceal. But Leffingwell has his supporters, the most zealous being Senator Fred Van Ackerman, who is willing to do anything to insure that Leffingwell is confirmed by the Senate. He and his cronies blackmail Senator Brigham Anderson from Utah who had a homosexual affair when he was in the Army. They threaten to make the news public unless Senator Anderson votes for Leffingwell. Devastated and depressed by the revelation of his affair, the Senator commits suicide. Anderson’s death and the exposure of the truth about Leffingwell’s lies regarding his communist past set in motion a chain reaction that ultimately rejects Leffingwell as Secretary of State. 

Granted, there have been no suicides yet in the Senate, or with Judge Kavanaugh, or Dr. Ford. But I wonder… are we getting to the point where the politics of personal destruction and a “means justify the ends” mentality are corroding our government to the point that good people and their families are now expendable? Does anyone really care about Dr. Ford or Judge Kavenaugh, or is it only political power at stake? Do we now destroy our opponents – smear and tarnish their reputations, or use them as pawns in a political chess game – in order to further an agenda? 

Frankly, I am appalled by the state of American politics today. It is one thing to vote for or against someone based on their political or legal philosophy. It is quite another to destroy a person, to tear them down and tear them to pieces, in order to win. Have we no shame? No conscience? No moral compass? I hope I am wrong, but I fear I am right. Pray for America.

Motivation Monday

The End Game

I saw this article over on Powerline and it reflects my thinking exactly.  We are at an ugly moment.  I continue to hope that the Dems will somehow walk back their actions, but it's becoming increasingly obvious that this is the new normal.  And it's scary.  Scary for today and scary for tomorrow.  I'm an old dude and probably won't see the ultimate result of the actions began in the last few weeks.  But my kids and grandkids will.  We are entering the twilight zone.  Buckle up.

"WHY THE BRETT KAVANAUGH SMEAR?

One question I have pondered over the last few weeks is, why are the Democrats so determined to block Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Realistically, he is the most moderate nominee they are likely to see from the Trump administration. If his nomination fails, the president will most likely appoint Amy Barrett, who is secure against #MeToo allegations and is both more conservative and younger than Kavanaugh. So what is the point?

To some extent, the Democrats’ bizarre smear campaign against Kavanaugh is explicable on short-term political grounds. The Democrats’ crazed base demands that they #Resist, so resist they will, whether it does any good or not. But I think there is something deeper and more sinister at work.

Brett Kavanaugh enjoys one of the most spotless reputations of anyone in American public life. He has been enthusiastically endorsed by those who have known him all his life–by girls he knew in high school and college, by judges he has served with, by professors and students and Harvard and Yale law schools, by judges who have worked with him, by his judicial clerks–most of whom have been women–by the American Bar Association, by sitting Supreme Court justices. In short, everyone who has ever known or dealt with Brett Kavanaugh endorses him.

I think that Judge Kavanaugh’s pristine reputation is one reason why the Democrats have unleashed against him a smear campaign unparalleled in American history. This is the message they are trying to send: If we can do this to the Boy Scout Brett Kavanaugh, we can do it to anyone. Are you thinking of serving in a Republican administration? Or accepting an appointment to the federal judiciary from a Republican president? Think twice, and then think again.

Because our smear machine will reach back to middle school if necessary. If we can’t find any dirt on you, we will manufacture some. There is no depth to which we will not stoop, and your honesty, integrity and spotless reputation are no match for our control over the media and our determination to dredge up ridiculous allegations against anyone who stands in our way.

Really, the more ridiculous the better. If we can accuse Brett Kavanaugh, one of the most respected lawyers and judges in America, of gang rape, we can accuse anyone of anything! And our insane accusations will dominate the news.

That is the Democratic Party’s message. And we have learned from the Christine Ford fiasco that accusations don’t require corroborating evidence. A single wacky, false allegation will negate decades of hard work on behalf of the American people.

By smearing the ultimate Boy Scout, the Democrats signal that they are determined to go lower than anyone has ever gone in American history. They intend to deter normal people from serving in Republican administrations, or accepting appointments from Republican presidents, or, ultimately, from identifying themselves with the Republican party. Given that strategy, the fact that they are smearing a man of obviously sterling character on absurdly flimsy grounds is not a bug, it is a feature. The fact that the Democrats’ smears are so patently false is ultimately their main point.

The Democrats are telling us: Republicans, beware–if this can happen to Brett Kavanaugh, it can happen to anyone. You’d better go quietly and cede power to us."

One More Week

Once again, I won't provide the background because if you're reading you have to know about Senator Flake's 'yes' vote for Kavanaugh out of committee but with the caveat that the FBI is given a week to investigate.  He has apparently gotten a few of the fence sitters to agree that it would be a good thing to delay for a week while the FBI looks into the allegations.  So one week from today this will be over.  One week.

I'm pretty convinced, having listened to everything that is out in the open, that it will make no difference.  The facts will remain the same and it will continue to be a 'he said, she said'.  But I make two predictions.  First, some on the Dem side will still not be satisfied and claim to need something else.  Because after all, this is about hating Trump and wanting to delay the confirmation...nothing else.  And second, there will be no apology from Feinstein or any of the other low-life Democrats who caused this whole charade.

So one week.  Let them do what's already been done.  And then let's see who still objects.  If there's still nothing there, then I think the vote will be in the 52-48 range.

The Hearing

You know what I'm talking about.  Today's Judiciary hearing to receive the testimony of Christine Ford and Brett Kavanaugh.  If you don't...well then stop reading because you won't have the context and background to understand.  I don't want to get into a big, long analysis because so many have.  And as so many have said, this comes down to "he said, she said".  I was able to watch or listen to much of it today.  At various times it was inspiring, boring, maddening and sickening.  But at the end of the day it truly comes down to "where you stand depends on where you sit".  So here are a few of my own takeaways from today:

• Christine Ford was said to be credible.  Okay, I guess.  She came off as believing what she said.  But for me, she had clearly been coached to play the unsophisticated, scared, innocent woman who just wanted to tell her story.  I was very struck by some of her answers that showed a very intelligent woman (2 Masters and PhD) who could recite impact on sections of the brain of sounds from 3+ decades earlier and yet couldn't remember what happened within the last few months.  Someone who can be a professor at a major university and yet can't figure out what to do with important information about a Supreme Court nominee without advice from "beach friends".  Someone who doesn't know who's paying for what during this whole ordeal.  Someone who professes a fear to fly and yet is documented to fly all over the world for work or recreation.  Someone who has a manner of speaking that is designed to make the listener believe in the "poor me" syndrome.  Someone who can be attacked one night and smile and say hi to her attacker a few weeks later.  Someone who wants to get her story out and yet professed to not know that Grassley offered to send investigators to California to interview her.  Unless she was living under a rock, this is totally unbelievable.  Someone who has hired the most partisan Democratic lawyers in the country.  Someone who has a GoFundMe sight that as of this afternoon is approaching $1M.  So no...I'm not buying it.
• And beyond all that crap above, I'm not buying it because there is NO evidence and all of her corroborating witnesses have refuted her claims.  Her details are so sketchy as to be laughable.  
• Kavanaugh was pissed.  As anyone would be.  He was emotional, angry, determined and protective.  He probably was too strident in his own defense.  I say that in the context of the critiques that he will get, but I don't blame him one bit.  His defenses to me are credible.  But for me I think even if he was an obnoxious 17-year old kid, that is irrelevant.  
• At first I thought that the Republicans made a mistake in hiring a prosecutor to ask the questions of Ford.  But on retrospect, that was a smart move.  The idea of all those Senators asking her probing questions wouldn't have resulted in any positive results.
• When it came to her, the Dems wore kid gloves.  They "believed her" even in the light of no evidence and no credibility.  When it came to him, the Dems were obnoxious, insulting and not remotely credible.  The worst was Blumenthal.  He is the "stolen valor" guy.  He claimed to have served in Viet Nam and was found to have lied about it.  He is scum.  
• There has been a continual hue and cry for an FBI Investigation.  If you're someone that believes that an FBI investigation is warranted, you're either ignorant or a left-wing partisan.  The Senate Judiciary Committee has all the investigative powers of the FBI.  They have professional investigators.  They can take sworn testimony.  They investigated every case in minute detail.  And the Dems didn't participate.  So shame on them.  
• This sordid episode lies squarely in the lap of Diane Feinstein.  It is a shameful legacy that will haunt her long career.  
• Lindsey Graham was a rock star.  His impassioned speech may have tipped the scales.  Whatever you have thought of him in the past, he certainly put a marker down today.  
• This really needs to be recognized for what it is.  The Dems desperately don't want him on the court.  The Dems hate Trump with a passion.  The Dems will do anything, stoop to anything, tell any lies, and take up any tactics to thwart this appointment.  When they saw that the hearing wasn't going to achieve their goal, they decided to play hardball.  It was a serious erroro.  I don't think that they believed he would fight back.  It also has to be said that the other low-life moves to bring out other accusers who have been discredited as nothing more than partisan attacks have served to undermine their frontal attack using Ford.  These other claims were a serious tactical error that hasn't helped them.  And make no mistake, they orchestrated them.
• I hope this one is true but am not sure.  I think that a lot of Republicans are pissed.  I think this is going to bring them out to the poles in droves.  I think the Dems seriously overplayed their hand and have done great damage to their prospects in the mid-terms.  We'll see if I'm right, but everything I read tells me that this has been a turning point for Republicans.  Especially those like me who like to view ourselves as moderate and willing to consider both sides.  This episode has largely driven many of us off the fence in the middle and solidly to the Republican side.

There are others but it's late and there has been a lot of emotion.  Personally, I hope he is confirmed.  She has no evidence.  He is a good man who doesn't deserve what has happened to him.  

Friday Funnies

The Latest Charge

This is totally believable!

Believability

Believability.  It's fundamental.  The more I hear about the sordid affair surrounding the accusations against Brett Kavanugh, the more believability takes a hit.  I know many think the women should be automatically believed.  I know that many think the burden is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocense.  And I know that the most fervent hope of Democrats is that he will drop out.  To all that I say BULLSHIT!  It's a coordinated and despicable smear.  Plain and simple.  I think the best thing I've seen on this is here.  It's not long and reflects my total thinking.  Read it all.  I don't know what's going to happen.  I could see a couple of the weaker Republicans caving to pressure.  And shame on them because as sure as anything, they know it's a smear job on a fine man.

And one more thing.  If this doesn't bring out the Republicans to vote in the mid-terms, I don't know what will.

Motivation Monday

Given the frenzy caused by the unethical and underhanded Democrats who are trying to undermine our system and smear a good man, this seems like good advice.

Friday Funnies

An old Marine Pilot sat down at the Starbucks, still wearing his old USMC flight suit and leather jacket and ordered a cup of coffee.

As he sat sipping his coffee, a young woman sat down next to him. She turned to the pilot and asked, "Are you a real Pilot?"

He replied, "Well, I've spent my whole life flying planes, first Stearman's, then the early Grumman's, flew a Wildcat and Corsair in WW-II, and later in the Korean conflict, Banshees and Cougars.
I've taught more than 260 people to fly and given rides to hundreds, so I guess I am a Pilot, and you, what are you?"

She said, "I'm a Lesbian. I spend my whole day thinking about naked Women. As soon as I get up in the morning, I think about naked Women. When I shower, I think about naked Women.
When I watch TV, I think about naked Women. It seems everything makes me think of naked women."

The two sat sipping in silence.

A little while later, a young man sat down on the other side of the old Pilot and asked, "Are you a real pilot ?"

He replied, "Always thought I was, but I just found out I'm a Lesbian."

A Modern Day Lynching

I can't bring myself to write something about the absurd Brett Kavanaugh affair.  I won't even describe the situation as it's just too distressing.  I am beyond ashamed of the people who are letting this happen.  What have we come to?

Motivation Monday

Sometimes a stalemate is motivating!

Cool Pic

Friday Funnies

Peer Pressure

Saw this article over at WSJ and it sparked some thoughts that I've been having for a while.  The whole LGBTQ movement has had some unbelievably major successes in the last few decades and our society is much better for it.  I've written previously about the shift in our culture as a result of the gay rights movement and I truly believe that it is the most significant and swiftest shift in culture in human history.  And I'm in full agreement with equality for all.

But I saw the article at the link and it did a good job in laying out a concern I've had.  The article is titled "Peer Pressure and 'Transgender' Teens".  It describes the work of Dr Lisa Littman in asking questions and conducting research on the issue of teenagers in some cases bowing to peer pressure and actually coming out as a transgender.  Of course, she's been highly criticized by the PC crowd, but the issue remains.

Now I've not been in any teen groups to know how they think.  And it's been quite a while since I was a teen and I fully admit that there weren't any issues like this when I was a kid.  At least I didn't know about them if they were there.  But I've seen some teen groups in my work in the community, and I see the peer pressure to fit in.  I've seen and heard of teen groups in which one or more teens come out as gay or transgender or bisexual or whatever, and there seems to be a propensity for at least a large degree of sympathy (or maybe empathy) and I sometimes wonder if there isn't some amount of identification that leads to some sort of unconscious mimicking and in turn that results in teens adopting a role that maybe isn't true to them.  Maybe I'm wrong about this but it seems to me that there are an awful lot of teens who are announcing that they are something that in a different era wouldn't have even been on the table.  Or maybe it was always there and I didn't see it.  Don't know.  But I do know that it's an important subject for parents to consider as they help their teens navigate through some difficult years.  When my kids were teenagers, I just don't remember all of the ancillary problems that do nothing but add to what are already highly emotional years.  Glad I'm looking at the rear view mirror for that task.

Anyway, the article is thought provoking.  If I were a current parent, I'd want this kind of info to help me deal with issues that are complicated and fraught with missteps.  In case the link doesn't work I'll copy the whole thing below.

"Peer Pressure and ‘Transgender’ Teens

Ideologues try to suppress a study on the increasing prevalence of ‘rapid onset gender dysphoria.’

By Jillian Kay Melchior

Sept. 9, 2018 

If your teenage daughter suddenly declares herself transgender, should you assume she’s mature enough to make decisions that will permanently affect her health, fertility and future? Or could she be influenced by societal and peer pressure? Physician and researcher Lisa Littman doesn’t have the answer, but transgender ideologues are trying to silence her for even asking the question.

Dr. Littman’s study about transgender-identifying teens was published in the open-source, multidisciplinary scientific journal PLOS ONE last month. Her interest had been piqued in 2016, when she noticed an uptick in parental reports that teens had suddenly insisted their gender identity didn’t match their sex, although they’d shown none of the common prepubescent signs of the condition, known as gender dysphoria. She spoke to a clinician who’d observed the same trend. “When the characteristics of a population seeking care for a condition substantially changes, the responsible thing to do is to start asking questions about what might be contributing to these changes,” Dr. Littman says.

Since little is known about such “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” the first step for researchers is to describe it and introduce topics for future inquiry. Dr. Littman surveyed 256 parents, whom she found online, collecting information about the teens’ mental health, friend-group dynamics and social-media use. Dr. Littman’s findings suggested these young people may have been driven in part by “social and peer contagion.”

Nearly 70% of the teenagers belonged to a peer group in which at least one friend had also come out as transgender. In some groups, the majority had done so. Nearly 65% of teens had spent an increased amount of time online and on social media, and parents reported that pro-transgender YouTube videos and blogs might have been influential.

Declaring oneself transgender carried social benefits, the parents reported. Among parents who knew their children’s social status, nearly 60% said the announcement brought a popularity boost. “Being trans is a gold star in the eyes of other teens,” one parent wrote.

Not all social pressure was positive. Many respondents said their children’s friends frequently mocked or derided people who were not gay or transgender. “To be heterosexual, comfortable with the gender you were assigned at birth, and non-minority places you in the ‘most evil’ of categories within this group of friends,” one parent observed. Parents often said that children who had second thoughts about being transgender feared social repercussions. “[My child] couldn’t face the stigma of going back to school and being branded as fake or phony . . . or worse, a traitor or some kind of betrayer,” one reported.

Dr. Littman’s critics claim that because she found survey participants primarily from three websites where parents discussed their concerns, the study is biased and scientifically unsound. Dr. Littman

Dr. Littman’s detractors also accuse her of bigotry. Her work “negates the experience of many transgender youth,” according to Diane Ehrensaft, of the Child and Adolescent Gender Center Clinic at the University of California San Francisco’s Benioff Children’s Hospital.

Transgender activist Brynn Tannehill calls Dr. Littman’s research “a naked attempt to legitimize anti-transgender animus with a veneer of academic responsibility.” And Zinnia Jones, founder of the website Gender Analysis, called rapid-onset gender dysphoria a “hoax diagnosis” perpetuated by those who would deny transgender children “acceptance and affirmation.” The motto of Ms. Jones’s website: “The personal is empirical.”

The effort at suppression had an effect. PLOS ONE’s editor-in-chief, Joerg Heber, announced the journal would subject the study to “further expert assessment on the study’s methodology and analyses.” Spokesman David Knutson told me: “Any time there’s a lot of reader concern or a lot of people talking about it, it warrants a second look, and that’s what we’re doing right now,” adding that this is “basically how science works.” Mr. Knutson would not elaborate about what specific concerns prompted the review or what it would entail.

Brown University, where Dr. Littman is an untenured professor, has also backed away from her paper. It took down a news release and attendant social-media posts about the study and posted a statement from Bess Marcus, dean of the School of Public Health, acknowledging “concerns that the conclusions of the study could be used to discredit efforts to support transgender youth and invalidate the perspectives of members of the transgender community.” The university updated its statement Thursday, emphasizing that "this is not about academic freedom as some news outlets have made it out to be” and “this is about academic standards.”

Cass Cliatt, Brown’s vice president for communications, tells me Brown was merely “reacting to PLOS ONE.” It doesn’t censor controversial research, Ms. Cliatt says, but in this case, “it’s a question about the science. We believe strongly in academic freedom, but we have to be a responsible academic institution.”

The reaction to Dr. Littman’s study is especially overwrought given the modesty of her conclusions. She argues for more research and counsels caution in the meantime. Parents and physicians aren’t infallible, she writes, but neither are teens, “particularly in the almost universally tumultuous period of adolescence.” Consequently, “it is incumbent upon all professionals to fully respect the young person’s insider perspective but also, in the interests of safe diagnosis and avoidance of clinical harm, to have the awareness and humility themselves to engage with parental perspectives and triangulate evidence in the interest of validity and reliability.”

When teens sought treatment for gender dysphoria, the parents reported, clinicians often took the complaint at face value and failed to consider whether anything else might be going on. As for Dr. Littman’s critics, they equate caution with bias, even hatred, and encourage teens to go through hormone therapy or surgery—drastic interventions whose effects are irreversible."

Ms. Melchior is an editorial page writer at the Journal.

Motivation Monday

Simple advice.  Keep this in mind.  Always!

A Regular Guy

Saw this over on FB and thought I'd share.  It's got a bit of humor, a bit of exaggeration, a bit of self deprecation and unfortunately for someone of my age and experience, a whole lot of truth.  I've railed on stereotyping on this blog over and over, but it doesn't seem to be getting better.  I'm hoping that I'm not right and am overreacting to seeing too much hyperbole on the internet.  And maybe that is true to some extent.  But I see it all the time.  All I know is that I and many like me could be categorized by many of the stereotypes below.  And it's just not true.  Not even close.  So here's my advice.  Look deeper.

I used to think I was just a regular guy, but I was born white, which now, whether I like it or not, makes me a racist & responsible for slavery.
I am a fiscal & moral conservative, which by today’s standards, makes me a fascist because I plan & support myself.
I went to HS, worked through college, got a degree & have held a job, & am here not because I earned it but because I was advantaged.
I am heterosexual, which according to gay folks, now makes me a homophobe.
I am non-union, which makes me a traitor to the working class & ally of big business.
I am not a Muslim, which now labels me as an infidel.
I believe in the 2nd Amendment, which makes me a member of the vast NRA gun lobby.
I am older than 65 & retired, making me a useless old man who doesn't understand Facebook.
I think & I reason, so I doubt what main stream media tells me, which must make me a reactionary.
I am proud of my heritage & our inclusive American culture, making me a xenophobe.
I value my safety & that of my family, & I appreciate the police & the legal system, making me a right-wing, cop loving extremist.
I believe in hard work, fair play, & fair compensation according to each individual's merits, which today makes me an anti-socialist.
I believe our system guarantees freedom of effort - not freedom of outcome or subsidies which must make me a borderline sociopath.
I believe in the defense & protection of America for & by all citizens, now making me a militant.
I am proud of our flag, what it stands for, & the many who died to let it fly so I stand & salute during our National Anthem, taking me back where I started - I must be a racist.
Please help me come to terms with the new me because I'm just not sure who I am anymore!
I thank my friends for sticking with me through these abrupt, new found changes to my thinking!
I just can't imagine or understand what's happened to me so quickly!
Funny - it all took place over the last 7 or 8 years!
If all this nonsense wasn't enough to deal with,
I don't know which restroom to use, & I gotta go!!!

Friday Funnies

I couldn't help myself.  There are a lot of good meme's out there that are a variation on a theme, but this is one of the best!

He Said, He Said

Bob Woodward's new book, FEAR is coming out soon and there was a big tease in the news today.  Of course his book is all about the Trump White House, what a terrible place it is, how he's a monster who is not only stupid but out of control, how his aids continually save the country from his tirades and impulses and how most people who work there think he's an idiot and hate their jobs.  Of course, many of those he quoted said it was all B.S.  It's actually sort of sad because I used to enjoy Woodward's work.  He has good access, is a smart and experienced guy, and generally can tell a great story.  But from I've heard, this is just so over the top accusatory, that his hatred of the President comes through loud and clear.

But what to believe?  From what I've heard it's clearly a he said, he said (or he said, she said depending who's on the other end).  Many who have had experience with Woodward say that he has great sources and if he says something you can expect that it is credible.  But like I said, some of the hyperbole I've heard coming out of this book seems....far fetched.  For instance, he quoted Secretary Mattis as saying that Trump has the "intellect of a fifth or sixth grader".  He is said to have refused to execute some crazy ideas that Trump put forth.  But here's Mattis' rebuttal:

This seems pretty unequivocal to me.  And General Kelly and others have released similarly strong rebuttals.  So to me and from what I've heard so far, the book seems like just another hit piece that takes a lot of license.  And since this is being done right before the mid-term elections makes me think pretty strongly that Woodward is doing this for some benefit to Democrats.  And if true, then Woodward is finished as a journalist.

Kavanaugh Day 1

If you've had the TV on at all today you saw the circus that was loosely described as the first day of hearings on the selection of Brett Kavanaugh as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.  The media focused on the crazy, obnoxious protesters and the idiotic Democrats (although they weren't described in that manner).  But there was a moment today that was sublime.  Most of the day was theater that could be likened to pornography.  This could be likened to Shakespeare.  It's worth your time.

Nike

I'm sure most of you have heard of the latest controversy of the day that emerged today regarding Nike choosing Colin Kaepernick as the face of the their advertising campaign celebrating 30 years of the "Just Do It" campaign.  The tag line is "Believe in something.  Even if it means sacrificing everything."  Some are calling it stupid and some are calling it brilliant.  To most people of my age and experience, it seems like a big slap in the face.  It's an extension of the whole kneeling during the National Anthem that he started in the NFL and has become a hot mess.  Most people I know personally think he's a jackass and some are even boycotting the NFL.  And it's not about what he or they can or can't do.  Of course they have the right to kneel.  Again, most people I know don't dispute that.  It's really about respect.  The common refrain is that they are protesting oppression of black people.  Okay...I get that.  It's an age old issue and in my opinion only gets better person by person, community by community.  The national stage means very little.  And I wonder if they've considered the insult to the millions who have died for this idea called the U.S.A.  Fundamentally, I think most who object to the kneeling think there's a time and a place for everything, and where they are exercising their right is neither the time nor the place.  And this becomes exacerbated because most of these guys are millionaires who appear to be taking the easy road.  If they really care about this issue what are they doing off the field.  I'm also seeing a lot of stories about Nike's factories in Asia where their shoes are made.  The average worker makes 30 cents and hour.  Yes, that's right.  30 cents.  Think about that when you go price your next pair of Nike's.  But I don't think Nike was talking to me or people like me.  I don't think they care about my demographic.  They are targeting a much, much younger and "hipper" generation.  I believe that they are betting that a broad cross-section won't be offended and many will admire the selection.  And those that don't?  Well, they just don't matter that much.  And there is an old marketing rule that public relations, good or bad, is good.  Of course it's true only to a point, but generally getting your name out there, if it doesn't damage you too much, is good. Nike obviously made a calculation that the risk was worth the move.  And that is their right.  We'll see how it turns out.  It will be interesting to watch their stock price in the coming weeks and months.  It will most likely be a story that has legs for a week or so and then will be forgotten.  But maybe not.  In the meantime I'll just leave the best response I've seen here.  It's something to think about.

Motivation Monday

Two Funerals

Two huge ones this week.  Aretha and McCain.  Two giants.  Both deserved the accolades and the honors.  Both had tremendous impact in their worlds.  And they both will be sorely missed.

I watched Aretha's on and off during the six+ hours of celebration.  I was struck by how joyful it was.  It was truly a great and appropriate ceremony to honor "The Queen of Soul".  I feel, like many people of my age, that I grew up with Aretha.  Her music was both the music of our generation and music for the ages.  The celebration was large, boisterous, beautiful and symbolic.  The speakers were as diverse as her Grandchildren, Jesse Jackson and former President Clinton.  They were all so sincere in their awe and touching in their personal anecdotes.  The music was a fitting tribute and some, like Chaka Khan and Ron Isely, evoked the glory of Motown of the past.  From the long lines of pink Cadillacs that arrived from all over the country to the traditional Baptist emotion, it was at once a celebration, a remembrance and a show.  It was every bit as good and poignant as Whitney's or Michael's, but there was a much larger sense of a life well lived.  A sense of the impact on so many and the glory she evoked through music.  And a sense of appreciation.  Her music will live on for decades and generations.  And whenever you hear it, you will think...Aretha!  What a tribute.  What a life.  What an impact.  

John McCain's long march to lay beside his flight school roommate, ADM Chuck Larson in the cemetery at Hospital Point on the Yard of the United States Naval Academy was no less impressive.  But it was very different.  After his death a week ago today, there was a bit of a dust up regarding honor rendered or not by President Trump and that stained the initial dignified week that I think all hoped for.  You can read my take here.  But beyond that, the ceremonies were glorious and heart wrenching.  From the initial service in Arizona, to the service in the rotunda of the U.S. Capital, to the memorial service this morning in the National Cathedral, to tomorrow's private service and internment at USNA, I think the common word was dignified.  Senator McCain lay in state in the Arizona capital and in the U.S. Capital, only the 31st person to be accorded that honor.  And thousands of normal, everyday people passed by to honor him.  It has been a week normally accorded to only the most revered and honored among us and to some it will seem inappropriate.  But to most who recognize Senator McCain's sacrifices, his patriotism, his devotion to duty, and his impact it will feel right.  While I didn't watch it all, there were a few standout moments for me.  The images of Cindy McCain tenderly touching her cheek to his casket, Meghan McCain's obvious distress and inconsolable sadness, the two sons in uniform stoically providing a quiet strength, the casket on display in the Rotunda, and of course the majesty of the National Cathedral were all indelible and classically rememberable.  Joe Biden's remarks in Arizona were great.  I'm not a fan but I thought he did a great job.  When he said passionately and with a catch in his voice that the family would someday remember Senator McCain not with a tear in the eye but a smile on the lips, there wasn't a dry eye in the house.  Senator Lieberman's remarks today were touching and borne of true friendship. And as much as I don't like him, I will freely admit that Barrack Obama is an eloquent speaker who today had the room in his hands.  It was something.  I'm glad that the ceremonies tomorrow at USNA are private.  I can't imagine how tired, sad and distressed the family is and keeping tomorrow private is the right call.  I can't embellish all the accolades, descriptions, remembrances or honors given to Senator McCain this week.  So I won't try.  I simply think he was a great man who loved his family, his country, and tried to do his best to promote the ideals he cherished.

Having said all that and not to take one iota away from the honors accorded to him, to me there was an undercurrent in the week that felt...petty.  I was disappointed that at the end of his life his heroism that was shared with so many Vets, his accomplishments as one of our greatest statesmen, and his obvious charisma and leadership ability was somewhat tainted by his personal feud with our President.  To be sure and as I've written in this blog many times, Trump can be insufferable, obnoxious and self-absorbed.  And his insult to Senator McCain that we all heard regarding his heroism as a POW was abhorrent.  But I somehow expected McCain would rise above it.  I somehow expected that in the end, the love of country would ascend.  But while McCain was great, he was also human.  Although he was a great man, he was just a man.  He demonstrated incredible honor and courage in the face of unimaginable torture and risked everything he was on the behalf of us all.  And sometimes he was less than perfect...way less.  I won't detail the knocks on him here...it doesn't matter.  But in the end, I expected better.  He had an opportunity to finish it for the country, but he failed.  He chose to prolong the feud into the grave.  He disinvited a sitting President to his funeral.  His daughter in her eulogy, like her father was wont to do when he felt like it, stuck the knife in and twisted.  He could have brought us together and instead the headlines are the snubs.  He could have buried the hatchet and shown in the end his ultimate greatness, but instead chose to push Americans farther apart.  And for this I am saddened.  

But he doesn't have to be perfect for us to honor him.  Like all of us he had flaws and yet still deserves to be honored.  I am saddened at his passing.  Saddened for the country and his family.  Saddened that on Monday the vitriol will return and the haters will arise again from their hiding places.  And here's the biggest thing.  We don't seem to be making them like him much anymore.  We lost another man among too few willing to step up.  For all his flaws he was, as the great Theodore Roosevelt said, "in the arena".  And he will never be "counted with those cold and timed souls who know neither victory or defeat".