The further to the left or the right you move, the more your lens on life distorts.

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Goodbye to a "Golden Age"

In an odd way, a biased, dishonest, corrupt, and incompetent main stream media did achieve their purpose over the past four years. Their coverage of Donald Trump and his administration was so confrontational and chaotic, and so full of outright lies, distortions and omissions, that it was exhausting to many who spent time with the media's output. As a consequence, it might just be that some (maybe a lot) of voters just wanted it all to stop and voted for a cognitively-challenged candidate who the media would fawn over because ... (1) he's a Democrat and (2) he's woke.

The same media clowns that spent four years making a mockery of journalistic ethics are asking, what now? Now that Trump is soon to be gone, exactly what will the trained hamsters "report" or write op-eds about? After all, there can be no scandals in a Democrat administration. Every policy decision will be brilliant and cannot be questioned. Capitulating to our adversaries will be a sign of nuanced brilliance, not craven stupidity. Economic wreckage precipitated by high taxes that hurt the middle class, minorities, and the working poor will be blamed on "capitalism" and "oppression," never on a leftist ideology that specializes in creating economic wreckage.

And of course there's the virus. COVID-19 will be characterized as an unfortunate pandemic that is being conquered by Joe Biden's brave and empathetic plan. And should Joe's plan not work to reduce "cases" (a ridiculous measure, but since it was pushed by the Dems, they now have to live with it) , it'll all be back-referenced to Trump's "incompetence." No one will mention that Joe's plan is identical to Trump's, and few will note that it was Trump, not a single Democrat, whose Operation Warp Speed resulted in a vaccine long before the :"experts" said it could happen.

And through it all, Joe Biden's obvious early stage demensia will be absolutely off-limits. Questions from the Dems' trained hamsters in the media  will be so gentle they'll be laughable. Nothing even remotely challenging will be asked. And no one will even mention Burisma or the odd anomalies that occurred on election day.

T. Becket Adams comments on the end of what Vanity Fair (without irony) called "the Golden Age of Journalism." In what will be a 180 like no other 180, the trained hamsters of "the golden age" will no longer be the combative "heroes' only they think they are. Instead, they'll become saccharine pussy cats who will fawn over Joe Biden as he brings us back "from the brink." So along with Adams, let's say:

... goodbye, then, to journalists elevating as worthy of public notice obvious liars and lunatics, including convicted felon Michael Avenatti … and conspiracy theorist Louise Mensch — all because they oppose the administration.

Goodbye to weekly “bombshells” that land with a “splat!” instead of a “boom!”

Goodbye to near-daily input from presidential historians turned political assassins …

Goodbye to White House correspondents pretending as if they are reporting from an active war zone or claiming they feel safer covering authoritarian regimes.

Goodbye to the Holocaust being invoked against the administration on a near-daily basis.

Goodbye to members of the press cheering America's enemies who may have insulted or upstaged a White House official.

Goodbye to the steady flow of news stories covering how reporters feel about covering the presidency.

Goodbye to members of the press pretending as if failed GOP “strategists” have a genuine concern for the future of the country and not just the health of their bank accounts.

Goodbye to news cycles based entirely on unverified gossip from disgruntled former administration staffers.

Goodbye to the seemingly endless stream of palace intrigue stories featuring people no one knows doing things no one remembers.

Goodbye to White House correspondents being celebrated exclusively for their histrionics and activism and not because they serve the public interest. Goodbye also to the pure theatrics of White House press briefings …

Goodbye to journalists pretending as if their lives are in danger because someone in the administration criticized them …

Goodbye to news cycles based entirely on the say-so of anonymous sources, especially those “familiar with the president’s thinking.”

Goodbye to industry-wide meltdowns over innocuous and harmless events, including the renovation of the White House Rose Garden.

Goodbye to wise-ass on-air news headlines, as they have given way already to saccharine and heroic descriptions of the president-elect:

Goodbye to true statements by White House officials being flunked as “false” or “mostly false” because of some tiny technicality cited by fact-checkers. We say goodbye also to fact-checkers being treated as celebrities and heroes.

Goodbye to stories about how the president is "raging,” “unraveling,” and “fuming." We say goodbye to reports about how the president is “isolated” and articles about how it is the “end” for the president.

Goodbye also to news cycles suggesting (or stating outright) that the president is mentally deranged.

Goodbye, but not farewell, because there is high probability that Biden and his emerging Team of 2s will capitulate to the hard-left demands of the new Democratic Party—and face plant on both domestic and foreign policy issues. That just might lead to a GOP election rout in the House and Senate in 2022 and (if protections against "voting irregularities" can be instituted over the next four years) another GOP president who will be the catalyst for yet another "Golden Age" of journalism.

Thursday, November 26, 2020

A Thanksgiving Thought

On this Thanksgiving Day, there's plenty to be thankful for, even with "covidiocy" and roiled presidential politics that have pervaded 2020. So yes, be thankful, but also be wary of those who want to transform our country, not for the better, but for their own considerably less than noble purposes.

Throughout the year and on the political front, we've seen behavior that is so extreme it can be astounding. Any comment that opposes "woke" thought is deemed by some to be "unsafe." Any action that doesn't perfectly conform to woke orthodoxy (an ever-changing target) can evoke outrage. Any person who suggests a different world view is automatically deemed a "racist" or "nazi."  The year has demonstrated that Social Justice Warriors have no sense of humor ... none. They live in a dark world of anger and accusation, hatred and fear. 

Throughout the year and on the public health front, we've seen policies and behavior that are so extreme it is frightening. A form of mass hysteria has gripped a significant percentage of the population, leading weak and stupid politicians to jettison real science and set policy that is at best nonsensical and at worst, destructive to lives and livelihoods. We've seen schools closed, businesses shuttered, and petty tyrants dictating public health policy that is as ridiculous and it is ineffective. Catastrophists are gripped by self-imposed isolation. They live in a dark world of fear, uncertainty and doubt. They are perfectly willing to insist that their self-imposed dread should be a reason to control the lives of those who are less fearful.

Now we hear a president-elect talk about "unity." But as we will surely see in the coming year, "unity" will be defined by the Left as total agreement (a.k.a. capitulation) with their ideas and proposed policies, no matter how ill-informed or ineffective or costly those policies are. But I suppose we can be thankful that Joe Biden has at least used the word "unity."

As Biden and the Woke ascend to a position of power, this Thanksgiving thought is worth heeding ... 

“If you can’t control your own emotions, you’re forced to control other people’s behaviour, That’s why the touchiest, most oversensitive and easily upset must not set the standard for the rest of us.”  John Clease

Wednesday, November 25, 2020


When I was younger, I played on a 4.5 USTA league tennis team. Our team won the local championship, went on the the states and then the regionals.  In the doubles match in the regional finals against a team from RI, we split the first two sets and then played to 6-6 in the third. Oh, BTW, the teams were supposed to be honorable and call the lines, there was no umpire or line judge. It was 6-5 in a tie breaker (ad-in), my serve. 

If we win the point, our team goes on to the national championships. I served to the T (up the middle) for a clean ace. The ball was in by an inch in both directions, close, but unquestionably in. Spectators agreed. The RI team called it out. My partner and I argued, then called an official, who listened, but then asked that we play the point over.

"No," I argued. "The serve was good. The match is over." 

Even though I think he sensed that our opponents cheated, the official cited the rules when disagreement about a line call occurred and said that we had to play the point over. He was hesitant to declare one team a victor. We lost 8-6 in the breaker. Our team did not go the the nationals, RI did.

I refused to shake my opponents' hands, thereby refusing to concede. And even with the wisdom of years, I would do the same thing today.

I know it's an old-school sentiment, but there should be a certain honor to competition—the recognition that an opponent has as much right to win as you do. But also the hard and fast rule that you never cheat, never.

* * * * * * * *

For the most part, I do believe that our recent election was conducted fairly. There were certainly isolated instances of irregularity, but overall the vote was fair. But where it really mattered, in a select number of blue cities in battleground states, I cannot state with certainty that the election was conducted fairly, that the "hard and fast rule that you never cheat, never" was followed by local officials.

With tongue planted firmly in his cheek, J.B. Shurk writes:

Candidate Joe Biden was so effective at animating voters in 2020 that he received a record number of votes, more than 15 million more than Barack Obama received in his re-election of 2012. Amazingly, he managed to secure victory while also losing in almost every bellwether county across the country. No presidential candidate has been capable of such electoral jujitsu until now.

While Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals in every urban county in the United States, he outperformed her in the metropolitan areas of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. Even more surprising, the former VP put up a record haul of votes, despite Democrats’ general failures in local House and state legislative seats across the nation.

He accomplished all this after receiving a record low share of the primary vote compared to his Republican opponent heading into the general election. Clearly, these are tremendous and unexpected achievements that would normally receive sophisticated analysis from the journalist class but have somehow gone mostly unmentioned during the celebrations at news studios in New York City and Washington, D.C.

The massive national political realignment now taking place may be one source of these surprising upsets. Yet still, to have pulled so many rabbits out of his hat like this, nobody can deny that Biden is a first-rate campaigner and politician, the likes of which America has never before seen. Let’s break down just how unique his political voodoo has been in 2020 ...

Shurk goes on to discuss more specific anomalies, red flags, and hard data that indicate the "miracle" of Bidens' win. Amazing things like:

Proving how sharp his political instincts are, the former VP managed to gather a record number of votes while consistently trailing President Trump in measures of voter enthusiasm. Biden was so savvy that he motivated voters unenthusiastic about his campaign to vote for him in record numbers. 

Julie Kelly notes another out of PA: 

Roughy 2.5 million Pennsylanians voted absentee in the general election; nearly 2 million of those votes were cast for Joe Biden. One analysis found rejection rates for  Pennsylvania mail-in ballots was 30 times lower this year compared to 2016.

That's odd, but yet another indicator of the Biden "miracle." 

But all of the anomalies, red flags, and hard data don't matter, dismissed by a media that has given new meaning to the word 'gaslighting,' and enabled by courts that are understandably hesitant to negate an election.

The Dems understood these realities and called the serve "out," and the server didn't even get a do-over. The rest is (tainted) history.

Tuesday, November 24, 2020

Miracle Worker

The core of the 2020 Democrat campaign for the presidency—a successful one if you discount all of the voting anomalies that the establishment would prefer you ignore—is that Donald Trump is a very, very bad person who has killed 200,000 plus people by not having a plan (don't worry, Joe Biden has a plan*) to combat COVID-19.

According to the four constituencies, everything the Trump administration did relative to COVID-19 was wrong. 

And ... Trump told us that his private-public vaccine development program, Operation Warp Speed, would get us a vaccine by the end of 2020." 

Our betters in the establishment laughed derisively at that. They suggested that Trump was lying, that he was disconnected from reality, that he refused to follow the sage advice of public health geniuses like Dr. Anthony Fauci, who told us a one to two year gestation period for vaccines was a "best case scenario." The establishment's collective lack of imagination, management skill, and optimism was astonishing.

Like everything else they espoused in 2020, the Dems and their allies throughout the media, the #NeverTrump GOP, and the deep state were wrong—very, very wrong.

The NY Post Editorial Board writes:

All the way back in May, after Trump announced that a vaccine by year’s end was a real possibility, the usual media suspects dumped cold water on the idea. One NBC story that month, for example, insisted, “Experts say that the development, testing and production of a vaccine for the public is still at least 12 to 18 months off, and that anything less would be a medical miracle.”

Hmmm. Looks like Donald Trump—the guy who didn't have a plan, who ruthlessly "killed" our citizens by his "mismanagement" of the virus, who rejected the warped reality of Anthony Fauci, MD, who argued that Americans should NOT live in fear, who recommended opening schools and avoiding lockdowns—was a "miracle" worker.


*  This is a direct quote in which Biden struggled to enunciate his "plan" as he addressed the Governor's Conference last week. No words have been changed, added, or deleted with the exception of those in [brackets]. Biden's comments:

“We talked a lot about what the governors about what the immediate needs are.

I’m gonna, we’re gonna impose the, we’re gonna enforce the… excuse me… employ the defense [unintelligible] reconstructive act [he means the Defense Reconstruction Act, you know, the thing that Trump used back in April] to be able to go out there and dictate companies build and do following things.

We need much more testing. We need much more masking. [unintelligible] . We need gloves.

I asked them east to go and asked the national governors association through the Governor Cuomo and the ones on the line to let us know what their shortages are.”

Gosh, that's completely free of any useful detail and in places, borderline incoherent. 

It appears that Joe has memorized the line about more testing and masking (not sure where gloves came from). There have been no reports of shortages of this PPE in months. We're testing at rates that are unmatched anywhere in the world, and there is absolutely no indication that more testing will somehow bend the virus curve.

As every sentient follower of this election expected, Biden's "plan" is to continue work done by the Trump administration. This is my shocked face.

Monday, November 23, 2020

The Payoff

I have been fortunate enough to be able to donate to my alma mater every year since I've graduated, but I'm sure to target my donation specifically to the Engineering school. Even there, the religion of "wokeness" has just begun to pervade an education that emphasizes clear thinking, problem solving, and fact-based analysis. But in other parts of the university, things are very different. Josh Hammer describes what's happening:

It is both terrifying and perverse that America's intellectual gatekeepers—the "elite"-forming, credentialing institutions that separate the "deplorables" from the ruling class—impress self-loathing pablum upon malleable young minds. With some notable exceptions, American higher education today comprises madrasas of wokeness fundamentally hostile to the American regime and the American way of life. Many of the far Left's most toxic ideas, whether moral relativism, socialism, "anti-racism" or multiculturalism, either begin on campus or gain steam there. It shouldn't surprise anyone that one of the more popular policies in conservative egghead circles today is to expand loan access to, and accreditation support for, trade school alternatives to traditional four-year bachelor's degree-granting programs.

Intellectual bankruptcy notwithstanding, there are manifold more tangible problems associated with the failed higher education status quo. Four years spent on campus between the ages of 18 and 22 means four prime years forgone from acquiring vocational skills, advancing a career, and mating and forming families. It also often means, due in part to the federal government's effective monopoly over the student loan industry, four years of willful indebtedness to major in such patently silly "subjects" as "gender studies." Student loans are now the second-largest source of collective American debt, behind only mortgage debt. By some staggering estimates, Americans have over $1.5 trillion in student loan debt.

The new Democratic party relies heavily on wokeness as a key element of their recruiting efforts and its representatives within the professorial corps work overtime to convince college students that the only way to vote is Democratic. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that in order to 'buy' votes, the Dems followed the lead of socialist icon, Bernie Sanders, and have implied that they'll work on a program to eliminate or reduce college debt, voluntarily incurred, that students in programs like gender studies, art history ethnic studies, or any of dozens of BA programs that don't even come close to making a list of those that in most demand in the work force. Graduates of those programs graduate, have difficult finding a decent job (in what is likely to become Biden's recession, it likely they'll have even more difficulty), and then struggle to pay back their college loans.

The Dems, as is their nature, then suggest that those of us who saved and set aside money for our own children's college fund or those college student who worked second and third jobs (as I did in addition to going to school) so they would not incur appreciable debt, should now pay off debt of others.

Hammer continues:

This policy is idiotic in the extreme and brazenly immoral. Republicans and sensible Democrats must unite to defeat it.

The higher education-student loan complex is in desperate need of more transparency and accountability—not more bailouts. A prudent first step would be for creditors, whether public or (ideally) private, to present clear information about salaries and career paths for graduating high school seniors to consider before they commit to taking out hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans to major in "ethnic studies." The worst possible thing we could do would be a mass bailout of this nature, which would initiate a vicious, never-ending cycle of tuition spikes, more indebtedness and more bailouts. It is a quintessential exercise in trying to apply a Band-Aid to a grievously slit artery.

And of course there's the small matter of the millions who have been responsible and paid back their college debt—out of income from jobs their education allowed them to acquire. Are they suckers? Or what about trade people who chose to forgo college. Are they responsible for bailing out graduates who are in debt and can't find work?

But none of that matters to the Dems, particularly when they're recruiting lifetime votes. And why stop with college loans? Why not consider car loans next, then credit card debt, and finally home mortgages. After all, if we can bail out one group, what's wrong with bailing out all of them. 

Plenty ... it turns out.

Sunday, November 22, 2020


It's a given that Joe Biden will be sworn in as President of the United States on January 20, 2021. The fact that tens of millions of Americans believe that the vote for Biden in key battleground states was manipulated to ensure his victory taints his presidency from its very first day. But in the end, that doesn't matter. He will wield the power of the presidency and the Democrats have the one thing they have long sought—power.

What does matter is that our country cannot and should not go down a path in which democratic elections can be tainted in the future. Where ballots can be manufactured to ensure a specific outcome, where dead people and non-citizens vote (and only for one candidate), where software that counts ballots is untrustworthy and/or surreptitiously designed to favor one side, where observers whose job it is to ensure a proper vote are frozen out of the process, where people are paid to vote, where dozens of credible anomalies (a.k.a. "red flags") cause citizens to question the result. All of that—and more—is dangerous, and it must be stopped. That's why some of us believe that a full investigation is not only justified, it is imperative. We are under no illusion that it will affect the outcome, but it could make us better prepared to hold fair elections in the future.

* * * * * *

After recounting a news conference in which Donald Trump's legal team described dozens of red flags that indicate possible voter fraud along with sworn affidavits that represent legally appropriate "evidence" of wrong-doing (and also foolishly tacked on a number of 'out-there' conspiracy theories), Peggy Noonan reflects the opinion of many establishment Republicans when she writes:

This isn’t a game. America isn’t your plaything. Doesn’t Mr. Gingrich [who demands a full investigation] realize how dangerous it is to stoke people like this, to rev them up on the idea that holding even the slightest faith in the system is for suckers?

Trump staff and supporters should know at this point that in trying to change the outcome they are doing harm—undercutting respect in and hope for democracy. Republican senators and representatives, in their silence, are allowing the idea to take hold that the whole system is rigged. This lessens faith in institutions and in their party’s reputation. Republicans were once protective of who we are and what we created in this democratic republic long ago.

Now they’re not even protecting themselves; in future years what’s happening now will give their voters an excuse not to take part or show up. What’s the point? It’s all rigged.

The point, Ms. Noonan, is to determine whether the election results were "rigged" in a small number of select blue cities, and to root out the rot, if that in fact is the reality of the 2020 vote. That cannot and will not be done without ruffling some feathers, making a few unfortunate hyperbolic statements, going down a few dead ends, and looking under rocks that establishment types don't want to pick up. 

It appears that Ms. Noonan and her contemporaries are perfectly willing to turn the other cheek and walk off to fight another day. The narrative she, along with every Democrat, far too many establishment Republicans, and virtually all of the media espouse is that it's somehow "dangerous" to question very suspicious election results.

Is it not "dangerous" to dismiss the tens of millions of people* who think that an election was rigged in blue cities in battleground states to ensure a victory by the Democrats? Is it not dangerous for our media to remain willfully ignorant, refusing to investigate any claim of voter fraud independently? is it not dangerous to gaslight the public (as Peggy is doing) by claiming there is "no evidence" when dozens of sworn affidavits have been presented in on-going legal actions? And exactly how dangerous is it if wrong-doing did occur, and we do nothing about it, and hold no one accountable. What will happen in the next election and the one after than if bad actors know that they're home free?

It is the height of hypocrisy to suggest because many voters believe Trump is a bad guy, it's okay to look the other way as an election is (potentially) stolen. It is NOT a conspiracy theory to note that there's sworn testimony indicating that irregularities did occur and that they appear to be significant. It's not unreasonable to think (given both anecdotal and actual evidence) that something bad happened in cities like Philly and Detroit, Milwaukee and Atlanta. It's important to determine the extent of it, even if what we find doesn't change the election outcome. 


* The elites dismiss tens of millions of "deplorables" who they claim will believe any "conspiracy theory" because they are too stupid to know better. But if you give it a little thought, you might come to a different conclusion. 

  • Those "deplorables" watched in 2016 as the establishment gaslighted the public, telling them there was absolutely, positively, unequivocally NO attempt to spy on the Trump campaign and that anyone who believed that the FBI was involved was "crazy."  
  • Those same "deplorables" watched as Democrats and their trained hamsters in the media told the public that there was clear and compelling 'evidence' that Donald Trump was a Russian stooge who colluded with Vladimir Putin and that anyone who thought otherwise was a fool. 
  • Those same "deplorables" watched as SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh was labelled a gang rapist by the best and brightest among the progressive commentariat.
  • Those "deplorables" sat by as a sitting president was impeached using evidence so flimsy that it was laughable. 
Few within the establishment then suggested that any of that was "dangerous to our democracy," yet any attempt to get to the bottom of voting irregularities is now deemed "dangerous to our democracy."

So it's reasonable for the "deplorables" to listen to establishment people who lied through their teeth—repeated, blatantly, and without remorse or apology—and say, "Why should I believe them now?"

Why indeed?


Ever since early reports that election hardware and software developed and integrated by Dominion Voting Systems had a "glitch" that changed Trump votes to Biden votes (apparently corrected after discovery) we've been told by all the smartest people that the software was 100% solid, that there's NO WAY that it could be either externally or internally compromised by nefarious actors who might want to have it bias toward the Democratic candidate, that allegations of Democrat investors in the company may have influenced the algorithms that were implemented are nonsense and irrelevant, that it's all just a "conspiracy theory." Maybe. 

Dominion Software was supposed to appear before PA State Government Committee where it was supposed to answer questions about the "glitches" that occurred during this month's elections. Apparently, the company has lawyered up and refused to appear. That in and of itself proves nothing, but it is an intriguing development.

I've worked in the software world for more than almost five decades and written the world's best selling textbook on software engineering. I've worked with many companies in the Fortune 100 and dozens upon dozen of smaller companies—all focused on software design, software quality, change management, and software process. Given that, any time I hear someone tell me that an app has "no errors," that there's no possibility that external or internal compromise has occurred, that the software is 100% reliable and correct, red flags go up. 

Hmmm. More and more red flags.


As "there is NO WIDESPREAD VOTER FRAUD" gaslighting continues, the uniform narrative coming from the Pro-Biden forces is that "there is no evidence." Amber Athey comments:

The media has been claiming since the election ended that President Trump’s claims of voter fraud are ‘baseless’ and ‘without evidence’. That just is not true. The President’s lawyer gave examples of it during today’s press conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington DC. But everyone is too busy mocking him to pay attention. 

[This is, of course, a classic gaslighting technique—attack or mock the speaker so that the hard facts he presents are disregarded]

I tried to listen to what Giuliani actually said and not what he looked like or the characterization of him by the rest of the media ... [He] did in fact present evidence of voter fraud today but many people simply didn’t want to hear it. He cited multiple Americans, one by name, who have signed sworn affidavits stating that they witness some type of fraud, whether it was pro-Trump ballots being thrown out without cause, ballots being backdated to before the election, poll workers being told not to ask voters for identification, and more.

As Giuliani helpfully pointed out, affidavits are considered ‘evidence’ in a court case. Whether you agree or disagree with them is a different question. And it’s reasonable that not all of the people who signed their names would be willing to go public. If you want to hear more of the evidence that was presented, just watch the first hour or so of the press conference [begins at 00:16:54 of the video].

The simple reality is that there is no amount of evidence, however compelling, that will cause a stir among the Democrats' trained hamsters in the media. They're perfectly happy to look the other way. After all, what's a little fraud or a bogus election result when you've defeated the worst person on earth.


There appears to be a hint of desperation in the establishment's combined condemnation and plea to let allegations of voter fraud go. It's as if they can't understand why their gaslighting hasn't worked to convince tens of millions that there's nothing to see there, move along.

Richard Fernandez tweets:

Throughout 2020, there has been "widespread irrationality," but it has nothing to do with allegations of voting fraud. The four constituencies have worked very, very hard over the last four years to debase themselves. Their arguments and assertions are no longer considered credible by many, and they're so self-important and out-of-touch, they have no idea why that is.

Saturday, November 21, 2020

Masking Up

When people become gripped by fear, uncertainty and doubt (driven by media hype, dishonest reporting and lack of context), they can and often do give in to mass hysteria. And when they get to that place, they grasp at any "solution" to their perceived problem, no matter how questionable, ineffective, and intrusive. 

As they grasp at the "solution," they'll intone "science" as their justification, insisting that anyone who questions their weak or non-existent interpretation of "science" is putting people "at risk" and is a danger to society.

Enter masks and mask mandates.

The conventional wisdom of 2020 is that masks are a key element in "slowing the spread" of COVID-19. In fact, masking up has now become an article of faith, mandated in many states. Should Joe Biden ascend to the presidency as expected, it's likely we'll have a national mandate.*

Masks have also become a sign of "wokeness." If you wear a mask, it's a not-so-subtle signal that you care, that you're a member of a select, morally superior group that truly understands the danger of COVID-19 and wants desperately to protect society from it. In many locales, a person can and will be criticized if they're not wearing a mask (even outside) with the clear implication they're an uncaring person.

There's only one problem—masks do little if anything to "stop the spread."

Over the past few months the results of a major scientific study (in Denmark) on the efficacy of masks in combating the spread of COVID-19 have, in effect, been suppressed in the scientific literature. Yes, political correctness has begun to pervade scientific journals. Finally, those results are coming out. Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson summarize the findings:

... The ‘Danmask-19 trial’ was conducted in the spring with over 3,000 participants, when the public were not being told to wear masks but other public health measures were in place. Unlike other studies looking at masks, the Danmask study was a randomized controlled trial — making it the highest quality scientific evidence.

Around half of those in the trial received 50 disposable surgical face masks, which they were told to change after eight hours of use. After one month, the trial participants were tested using both PCR, antibody and lateral flow tests and compared with the trial participants who did not wear a mask.

In the end, there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by COVID-19. [Emphasis mine] Of those wearing masks, 1.8 percent caught COVID, compared to 2.1 percent of the control group. As a result, it seems that any effect masks have on preventing the spread of the disease in the community is small.

Some people, of course, did not wear their masks properly. Only 46 percent of those wearing masks in the trial said they had completely adhered to the rules. But even if you only look at people who wore masks ‘exactly as instructed’, this did not make any difference to the results: 2 percent of this group were also infected.

When it comes to masks, it appears there is still little good evidence they prevent the spread of airborne diseases. The results of the Danmask-19 trial mirror other reviews into influenza-like illnesses. Nine other trials looking at the efficacy of masks (two looking at healthcare workers and seven at community transmission) have found that masks make little or no difference to whether you get influenza or not. [Emphasis mine]

Hmmm. But Joe Biden and his cadre of woke supporters tell us that masks make all the difference, that they'll stop the spread, that "science" supports their position—except it doesn't ... not even a little.


*  At the same time Joe Biden advocates a mandatory mask mandate (because he's following science that doesn't exist) he's also advocating a much less stringent border policy with Mexico. Consider for a moment that Mexico currently has the highest COVID-19 mortality rate in the world at 9.8 percent. Is it wise to encourage illegal border crossings over the six month or year? Is it just possible that a non-trivial percentage of those making the crossing might have the virus and transmit it to others inside the USA? Oh ... never mind. The wokeness of open borders will trump the wokeness of masks every time.