Conservatives often complain that the left believes that biological realities will go away if you just win enough Twitter arguments.
But how would you describe someone who responds to the observation that US hospitals in some areas are already at capacity with "But Sweden"?
Like, even if you won this argument, or at least made your interlocutor too tired to continue it, the virus is not going to scream "Aiieeeeee, Sweden, I am slain!" and stop ripping through hospitals.
We need to spend more time addressing the physical reality of a virus that cannot read and therefore does not know or care about anything except infecting us. And way less time litigating past policy grievances, or demanding a hall pass from biology for our very special cause.
If you want to argue for let 'er rip indoor dining and church every day, fine, but you have to argue from the likely results, not what someone said in March.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Okay, all of you folks yelling IF YOU THINK ISOLATED CASES OF FRAUD OCCUR, WHY ARE YOU SO SANGUINE? HOW ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH FRAUD?
I need to tell you guys a story. About ballpoint pens.
Readers of my columns have heard this one before. Sorry. Bear with me.
So when I was just a young slip of a girl, making my way in the Big City by doing temp work, I got a multi-week gig at a moderately sized office that was, I infer, having some financial problems.
1) Cities tend to be monolithically left, and monolithic groups become more extreme, so that urban discourse is significantly to the left of the American center, or indeed, the modal Democrat.
2) "Mainstream" media and academia are even more extremely left-skewed, which removes a natural check on the tendency to talk left. (This problem is becoming more apparent on the right as they disengage from mainstream media)
3) Primaries make it costlier to "talk right", especially as symbolic cultural politics dominate more and more of this intra-institutional jockeying for power.
Trump has one great superpower: utter shamelessness. With it, he has won some battles others would have lost, notably Kavanaugh. And it enables him to be the world's greatest slogan A/B tester, because if something he said yesterday bombs, he drops it and tries something else.
But this superpower is extremely limited, and a boundless willingness to say literally anything, combined with no attachment to principles of any kind, is a bad political strategy for the long run.
People without principles aren't trusted, which means they can't build coalitions, which is why the big "wins" his supporters like to cite are a handful of modest executive orders, and a tax bill and supreme court nomination that were exactly what the GOP establishment wanted.
My husband likes to pick the meat out of my braises and leave the liquid. I have turned this into a kitchen hack, which works like this:
Every time I make a familiar dish--oxtails Ancient Rome style (ish), pot roast, beef stew, osso buco, chili verde, etc--I save excess liquid in the freezer. Then I use the leftover liquid as a starter for the next one, supplementing with wine, tomatoes, mirepoix, stock, whatever.
The result is in "infinity braise" where each braise has just a little bit of all the previous ones in it. Sacrifices some consistency, but I usually freestyle the stuff I make really often with whatever's on hand, anyway. On the plus side the flavor is much richer & more complex
My MBA class, the Class of 2001, had the worst job market experience of any class in living memory. (Yes, worse than the financial crisis). The Class of 2021 will probably outdo us. wsj.com/articles/m-b-a…
Before you ask, how could 2001 have done worse than the classes of 2008 or 2009?
Because companies that had fired whole associate classes found themselves, 5-8 years later, without the middle management layers they needed. In 2008, they resolved not to let that happen again.
2001 was hammered because we were right in the eye of Hurricane Stock Market Crash--the Class of 2000 got a year of relatively normal job experience and seniority when the layoffs started; 2002 got some warning. 2001 got hosed.
Stories of people like Jon Ponder are inspiring, but also illustrate how far we have to go in really offering convicted felons a fresh start. It's great that people like Mr. Ponder have a new life helping felons start over, but we need more success stories in ordinary businesses.
There is still so much prejudice against ex-convicts, and while that's understandable--recidivism is not zero--it's an enormous barrier that helps shove people back into a life of crime.
I don't want to take anything away from the people who do amazing work helping reintegrate felons. I just want to challenge us to do better, as a society, in finding ways to let people who did bad things put that past behind them after they've paid their debt to society.