Lift Up Your Hearts!

I share this interview of Matt Taibbi (of Twitter Files fame) by Tucker Carlson for two particular reasons. The entire interview is quite interesting, but there's a bazillion fascinating interviews out there and it's very easy to drown in the flood of information. As our choir director says during the times when we have more choir members than space, "That's a nice problem to have." But it's also exhausting, so I'll put the video here for those who want it, and extract just my two points from early in the interview.

(1) As you know, I was not happy with many of President Biden's last-minute pardons, particularly that of Anthony Fauci. What I did not know, assuming Taibbi is correct, is that the pardons may save the recipients jail time and other legal sanctions, but they also take away their right to "plead the Fifth" when testifying. So Dr. Fauci and any of the others who have been pardonned can now be called on (e.g. by Congressional committees) to testify under oath without being able to weasel out on the basis of possible self-incrimination. Maybe they can't be convicted, but we have a better chance of ferreting out the truth, which is more important.

(2) Finally, someone is asking the questions that have been troubling me for a very long time. Who was running the country and making the executive decisions during the four years of President Biden's tenure? Or, if you don't believe his mental disabilities go back that far, at least for his final year, when even his own party finally had to admit his incompetency. And this: Why wasn't this question on everyone's lips; why wasn't it on every nightly news broadcast? Especially near the end, when whoever was making the decisions seemed indifferent to the increasing possibility that we were heading for open war with Russia? I don't have the answers, and neither does Taibbi. But at least he's asking the questions.

0:00 Fauci’s Pardon
7:32 The J6 Committee’s Pardon
11:02 The Golden Age of Journalism Has Begun
17:44 The Major Questions We Should Be Asking Now That Trump Is President
29:00 The Destruction of Nord Stream Will Kill the EU
33:57 The Key Players of COVID That Have Yet to Be Investigated
36:20 The New Media Landscape
45:17 Trump’s Mass Disclosure Will Make Certain People Very Dangerous
51:13 Will We Ever Truly Know the Purpose of the COVID Regime?
58:45 Russiagate and the Leaked DNC Emails
1:03:28 Kash Patel and Political Espionage
1:20:30 The Intel Agencies That Control Wikipedia
1:33:47 How They Try to Brainwash Us Into Submission

One of the frustrations/pleasures of having lived so long is observing how often opinions, even (maybe especially) "expert" opinions, flip-flop. I've mentioned this before on the issue of healthy eating: Fat is bad; no, it's really good. Protein is bad; no, it's really good. Carbohydrates are bad; no, they're really good. Repeat until no one believes you at all. If you always take these pronouncements seriously, you'll eat nothing—or everything.

This time I'm wondering about our attitudes toward the USAID. During my formative years, the Left fought against that organization, claiming that it was just a front for the CIA, operating under humanitarian pretenses. But now that the Left/Right/Center coalition we have in office is finally trying to dismantle the USAID, the new Left is jumping to its defense. I doubt the USAID itself has changed much.

If you take exception to my designation of the current administration as a Left/Right/Center coalition, and still believe that our new leadership is something out of the Far Right, take a closer look at how many of its supporters and major players, including President Trump himself, were once part of the Democratic Party, and still retain many of its former ideals. (Yours truly included.) This coalition is openly one of many diverse interests giving priority to what they have in common and consider critical for our country to survive—and flourish. How else to explain the strength of President Trump's support among suburban white women and inner-city black men; secular and Hasidic Jews and Arabs; the Amish, young religious people, and half of all Hispanics? It's a strong alliance—albeit a fragile one, because we do have major differences. I pray we can keep our "eyes on the prize" through continued cooperation, compromise, and civil discourse.

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying have the best analysis I've heard yet of President Trump's first executive orders.  I don't say that merely because I agree with them on most of their points—the ones they approve of, the ones that raise concerns, and their cautious optimism for our country—but of course that helps.

Approximate timestamps:

00:00:00 Holding Screen
00:05:33 Welcome
00:06:48 Sponsors: CrowdHealth, Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club, ARMRA
00:18:26 Bret & Heather’s Inauguration & MAHA Ball Experience
00:39:18 Executive Orders: The Positive
01:28:45 Executive Orders: The Negative
01:42:33 Executive Orders: The Environmental
02:00:18 Executive Orders: MAHA?
02:02:43 Bret’s Argument for Why Trump COULD Be The GOAT
02:15:34 Closing

Moving on in the 21st century, I did a little playing this morning with Microsoft's Copilot AI. This time, instead of creating images, I asked questions.

I realize that the great danger with asking questions of Automated Idiocy is the biases that are built in, either unintentionally or on purpose. Wikipedia, unfortunately, has developed the same problem, so I'm no stranger to the need to be careful with results. But even Wikipedia can be a great source of information about which there is little dissent, so I began with an inquiry about the availability of Heinz Curry Mango Sauce, which I have not been able to find in this country, despite Heinz being headquartered in Pittsburgh. Copilot quickly suggested three places where I could buy it: Walmart (but it was unavailable when I checked their site), Amazon (also unavailable), and someplace called Pantry.me, which claims to have it, but out of my price range, especially when you add the cost of shipping it to the U.S. Still, Copilot tried, and give me hope that someday Walmart may actually carry it.

Next I asked it to find "Sal's Birdland Sauce," having momentarily forgotten that the name they're using now is "Sal's Sassy Sauce." Despite the incorrect name, Copilot found the item immediately, though for a price that leaves me happy to rely on the generosity of a friend who regularly visits cities with Wegmans supermarkets, where Sal's Sauce can often be found. Or to use my own recipe, which I'm free to say is quite good.

Then I asked a more controversial question: Where can I find ivermectin? First it gave me a stern warning that ivermectin must only be used "under medical supervision"—which is actually not true, depending on where you live; our friends from Ecuador can buy it over the counter at the local pharmacy. But after that it did give me some sources.

Finally, I asked about Switzerland's recommendations with regard to the Covid-19 shots, and received this response.

As of spring and summer 2023, the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) is not recommending COVID-19 vaccines for its citizens, even for high-risk individuals.

You can still get them, if you insist. If you can convince your doctor to make the recommendation, the shots will be paid for; otherwise you can still get them as long as you pay the costs yourself.

Back to Copilot one more time, where I learned that the United States still recommends the shots for

Everyone aged 6 months and older...including women who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or planning to become pregnant.

As I even now listen to the Senate confirmation hearings of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., all I can do is pray that our recommendations will change soon, especially for the children and babies.

With all the important things that should be said about current events, sometimes you just have to make room for noting the absurd.

Enter Heather Heying's latest Substack offering, "Not the First Woman President: but yes the First Raccoon". Anyone who has read (and re-read, and loved) Sandra Boynton's "But Not the Hippopotamus" will understand my first thoughts upon reading that title.

Heather is reacting to some particularly absurd responses to President Trump's executive order entitled, "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government." I have read the order and find it cogent, rational, and much-needed; it states the obvious that should never have had to be stated.

Here's one absurdity, from the Guardian, which headlined its article, "After his executive order on sex, is Trump legally the first female president?"

Despite Trump’s decree that sex is “immutable”, the wording of his executive order left some room for interpretation. Indeed, some critics noted that because the undifferentiated genitalia that males and females share very early in fetal development are “phenotypically female”, you could argue he just made everyone legally female.

“[Trump] just declared everyone a woman from conception, based on the language of the executive order,” Delaware representative Sarah McBride, the first openly transgender person elected to the US House of Representatives, told the Independent.”

As Heather states, Nope. Wrong. So wrong. She goes on to detail why. There a lot to that, which you can easily read for yourself, but here's a snippet:

Early in development, everything is undifferentiated. Decades ago, some researchers argued that early “undifferentiated” genitalia are phenotypically female, but they’re not. They may be just a bit more female-like than male-like, but are actually, again, simply undifferentiated. Furthermore, at conception, there are no genitalia at all—nothing exists at that stage to be differentiated or not. Conception is when two cells come together—an egg, from the mother, who is definitionally female, and a sperm, from the father, who is definitionally male.

One commenter on the post pointed out another problem with the absurd headline:  Even if one accepts their premise, the first female president would not be Donald Trump, but George Washington.

After all that seriousness, Heather moves into a diversion about the First Raccoon (typical biologist!), who made her debut in the Coolidge White House.

From an article in Harper's Magazine:

Rebecca, who would soon become the First Raccoon, had been sent to the White House in 1926 by a citizen of Mississippi, who perhaps thought that she would taste good with cranberry sauce. President Coolidge declined to eat her. Soon she would be wearing an embroidered collar and taking baths, which she particularly enjoyed when given a cake of soap with which to play.

Here's where I burst out laughing and decided to share Heather's post with all of you:

“And so she lived a life of luxury until she did a thing many of her fellow Americans have dreamed of but very few have achieved: she bit the president of the United States.”

I know nothing about any of the people or organizations involved in the following video, but the poem hit me hard when I discovered a few months ago. It expresses deeply one part of the groundswell that resulted in the election of President Trump, and seems particularly appropriate in light of President Biden's recent preemptive pardon of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Let me be clear: I am thrilled by much of what I know about the executive orders President Trump issued on his first day in office. And equally thrilled that he rescinded the harmful executive orders executed by President Biden in his time.

But is this any way to run a country? A rich garden that never bears fruit because each president pulls up the "weeds" planted by his predecessor?

President Trump and his team have a lot of true weeds to remove. I wish them the best and pray for them daily. As I also prayed daily for President Biden, I must admit. What sane person would wish harm to his own country just because he didn't like the sitting president?

However, it is the Legislative branch of our balance-of-powers system that is supposed to make the laws. Are you listening, Congress? Making wise laws is your job. And remember this: You are not kings to enact your own will; you are not knights and bishops whose power is to be bought by the highest lobbyist; you are not pawns to blindly follow the will of the majority of your constituents. It is your responsibility to act with honor, wisdom, and honesty for the good of your districts, states, and country.

And it is our responsibility to elect legislators who can and will do so.

The inauguration of President Trump could hardly have been as impressive as the coronation of King Charles III, but it was still very moving. As with the coronation, I watched all of the ceremony, and parts of the other events. One thing I particularly enjoyed: the bands and the singers were great. The only disappointment with the music was the commentators who talked over the piccolo solo in The Stars and Stripes Forever. :(

One highlight for me: speaking of one pipe band's achievements, the commentator mentioned that they had played in Switzerland; I am 99.9% sure that they must have been at the Basel Tattoo. I've never attended the Tattoo itself, but I've thrilled to its parade.

Another: I confess to playing "air cymbals" when one of the bands at the inauguration featured The Liberty Bell March, which I play every Independence Day with the Greater Geneva Grande Award Marching Band. There were many great bands at the inauguration—the military band and chorus were especially impressive.

The GGGAMB should have been there, but we have a strict policy of doing only one performance per year, and Geneva asked first.

How much harm could President Biden do in the few hours before President Trump's inauguration?  Plenty, as it turns out.

I will not sully this day with the words I wanted to say when I heard about President Biden's most recent presidential pardons, especially that of Anthony Fauci. If any government official needs to be brought to justice—and even more, to have his deeds exposed during the "discovery" part of a trial—it is Dr. Fauci. My heart burns at the bare-faced injustice of this presidential action. It's a good reminder that ordinary people face corruption and injustice daily—from families, schools, employers, businesses, and government at every level—only with less visibility.

But we are not limited to human systems.

It is mine to avenge; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; their day of disaster is near and their doom rushes upon them. (Deuteronomy 32:35)

Fauci's day will come. Not even Josef Mengele could escape forever.

I have seen a wicked and ruthless man flourishing like a luxuriant native tree, but he soon passed away and was no more. (Psalm 37:35)

In the meantime,

Be still before the Lord and wait patiently for him; do not fret when people succeed in their ways, when they carry out their wicked schemes. Refrain from anger and turn from wrath; do not fret—it leads only to evil. (Psalm 37:7-8)

Do not fret, refrain from anger—but a well-crafted civil suit against Dr. Fauci may not be out of order.

The Kindle version of The Real Anthony Fauci is currently available from Amazon absolutely free of charge. That's $0.00. Here's the review I wrote in 2022, and a follow-up.  It's not an easy book to read carefully, but at that price you could get a lot out of it by just skimming. Highly recommended.

It's not nice to fool Mother Nature. (The link has nothing to do with the topic here; I include it for those who aren't old enough to remember that series of commercials.)

There are many things I appreciate about Rick Scott, our senator, but sometimes he plunges steadfastly in the wrong direction, and this morning he sent me an e-mail bragging about one of those wrong-headed moves. I had to respond.

Dear Senator Scott:

I appreciate your efforts to end the semi-annual changing of our clocks, but you are going in the wrong direction by trying to impose Daylight Saving Time on us.

Why are you, as a Floridian and one who represents our great state, so against Standard Time (sun time)? Daylight Saving Time doesn't "save" daylight at all, as you know, but only moves our clocks out of sync with the sun. While the necessity of time zones makes it impossible to keep our clocks totally in accord with nature, Daylight Saving Time takes us deliberately, artificially, and unnecessarily further out of step. This is a bad idea.

Especially in the southern latitudes, there's no good reason to steal sunshine from the morning hours and bestow it on the evening, when most people are inside staring at screens and couldn't care less what the sun is doing.

I would heartily support efforts to move permanently to Standard Time, but would far prefer resetting the clocks twice a year to having to live perpetually with DST. (What's the fun part of changing the clocks in the fall? Getting back the hour we lost in the spring. Stay on DST and that hour is gone forever.)

Please reconsider your priorities in this. Thank you.

Linda Wightman

Now I guess I need to follow up by writing to a few more politicians. Writing is my passion; writing to politicians is not. But I'm haunted by the lesson my mother taught me, which she learned early in my life:

After weeks of hearing complaints from the parents of my fellow classmates about some nonsense that was going on in our school, and feeling the same way herself, my mother spoke up to the school authorities. She was immediately dismissed with a curt, "You are the only one who opposes this; no one else has expressed any concerns."

From then on, she determined not to stay silent, but to be a voice for those who could or would not speak for themselves.

[I wrote this post back in early September of this year. L'il Writer Guy often works in spurts: As I've said before, some time periods have more than their share of interesting material to write about, so I write more than I want to post immediately. I like to squirrel the excess away for occasions when life and/or other priorities leave me, not without many things to say, but without the resources I need to craft them into blog posts.

The negative side is that I often find myself thinking that I've already posted something that's still waiting in the pipeline, as happened with this one. I was working on a thank-you note for some books I received for Christmas, and wanted to reference this post. That was when I realized that I couldn't reference what I hadn't actually posted. So here it is, none the worse for being almost four months old.

And lest you think I've forgotten the current season: I hope you are all having a Merry Christmas—which for us Episcopalians is only on its third day, so I still have a a few days in which to make an actual Christmas post.]

For decades, Christianity Today was one of the few magazines we subscribed to. I appreciated its orthodoxy, its intellectual approach, and its willingness to tackle difficult topics. The magazine's downfall was gradual (as most downfalls are) but undeniable, and we eventually dropped it. Later, I dove back into their online version for a while, but was appalled at how much further its content had fallen. 

Megan Basham's book, Shepherds for Sale, ended up on my Amazon wish list at some point, though I no longer remember who recommended it. Maybe I ought to raise its priority, because it was recently brought back to my attention, and piqued my interest further:

Tucker Carlson interviewed Basham, and it's a 25-minute show well worth watching. Now is not the time to bury our heads in the sand (or our busy lives). Among other things, it makes perfect sense of what happened to our once-favorite Christian magazine.

This post began with a simple meme that made me laugh.  Then I thought about it.

(I didn't make this up. I took it from Elon Musk on X, and who knows where he got it?)

The problem did not start with Joe Biden. It didn't start with Donald Trump. It didn't start with George Bush or Barack Obama. I don't know how far back the corruption goes. I don't even know what it is. The Deep State? The Administrative State? Bret Weinstein calls it Goliath. Others call it the Blob. A Christian might recognize it as Satan. It's not a person, though a large number of highly influential people are deeply involved; it's not a committee; it's not even an organization you can put your finger on, though plenty of committees and organizations are in it up to their necks. It's a force, and it has been driving our country at least since the Lyndon Johnson era, and probably before that.

The person who holds the office of president certainly matters—consider what has happened in just the last three and a half years—but not as much as one might think. There's something that has been driving our country steadily in the wrong direction for decades. It is unelected, responsible to no one, and doesn't care if it corrupts Republicans or Democrats as long as they do what they're supposed to do. Some people are more amenable to control than others, but no one is clean. This may sound like a conspiracy theory, but the evidence is convincing. I've been observing our culture for more than half a century, and this hypothesis is a curve that best fits the data points. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

We face a formidable foe. I don't know who they are, but I know they've been running the country behind the scenes for the past three years—it sure couldn't have been President Biden. Based on what has happened on her watch, which she has not repudiated, I'm 100% convinced that even if Kamala Harris is not complicit, she would, as president, continue to be led along the same disastrous path.

I don't know if Donald Trump has much of a chance; he tried in his first administration, with some success but some notable failure, too, especially in the COVID-19 debacle. I think he has become smarter and wiser from his experience. There's a lot about the man I don't like, but at least he, J. D. Vance, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and many other brave souls recognize what we are up against and are determined to fight against it. Yes, I do recognize that the people I just named, who are so enthusiastically working with President Trump, came from the Democratic Party. That's a good part of where I find encouragement: people of all parties are beginning to understand the situation and take action.

With two doctors in the family, and plenty of friends in the medical world, I have it on good authority that neurosurgeons, as a group, are a particularly nasty set of people. In general, I'm told, they are brash, egotistical, and opinionated to the point of extreme rudeness. Not the kind of people I would like for neighbors. Or friends. But if that's true, I strongly suspect that those personality traits are exactly what is needed for the kind of work they are called upon to do. If you're going to operate on people's brains, you need to believe you are the best for the job, and demand the best from everyone in the operating theater. You need supreme confidence in your opinions, your skills, your decisions, your equipment, and your coworkers. How else would you dare to touch a human brain? Would you want someone operating on your brain to be indecisive? To make his cuts without being certain that he is doing the right thing?

Jordan Peterson has wrestled with trying to figure out Donald Trump—he's a psychologist; that's what they do—and has suggested that the traits that turn people off may be exactly what he needs to succeed in his David versus Goliath mission. They had better be, because for now, he leads the greatest earthly hope we have.

Florida's state surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo, just went up another notch in my book. He is now recommending that Florida's cities that add fluoride to their water supply reconsider that practice.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not against fluoride as an aid to dental health. And once upon a time I was pleased to have fluoridated water, considering it to be a sign of a progressive city. I now believe I was wrong. (I have been wrong on occasion. Once upon a time I even thought it was a good idea to get the COVID-19 vaccine, a decision which I now regret.)

Maybe there was a point in time when it was a good idea to mass-medicate the population, but looking back, I don't think so. In any case, there are now so many other ways to obtain fluoride for dental purposes that it seems ridiculous to impose it on all the city's water customers. I'm not against fluoride, per se, but I am 100% against government-mandated ingestion of fluoride. Let those who want it avail themselves of the many options available, but let our water be pure and safe! Here's hoping we can convince our city to follow the surgeon general's recommendation.

In this I do envy our Swiss family, whose city water comes out of the tap as it comes out of the ground: no fluoride, no chlorine, just great-tasting, pure water.

UPDATE: I wrote to our mayor and our city commissioners, and received a response from the city manager, with whom I have already clashed on the issue of recycling. It was not encouraging. He hastens to reassure me that "you will be happy to know that the levels in our water [are] far lower than the level of fluoride in the study that concerned the Surgeon General," and "we are guided by the science." Well, no, that does not make me particularly happy. Any level of added fluoride is at best outdated, as fluoride for dental purposes is readily available in many forms for those who want it. Medicating the population, en masse and often against their will, is not an acceptable function of government.

Plus, the phrase "we are guided by the science" automatically raises red flags, as all too often it translates to, "we are guided by the pronouncements of whatever authorities we choose to follow," with little regard for how the process of science actually works. This is the same city manager who, when I asked where the materials that the city collects for recycling actually end up, showed no interest in what happens to it once the city passes it on to another agency.

I guess there's more work to be done. I hate politics, but the least I can do is speak up, so they can't insist that they must be right because no one is objecting.

I certainly should have known better.

For several years I worked in a research lab at a major university medical center. True, I only did the computer work (I have exactly one published paper to my name from those days), but even back in the 1970's it was obvious that the peer-reviewed papers/government grant system was, if not totally broken, at least rigged.

Moreover, I spent much of my life learning that "the system" was not to be trusted in many fields. I think it began when my mother, following the customs and recommendations of both society and the medical experts, fed her newborn infants a mixture of diluted evaporated milk and Karo corn syrup, instead of breastfeeding.

But it didn't really hit me until I had children of my own, and observed again and again that the best course of action seemed to be to do exactly the opposite of what the experts recommended and society accepted without question. From birth and childrearing practices to educational decisions to nutritional and medical choices, life taught me that "going with the flow" was often a very bad plan.

So why, why, why did I willingly, even eagerly, accept the COVID shots? Two reasons.

One, working in medical research had provided opportunities to perhaps make a difference in the world, and one of these was being a test subject for the development of the Haemophilus Influenza B vaccine. Porter and I have been blood donors for decades. Our DNA is part of a medical research database. In other words, we've always tried to be good citizens on the medical front.

I like to think that was a good thing. But it predisposed me to being willing to try the COVID shot for the good of the world. Plus, the pressure was great back then that COVID-19 was deadly for the elderly, and our children were worried about their parents.

Still, I feel really stupid for trusting the medical establishment that this was "safe and effective and the only way to keep from killing grandmothers." I knew better. I knew, and even proclaimed at the time, that when the government and medical authorities make such broad statements they are lying. They must be, if only because nothing—especially nothing so novel—can be known to be safe without long-term trials.

By far the biggest factor, however, in our decision to get the shots was blackmail. We have family living overseas, and the only way we could visit them was to submit to the jab. Grandchildren change so fast, even in the course of a year. Even stateside family was largely cut off. We missed a big family reunion, and a nephew's wedding, and barely made the wedding of another nephew. Florida relaxed its restrictions relatively early on, but several long-planned events could not have happened without our vaccination cards, thanks to the restrictions imposed by other states. It was much worse for other people; at least we didn't miss any funerals, or lose our jobs.

Knowing what I know now, would I have willingly closed the door that the magic compliance card opened? I certainly hope so, but I can't honestly say I'd have made the sacrifice.

Nonetheless, I feel stupid, betrayed, and very, very angry.

We're all probably going to die when a more dangerous pandemic hits, because the trust is gone. At least the boy who cried wolf only got himself killed.