Sunday Mailbag

We got so many educational nightmare stories, we're going to have some more this week, and then a final group next week.

Politics: The Biden Administration

R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: I tend to agree with your assessment of the Biden Presidency. His presidency and Obama's are both notable to me for failing to hold people accountable for their actions; Obama for trying too hard to build bipartisanship and reach out to people who were completely uninterested in outreach and Biden for fiddling while Rome burned (or at least not taking AG Merrick Garland's violin away from him and giving him a tongue lashing).

---

C.K. in Union City, CA, writes: I disagree with (V)'s contention that President Biden's actions and signed legislation would not be "long remembered." History will most certainly remember the pandemic that Biden's predecessor screwed up so badly, even if voters of 2024 do not. Much of the country was out of work (this commenter included) for months and even years. People's homes were in danger of foreclosure. Businesses were failing left and right. Joe Biden led our country out of what could have been a worse depression than the 20th Century saw, and our nation prospered, which led to global recovery from the pandemic. We are smarter and better people than the Trump voters, for sure, but I'm confident that honest writers of history will get the story right.

---

R.C. in Des Moines, IA, writes: To me, Joe Biden had three primary tasks as president. First was to guide us out of the pandemic and manage the economic recovery. I give him high marks for this, but is that something that gets a full page in the history books of 2124? Probably not.

Second was to protect democracy, which included slaying the Trump menace. Picking Merrick Garland for AG belongs here. Seeing as how Trump is poised to return to the Oval Office, Biden failed epically here.

Third was to be a transition president. Another epic fail, because he refused to step aside early enough to allow for a proper primary process (a triple-P?) thereby giving the Democrats the best possible shot at winning last November. Some might contend that, given how incumbents have lost all over the world lately, the Democrats had no chance no matter the candidate. But because of Biden's foolish and selfish stubbornness and those closest to him reinforcing this (looking at you Dr. Jill) we'll never know.

Despite the good things Biden accomplished legislatively in his first two years, my personal ranking of his presidency is near the bottom of the list because of the two epic fails. And if Trump v2.0 turns out as bad as we fear, then I will view Biden as the worst president. If Trump is actually able to move us toward authoritarianism, Biden would end up as an enabler of that because of his failings. If this came to pass, I would rank Biden below Trump. And for those who might ask, "What about Andrew Johnson?" At least we didn't lose our democracy because of old A.J. I know this might be an unpopular opinion among readers of this site, but I am really angry at Biden right now and I don't see that going away. And I acknowledge that my emotions in this area may be clouding my judgment.

---

B.B. in Dothan, AL, writes: Biden's legacy: too nice, too old.

---

K.B. in Newark, NJ, writes: Secretary Final Raimondo lasted all four years and oversaw a thriving Commerce Department. Truly part of Biden's legacy. CPO has awarded approximately $34 billion, signed preliminary terms for an additional $2 billion with more negotiations ongoing, and disbursed more than $4 billion. That's 34 negotiated deals across 22 states.

Not bad!

---

B.R.D. in Columbus, OH, writes: I know, I know. The accepted narrative is that Merrick Garland didn't act until shamed into it by the 1/6 Committee. I've been pretty tired of that narrative for a long time—yes, there was reporting. But how much do DOJ officials at any level talk? And if they do, why? In any case, Harry Litman, on The Contrarian does a very good job of laying out why that narrative just does not fit the facts. Mueller, She Wrote and Emptywheel have also defended Merrick Garland, saying that actually, he was doing a lot, but was also being thwarted by Trump administration leftovers and by the law. In fact, if you read between the lines in Jack Smith's final report, you get a sense of why it took so long even after he took over. There are all kinds of procedures you have to go through to get access to phones and e-mail, for example. One footnote even hints that there were numerous interviews held before Jack Smith was named Special Counsel.

The 1/6 Committee, as good as it was, was not making a legal case. Further, they did not share their work until after they were done. And even then, their work did not really help Jack Smith's work that much.

Please read Harry Litman's piece in which he says Merrick Garland is getting a raw deal. And in which he makes a very good argument that it would have taken this long no matter what, given regular DOJ procedures about collecting evidence, the Supreme Court, and Trump's lawyers. Blame should not be put on the DOJ. It should be put on the Supreme Court that dilly-dallied and did not rule on immunity until the very last minute (and then "settled" much more than the case before them). In other words, they over-reached. It should be put on Trump, who used every trick in the book to delay, delay, delay.

And finally, enough American voters evidently did not think about the consequences of their votes for Trump as far as the cases went. Or they did not care. Or they knew damn well what the consequences would be, and used that as a rationale for voting for him.

The blame on Garland and the DOJ is misplaced. We would do much better to think about how to reform the Supreme Court, increase civic education, and find new and better ways to communicate with the population than waste energy blaming someone who did his job, who DID pick up the case against Trump, evidently a day or two after taking office (!), and followed DOJ procedures about not communicating with the public during ongoing cases. Would that Trump and his minions would follow those procedures. But they won't.

---

Z.B. in Washington, DC, writes: I wanted to respond to your comment that there's only been a slight uptick of the number of refugees admitted to the United States during the Biden years as I believe it overlooks much of the work the Biden administration has accomplished. I will concede that the first years of the Biden administration did not meet stated goals of admitting 125,000 refugees each year; this was mostly due to the state the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) was left in by Biden's predecessor. However, in Fiscal Year 2024, the Biden administration resettled over 100,000 refugees, the most in one fiscal year since the mid-1990's, and I would think that current resettlement pacing is well on track to meet the 125,000 limit. Unfortunately, it is doubtful that we will be able to see what a rebuilt USRAP can do with the changing administration, at least for the next four years.

Politics: This Week in Trumpworld

R.M.S. in Lebanon, CT, writes: In reply to M.B. in Shenzhen: I am not a doctor or mental health professional, but observing Donald Trump's actions for 2 decades has led me to believe he is mentally ill. I am not the only person to say this; writer Andrew Sullivan has been saying it for years. I believe Trump suffers from pathological narcissism. It is characterized by excessive self-importance and lack of empathy towards others. Narcissists are intolerant of criticism of themselves, and exaggerate their achievements and skills to make themselves feel superior to others.

If you view Donald Trump through the lens of this condition, it would explain much of his public behavior over the past 40 years. It would certainly explain why, after losing dozens of lawsuits, he still has never acknowledged publicly he lost to Joe Biden in 2020. His disorder simply will not allow him to admit someone was more popular than him and could possibly beat him in a fair competition. He even instigated a violent attack against the seat of democracy and his own vice president, and his supporters believed him.

One of my favorite songs from the 2010s is "#Selfie" by the Chainsmokers. The song is done in a stream-of-consciousness style from the perspective of a narcissistic woman. I think it perfectly reflects the thoughts of a person with this issue. I also find it hilarious and it is one of the definitive songs of my generation.

---

R.H. in San Antonio, TX, writes: D.S. in Inver Grove Heights, MN, asks: You wrote: "[Steve Bannon] has the power to turn [Donald] Trump's base against Musk.

"Does Trump really need his base anymore? He no longer needs votes, nor cheering crowds. It seems that Trump's base has become obsolete."

Don the Con needs those cheering crowds more than anything else. A narcissist needs narcissistic rewards like a baby needs love.

Fifty or so years ago, Reader's Digest had stories about babies in orphanages "behind the Iron Curtain" (because the owners of the publication, DeWitt and Lila Wallace, were "rabidly anti-Communist").

Those babies were said to have been permanently stunted by the lack of affectionate interaction with their caretakers. Without that interaction, the babies suffered lifelong emotional deficits.

They needed that interaction, just like Donald Trump needs the dopamine rush he gets from his Nuremberg Rallies.

---

K.F. in Berea, KY, writes: It's truly disappointing that Donald Trump, a convicted felon, has chosen to order flags back to full staff this week, disregarding the opportunity to honor Jimmy Carter by keeping them at half-staff until the end of the month. Equally troubling is Gov. Greg Abbott's (R-TX) decision to follow suit in Texas, seemingly to curry favor with his political ally. Imagine the uproar we'd witness from right-wing media if Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) made a similar choice when Trump eventually passes away. The double standards are staggering.

---

J.B. in Lincoln, NE, writes: The Speaker of the House and several Republican Governors are in a big rush to make sure the flags are raised to full staff on Martin Luther King Day to honor a great civil rights leader. Right?

---

J.E. in San Jose, CA, writes: Thank you for showing appropriate editorial restraint in regard to judiciously referring to Trump as a convicted felon. Jokes do get old fast. That's why Trump is constantly coming up with new mater... wait a minute.

---

B.S. in Stanhope, NJ, writes: You wrote that DEI has become a Republican dog whistle to mean "minorities and women and LGBTQ people," which I think lets Republicans off the hook. To me, it's pretty clear that what they really want to say when they use the term DEI is "n******". Just substitute that in your mind whenever you hear some Republican go off on DEI, and their MO becomes unmasked.

Politics: Trump the Imperialist

P.Y. in Boca Raton, FL, writes: D.M. in Tyler wrote that the NATO Treaty "binds the member nations to attack us if we invaded Greenland". Unfortunately, this is not correct, as the tense situation between Greece and Turkey demonstrates. Turkey's Recep Erdoğan is another imperialist and some of his supporters have talked about invading Greek islands, which has prompted an arms race between the two neighbors. Article 5 of the Treaty calls for collective action in the event of outside aggression against members but says nothing about one NATO member attacking another. In fact, this has prompted Greece to seek bilateral alliances with countries inside and outside NATO, such as France, Israel and Egypt.

---

R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: I'd just like to toss in a bit of nuance about the ability of soldiers to refuse illegal orders, based on my experience as a Private (E1) back in the 80s. One caveat before I start is that it has been almost 40 years since Basic Combat Training, so I don't know how things might have changed in that time, and especially in the milieu that gave us Abu Ghraib, but I bet it's not a lot.

In any case, in Basic, we got a class on The Law of War, in which we talked about illegal orders. For soldiers of that rank, there are two important things to remember: (1) Make sure you understand the order that was given to you. "Did you really mean to order me to violate the Geneva Conventions?" is a valid question. But you probably don't want to delve any further into that because... (2) The lower your rank, the more legal the order is. This is more a rule of thumb than anything else, because (V) & (Z) are spot on when they write that most soldiers aren't going to have all the intelligence briefings and other behind-the-scenes info to weigh the legality of the orders they've been given. And as the Supreme Court said, orders to deploy should be taken, even by a 1LT, as presumptively legal.

All that said, The Joint Chiefs of Staff are as much aware of the situation as their commander-in-chief, if not more aware, and are in a position to question the orders they get and also in better position to refuse to obey (if nothing else, they are free to resign). Could they convince him to change his mind? Maybe, maybe not, but as far as I'm concerned, they are duty-bound to make the attempt. In the end, if they can't change his mind, they do still have to defer to the president's authority as commander-in-chief, as specified in the Constitution. I don't know how much legal weight this might have, but it's also true that the oath for enlisted folks includes the promise to obey the orders of the officers appointed above them, as well as those of the president. The oath for officers does not include that provision.

In short, I do think that it is possible for "the military" to refuse an order that would break an international treaty, but if so, it's only going to happen at the very highest echelons.

---

J.H.C.V. in Bamberg, Germany, writes: In history, the idea of taking lands is a stepping stone to fascism; Hitler wanted Lebensraum; Japan wanted resources to sustain an empire; Italy wanted its colonies in Africa for recovery of a Roman empire; all this talk of Greenland, and Canada may be the seeds of MAGA fascism. Hitler had brownshirt enforcers; Mussolini had blackshirts; convicted felon Donald trump has the Proud Boys; the seeds of fascism are in the wind.

---

S.S. in Athens, OH, writes: I'm convinced that the reason that Donald Trump—a convicted felon—has eyes on Greenland and the Canal Zone is that he wants to out-Putin Vladimir Putin: Surely if the President of Russia can get away with annexing parts of Ukraine, the President of the United States can annex Greenland and the Canal Zone at will.

---

M.M. in Newbury Park, CA, writes: A lot of very intelligent readers have offered some fascinating theories about why our new president is interested in expanding the territory of the United States. However, I think we need to invoke Occam's Razor here.

There is a common belief that Mount Rushmore honors presidents who expanded the territory of the United States. I'll let our resident history expert clarify whether there's any truth to that. But when it comes to Trump, he is never thinking strategically, he is never playing 3-D chess, he is never planning ahead. He is always, always, always focused on either making money or glorifying himself.

This explains why he doesn't particularly care where the U.S. might expand. Greenland? Canada? Panama? Who cares? He just wants to be on Mount Rushmore. It's as simple as that.

(V) & (Z) respond: That may be the common belief, but it's not true. If it were, Abraham Lincoln should not be there, and James K. Polk should.

Politics: The Oligarchy

J.J. in Johnstown, PA, writes: Your item "Beware The Oligarchs" was... flabbergasting. The table you put together on the money flowing to political parties and the people who funneled it should be published in every single newspaper in the country and should be posted on tavern and church doors in every red county.

The idea that the MAGA faithful believe that the Democrats and liberals are rich elites who want to control the government is even more laughable with a table like that staring you in the face. I don't know what's more disheartening: The fact that so much money is being thrown into politics by so few ultra wealthy people, or that the $280 million Musk pumped in is just 0.05% of his net worth.

Being from a very red portion of Pennsylvania, I of course have many friends and acquaintances who are Republicans who "can't wait for Trump to release the hounds." So when they start spouting the great things Trump will do, I just simply respond by telling them to dust off their Bibles and read Hosea 8:7.

Heaven help us.

Politics: The Washington Post

B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: On The Washington Post's newfound commitment to AI, you opined: "Maybe nobody has told them that what AI does is absorb a huge amount of information from the Internet and answer questions based on what it found there. That doesn't work for something that happened 3 hours ago, which is what news is. If they really do this, expect many, many errors."

I have special insight here, as I am one of their 2+ million (and falling) readers. At the exciting rollout of their AI feature last month, I asked WaPo AI what percentage of the popular vote Trump won. It was a trick question: I already knew the answer because I had just read it—in The Washington Post! What on election night was a landslide, and then an impressive 50%+ victory, had become, with all the votes now counted, a <50% plurality.

In the wink of an eye, WaPo AI gave me the earlier 50%+ figure that it found on the web, confirming what you asserted. I was surprised WaPo AI was unable to read The Washington Post.

As a subscriber, I thought I would do my civic duty by reporting my experience (your AI may not be ready for prime time), but I didn't know how to contact The Post. No problem. I asked WaPo AI. Despite several tries, AI found my request baffling. Really, it had no idea what to do. The best it could come up with was the email address of the food editor (food@washpost.com). I decided not to bother the food editor with AI issues.

Because of many factors, including that "Riveting Storytelling for All of America" is not what I want in my newspaper, and more particularly because I really don't like the direction the WaPo leadership is taking the paper, I decided to cancel my subscription. Here is what I learned:

• It's not easy. Among other things, when you press CANCEL, you get a list of news articles you might be interested in, and you have to scroll past that to find the next cancel button.
  
  
• You find out they would be happy to sell you their paper for half of what they've been charging you. Last year they raised the rate by 20%. Now, suddenly, when they find out I don't want what they're selling, they can see their way to cutting the price by 50%. If you're taking the Washington Post online, I highly recommend threatening to cancel and getting their special discount rate.
  
  
• If you cancel, your cancellation only goes into effect when your current subscription ends, so for me that's nearly June. And if you read the Post between now and then (which you may as well do, since you've already paid for it at the premium rate), the articles come with helpful encouragements to change your mind and re-up.
  
  
• They would like to know why you are cancelling. All you have to do is select from the list of items which includes every conceivable reason, and many you would not have thought of, except for the reason you are cancelling: unhappy with the leadership of the paper.

---

N.N. in Andover, MA, writes: You wrote, regarding The Washington Post's planned use of AI: "...what AI does is absorb a huge amount of information from the Internet and answer questions based on what it found there."

On the contrary, there are publicly available AI tools—Google's NotebookLM, for example—that do not use the Internet as a resource. NotebookLM allows a user to upload up to 50 documents and then, in response to the user's questions, provides answers based solely on the uploaded content.

My close friend works to implement state-mandated energy-efficiency programs for our low-income communities here in Massachusetts. Working alone as a volunteer, without any staff to help him, he has used NotebookLM to dissect the 3-year plan proposed by the energy utilities. The specification spans hundreds of pages and references 75 other documents, each of which may in turn comprise hundreds more pages. NotebookLM answers his questions on what has been proposed, even citing the excerpts from which it draws its answers. This tool has been crucial for my friend to be effective at this work.

NotebookLM is not the only tool that offers this option. Other popular AI tools that, by default, regurgitate information from the Internet can alternatively be directed to answer questions pertaining to uploaded content. ChatGPT and Perplexity are well-known examples.

I can imagine that such AI capability would be extremely useful to a Washington Post reporter trying, for instance, to glean details from thousands of pages of legislation. That said, I don't trust the motives of Washington Post management, and I plan to cancel my subscription! But my larger point is that AI is much more than a technology that spews error-ridden drivel from the Internet. AI is changing our world whether we like it or not, and we would all benefit from understanding its nuances and possibilities.

Politics: Jimmy Carter

D.M. in Burnsville, MN, writes: You wrote, of the exchange of complimentary assessments between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan: "Sometimes, it's nice to be able to put politics aside."

Amen. And thank you for that little bit of sentiment.

---

J.J. in Freeport, ME, writes: I'm very proud to say that not all of Jimmy Carter's solar panels left the country to just be museum pieces. Some ended up in Unity, Maine and were used for quite a while!

---

P.M. in Port Angeles, WA, writes: I'm sure you have received a ton of pushback concerning your statement: "None of these things would make this pardon remotely acceptable today". In today's climate, not only is Mr. Yarrow's action permissible, but it is even condoned and approved by a certain so-called political party. Just review the records of these miscreants: D. Trump, R. Giuliani, B. Kavanaugh, A. Dershowitz, M. Gaetz and P. Hegseth for confirmation that sexual predation is rife and the new normal for this party of grand old perverts.

I do not condone Mr. Yarrow's actions, and I don't know if his sentence was too harsh, but Peter, Paul and Mary were part of cultural heritage, and leniency may be appropriate in this case.

---

L.Q.-B. in Glen Allen, VA, writes: Jimmy Carter may have been a nice man, but he failed to see the Marxist tendencies of the Sandinista revolutionaries, which did not beget democracy, but a regime actively opposed to the U.S. and eventually begat a dictator, Daniel Ortega, which has caused suffering to countless of Nicaraguan people to this day. For that reason, I do not exactly mourn his passing.

Politics: Robert Reich

M.A.H. in Akron, PA, writes: D.K. in Iowa City asked about Robert Reich.

He has a weekly "Coffee Klatch" that he does on YouTube. His most recent one is here.

---

J.N. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: In case nobody else has shared the info with you, Robert Reich posts regularly at his Substack.

One may sign up for a free e-mail subscription. Additional features are available for paid subscriptions at different levels.

Politics: Israel

A.G. in Scranton, PA, writes: I can appreciate the desire to get some aid in, to bury the dead, hell, just to figure out who is dead beneath the rubble, and for a moment of breathing room, but the Gazan leadership would be fools to believe this will be a lasting peace or one that leads to any permanent solution.

Israel and the U.S., I believe, will get the hostages back, Israel will release some people they are easily able to hunt and kill any time in the future they want and, after a diplomatically acceptable period of time, another "existential crisis" will arise that will require Israel to use brutal force to put down the Gazans.

This doesn't solve the partition and occupation of the West Bank, this doesn't solve the fact that Israelis (armed as soldiers might be or better) are free to murder Palestinians at will and with no oversight or corrective justice in place to adjudicate the unjust murders. There is still no viable solution to the "Palestinian problem."

This is nothing more than a moment of "peace" that leverages the starvation of people and their children to get a few hostages back (and I am glad for them and for their families) and then turn around and finish the job that was started two Octobers ago: the destruction of anything the Palestinians hold dear and the elimination of them as a threat, one real or imagined.

I rarely hope to be wrong as badly as I hope for that in this instance.

---

A.G. in Bellevue, WA, writes: M.S. in Newton writes that "there is no self-respecting Jew who cares at all about Israel that would say he [Jimmy Carter] is anything less than an antisemite and someone who acted actively and purposefully against the State of Israel."

I can tell you without a doubt that this is factually incorrect. I am just one person, but my circle contains at least a dozen people who meet that description. Three of them are Israeli. One is an Orthodox rabbi. One of them even lives in Newton and attends shul there, so you M.S. know them also! In other words: you, M.S., DO NOT SPEAK FOR ALL JEWS WHO CARE ABOUT ISRAEL. Please repeat that to yourself 10 times, or 100 times. However long it takes for you to internalize this reality.

It is not antisemitic to believe that the daily onslaughts resulting from Israel's settlement expansion on the millions of human beings already living in the occupied territories is a profound moral evil that violates international law and the principles of the Jewish faith, and is a barrier to Israel's peace and security. It doesn't matter how evil other people may be, and how much they may hate Jews across the board; both things can be true at once. As for Carter's willingness to meet with the leadership of the various organizations that hold power in the region, regardless of the fact that we all wish they didn't, such meetings are part of the often messy business of diplomacy, which is where peace ultimately comes from. We can disagree on the value of those meetings without having to resort to denigrating those who see them differently than you do.

I realize, of course, that M.S. will simply dismiss all of this by declaring that these various folks of whom I speak are not "self-respecting," whatever the heck that means, or that we don't really care about Israel, or that we don't understand the situation as well as M.S. does. All bulls**t. But it allows M.S. to claim a moral high ground free of any complexity or ambiguity or nuance, and I have seen many times over how powerful that drug can be.

---

B.J.L. in Ann Arbor, MI, writes: I feel sorry for M.S. in Newton, who seems to have not actually been around to witness the Camp David accords. Look, I wasn't a great fan of Carter, and did not vote for him or Ronald Reagan in 1980 (put me in the John Anderson camp). However, Carter's efforts to broker peace along the Sinai were remarkable, and in the end, it got Anwar Sadat assassinated and it made Menachem Begin person non grata among his Zionist brethren by removing settlements from the Sinai.

M.S., like so many others, seems to have no capacity to recognize the multiethnic, multicultural, and multi-tribal region that so many people seem to have started from, and that was neglected throughout most of the Ottoman Empire's existence. The Turks leaving things alone allowed everyone to peacefully coexist reasonably well for centuries. OK, there were tribal complaints, but generally, no one was wiping anyone out. M.S. seems not to appreciate that Carter was trying to help referee an area where there are no angels. None. A little grace would go a long way.

Politics: Judaism

J.G. in Louisville, KY, writes: B.J. in Arlington asked what would happen regarding burial if a president were Jewish, as state funerals require more time than Jewish tradition allows.

You replied—correctly—that it would be up to the family. And that further, delays beyond a day are granted to allow family to travel, to honor the deceased, and to facilitate other logistics. Indeed, in my community the standard is 2-3 days for most burials, including my dad's in December 2020 and my mom's this past August.

I immediately thought of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died September 18, 2020, and was buried on September 29, 2020, after lying in repose at the Supreme Court portico and lying in state at the Capitol.

Ginsburg grew up within the Conservative movement and, while not strictly observant, attended a Conservative synagogue in Washington, DC, on Yom Kippur. Her death and burial perhaps give a preview as to what might be possible. Having said that, I would expect the Orthodox Joe Lieberman to choose differently.

My family were abuzz after Giinsburg's death, not just with the political implications (though there was much of that), but also debating were it OUR mother, would we insist on the traditional expedited burial and pass on the great honor of lying in state, or would we pick the reverse. In the end, we decided that lying in state would be too great an honor to pass up, but that we would have to insist on a closed casket and hire a shomer (watchman) to be with the body from death to burial. Some traditions run very deep indeed, and we're not strictly observant.

---

C.S. in Philadelphia, PA, writes: On the subject of the "nicest" presidents, you wrote: "There were another half-dozen that we seriously considered, but excluded because of one black mark or another. Grant was literally next up, but we did not include him because of his antisemitic General Order No. 11. Not enough to condemn the man and his life's work, but enough to keep him out of the 'nice guy presidents' top five."

Observant Jew writing in defense of Grant. If there is someone who royally screwed up and did teshuvah, it was Grant. It was not just his words (he apologized), but his actions as president and post-president that show this. He appointed Jews to positions in the U.S. Government, was the first president to visit a synagogue, tried to assist Russian Jews persecuted by the Tsar, and after he was president, as part of his world tour, he visited impoverished Jews in Jerusalem and offered assistance.

Recommended additional reading: When General Grant Expelled the Jews written by the foremost authority on American Jewish history, and my wife's former professor, Dr. Jonathan Sarna.

Politics: The California Wildfires

R.L. in Alameda, CA, writes: If the Democrats are going to learn anything from the election, it's that they need to match Republicans talking point by talking point. I'll use the Southern California wildfires as an example. Late night talk show hosts found several clips, from Sunday shows, of Republican politicians blaming the fires on DEI, woke policies in blue states, incompetence among our elected leaders, poor water management and poor forest management. How come we haven't heard from Sens. Adam Schiff or Alex Padilla (both D-CA)? Where were the dozen or so Representatives from Southern California? Gavin Newsom? And they need to learn how to speak like normal people and in language that gets noticed.

For every Sen. John Barasso (R-WY) spouting off about DEI and woke policies, Schiff or Padilla should say, "DEI ensures that the most qualified people get these jobs. For too long, they have gone to unqualified white people. Kristin Crowley is the most qualified person to serve as LA's fire chief and she happens to be a lesbian. So what?"

For every Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) suggesting that aid to fire victims be conditioned on... something, there should be a Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), who represents the Pacific Palisades (yes he is a real person—I had to look him up) suggesting that, perhaps, Texas's aid following the cold snap and power outage 2 years ago should have been conditioned on making ERCOT actually work properly (this is actual incompetence, in my judgment).

For every Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) suggesting that California is taking too much, Newsom should be pointing out that "...we get back something like $1 for every $5 in tax revenue we send to the Federal government. If we were a nation, we would have the 5th largest economy in the world. California is literally subsidizing your broke-a** state, dumb Senator from Alabama!"

My point is that Republicans say the most outrageous things. That's the communication currency these days. This is what gets clicks. Yes, they have an advantage in that they don't care about being truthful. But we can fight fire with fire (too soon?) and come back immediately with outrageous truthful statements. Crazy outrage gets clicks and this is, in my judgment, how we can push back and their crazy lies. We have to stop allowing this stuff to be out there unchallenged.

My heart goes out to everyone who has been impacted by the still-burning wildfires. Recovery won't be swift, but may it go smoothly for all.

---

R.B. in Cleveland, OH, writes: You wrote: "Finally, if the Republicans cross this particular Rubicon, and start conditioning federal aid on "concessions," then they're going to receive the same treatment once the shoe is on the other foot."

I don't believe this to be true, and both parties know it. Attaching conditions to aid for those in need has become Republican orthodoxy at this point. We see this in their framing of nearly every benefit program (Medicaid, unemployment insurance, etc.). I also recall certain odious Republican senators trying to add conditions to aid in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, so unfortunately this isn't a new development.

The Democratic Party, by contrast, doesn't do this. They didn't do it when promising aid to states impacted by Hurricanes Helene and Milton, nor was it discussed in the aftermath of the 2016 southeastern wildfires.

Any claim that these conditions being attached to federal aid for L.A. is about something other than punishing "blue states" and liberals is nonsense. It's clearly meant to be punitive.

It's actually really sickening that so many of our alleged leaders in this country are comfortable with treating their fellow Americans this way. It's even more disheartening to see how many Americans willingly swallow this poison and appear to revel in it. It certainly doesn't put "America first" or "make America great again."

---

P.S. in North Las Vegas, NV, writes: One of the big problems in Southern California is topography and the Santa Ana winds. The winds head west towards the LA basin. Once they head over the mountains, the air is adiabatically warmed, and potential moisture is 'wrung out." The LA valley then traps the stagnant air, buffered by stable air over the Pacific and by the topography of the Sierras to the east of the city. Contrary to Marjorie Taylor Nitwit, there is no chance for cloud cover, hence no chances for seeding.

---

M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: I have a beef with how the media has covered the Los Angeles fires. Every time they quote some hypercritical know nothing, especially TCF, they need to explain three essential facts: (1) a typical Santa Ana wind blows 25-35 mph with gusts up to 55 mph. This one blew at 80 mph with gusts of 100 mph, which was unheard of until now; (2) Aircraft are grounded if there is a 40 mph crosswind or a 10 mph tailwind; hence, no aerial firefighting equipment could be deployed; (3) Without said equipment, wildfires burn out of control. (Sadly demonstrated in San Diego County during the 2003 Cedar Fire because, at the time, these aircraft were grounded after dark, allowing that blaze to grow unabated all night long. Flight rules were changed accordingly afterwards.)

Winds too high, aircraft can't takeoff/land, no aircraft, fire spreads. That's how the media should shut down the political rants.

All Politics Is Local

R.B. in Cleveland, OH, writes: I think Jon Husted (R-OH) as senator actually gives Sherrod Brown (D) his best odds to recapture a Senate seat if he chooses to run in 2 years. As you pointed out, Husted isn't particularly Trumpy, and his close alignment with Gov. Mike DeWine (R-OH) may actually harm him with the base. Since Trump isn't on the ballot, turnout will be an issue for him. He's also very connected to what is likely the biggest political scandal in Ohio history. Many Ohioans are already aware of this, and if they aren't then they will be soon.

---

R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: Yes, the Texas Legislature does definitely have better things to do, but they are very focused on doing the worse things on their agenda, like perpetuating homelessness and finding the most expensive ways possible to deal with the people experiencing it while doing nothing to get them permanent housing, not to mention kowtowing to corporations who would like help fighting the municipalities that would prefer to prioritize the people in their communities. And don't even get me started on steadfastly refusing to dip into the so-called "Rainy Day Fund," a pool of money set aside to be used for expensive but time-limited events. They even refuse to use it to help with literal rainy days, as Houston and other areas of the Gulf Coast dealing with ever-more-frequent hurricanes. It's gotten to the point where I'm convinced that the real purpose of the rainy day fund is to be an accounting trick designed to hide the fact that they don't actually balance the budget as they are required to do.

I still remember the time a Texas legislator came to talk to a networking group I belonged to in Austin, bragging about how fiscally "responsible" he and his fellow legislators were for refraining from spending a billion dollars of spending authority they had available. And I asked: "Let me get this straight, you knew that there was already a court case accusing the state of failing to adequately provide for public education as required in the state constitution, and you expect us to praise your for leaving a billion dollars on the table? A billion dollars that was pre-approved and certified not to unbalance the budget? You call that 'fiscal responsibility'?" I don't know why Republicans keep using that phrase because they obviously have no clue what it even refers to.

---

J.F. in Fairmont, WV, writes: You wrote: 'West Virginia actually has a Democratic Party (Who knew?). Its chairman, Mike Pushkin, accused [Gov. Patrick] Morrissey [R-WV] of using 'divisive rhetoric aimed at dividing people by race.; For a state that is 93% non-Hispanic white and 2% Hispanic, that is not a lot of dividing, but still."

As a member of a Democratic County Executive Committee in West Virginia: Ouch. We're here. We're doing the work. (Arguably more at the county level than the state level, but still.) The sudden seismic shift in West Virginia from a blue state to a deep red state over the course of two decades has been hard to fight back against.

---

B.W. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: As regards your pessimistic assessment of the reelection chances of Mayor Eric Adams (D-New York City), you're not out to lunch.

Adams was elected shortly before I moved from New York City to Los Angeles. Purely anecdotally, the buyer's remorse started almost instantly.

I lived in New York through a few mayoral administrations, and Adams's honeymoon period seemed unusually short.

---

J.A.W. in Queens, NY, writes: At 6% in polling, and with a federal trial hanging over his head (pardon notwithstanding), Adams' goose isn't just cooked; it's baked, fried, boiled, sous-vided, sauteed, grilled and burnt to a crisp. In addition, if Andrew Cuomo tosses his hat in the ring and wins, I will be convinced that the ghost of Fiorello LaGuardia has cursed the City of New York.

---

R.M. in New York City, NY, writes: My money is on Eric Adams switching back to being a Republican. There is no strong Republican challenger in the wings (or even one with any name recognition), so it would give Adams his best chance of advancing to the general election. Adams can continue his Trump charm offensive to peel off actual Republicans, and hope to cobble together some sort of coalition with whatever remains of his 2021 base. His best hope would be for a candidate to make it through the Democratic primary that can be painted as an open borders, defund the police, leftist. Coupled with whatever is happening on the national scene around crime and immigration, not to mention coming out hard against the recently enacted congestion pricing, he could still have a chance to squeak out a victory in a super close race.

Educational Nightmares, Part II

E.W. in Delray Beach, FL, writes: Please tell S.C. in Tonowanda that I've had those nightmares, too! Not the ones about teaching, because I've never been a teacher, but a few years after graduating I had nightmares that I had missed a class, or a whole semester of classes, or had been confused about whether it was a M-W-F class or T-Th, where it was it held, or just simply forgotten I about it. They persisted for years, but they did go away.

---

D.E. in Ann Arbor, MI, writes: This is on the topic of teacher and student anxiety dreams: I have a master's degree, and I was a middle school science teacher for 33 years. I believe I was seen as an effective, capable teacher (I won a number of teaching awards, was department chair, ran the largest science fair in Michigan for decades, had good relationships with students and their parents, many of whom are still my friends years later, etc.). I have been retired for 8+ years now. Yet I still have anxiety dreams about teaching at least weekly. I have student anxiety dreams at least monthly, as has been the case for my entire adult life, and I haven't been a student in over 30 years.

A typical teacher anxiety dream for me would be standing unprepared before a rowdy, distracted classroom, losing my temper, and laying hands on a student. Often there will be a young student teacher in my dream (I mentored dozens of them), and she will take over and soothe the situation with the student after I have completely lost my composure.

In a typical student anxiety dream, I find that I have stopped attending a college class (usually a math class), and I realize the final exam is coming up, and I don't even know where or when the exam will be held. I will have stopped doing the readings, and I desperately attempt to read a few chapters in the hopes of possibly eking out a D on the test, if I can ever find where or when it is. In other dreams, I will find that I have graduated college but it will be found that I never finished high school, and I must go back and take a few classes in high school at my current age. I also dream about trying to obtain my student ID and encountering endless red tape.

Many of my colleagues report having these types of dreams also. I don't think they actually reflect anxiety about teaching or studying; I was very good at both, and I always felt confident about them. I think, rather, that teaching and studying are familiar milieux that substitute in my dream state for other areas where I fear I might be inadequately prepared or might lose control of a situation.

I have come to believe that anxiety dreams, and even nightmares, are ways one's mind confronts situations one fears and prepares one for worst-case scenarios. In other words, they are a gift that helps us face down our own fears. Since we are approaching what I fear may be a real-life worst-case scenario, one that has often caused me insomnia, perhaps my dreams will be helpful in the year to come. At least one can hope. Just my two cents, and thanks for reading...

---

K.P. In San Jose, CA, writes: As somewhat of a veteran teacher—35.5 years and counting the days until the final bell—l can offer my experience. I had about 25 years of can't-sleep-the-night-before-the-first-day syndrome, which finally disappeared. Last night, l actually had a classroom nightmare for the first time in a while. I was asking for quiet and attention and was not getting it, student were mobbing my desk to pick up papers and ask questions, so l asked them, in the nicest way possible, of course, to "shut the (Fluorine Uranium Carbon Potassium) up!"

It happens, don't let it ruin your day! I love what l do, but my patience is wearing thin, and this seems like the right time to step away. If you enjoy what you are doing, the stress eventually becomes manageable. If your current placement isn't right, look for a different school/district/level/subject. It is a long haul, and if you are happy, it is much easier.

---

T.D. in Duluth, MN, writes: I have only recently restarted reading Electoral-Vote.com after the New Year. I still can't, don't want to, or understand, what happened in November. I was pleasantly surprised to read about the teaching nightmares from S.C. in Tonawanda. I taught science for 34 years, to primarily 8th and 9th graders, and, in the beginning, 11th and 12th graders, having as many as 3 preps a day. I basically didn't sleep, so no nightmares.

I was told the first year would be the hardest year of my life. But no, the second year was even harder, because what was once a dream was now a relentless reality. I can remember distinctly dreading Fridays, because in a mere 2 days Monday would come 'round again. Teaching is tough for introverts and the faint of heart. It wasn't until a particular class of students did I turn the corner and find real joy in teaching. The personality of a class of students can make a huge difference, especially in a smaller school with overall class size around 75. So I enjoyed teaching for many years. However, when I retired in 2021, the memory dreams started and were occurring monthly at least. All sorts of scenarios played out, and not surprisingly so, when you teach for so long. I have a recently retired colleague who has been reporting her first post-teaching dreams. I intend to reach out at some point soon to schedule a conference with coffee.

"School's out forever!" — Alice Cooper

---

J.S. in Germantown, OH, writes: I'm not sure I would agree with your assessment that more experience prevents nightmares centered around the area of experience. I've been involved in community theater for over 25 years, acting in and/or directing one or two plays a year. My father was a professional theater director, so I grew up in the theater. I have also rarely, if ever, actually been nervous before performing. And yet, I still have the dream where I am shoved on stage without knowing my lines. I suspect those dreams happen for some people precisely because they have experience in that area, but suffer from imposter syndrome or other self esteem issues. It is possible to maintain imposter syndrome long into a career. Hopefully, S.C. in Tonawanda isn't in this category!

Sci-Fi

S.K. in Sunnyvale, CA, writes: Replying to D.E. in Lancaster, on the origin of V'Ger: "For shame"? V'Ger was not originally one of the two extant, publicly-known Voyager probes, but the subsequent probe Voyager 6!

Nerdology 101: If you're gonna name-drop lore, make sure you know the lore.

---

K.H. in San Jose, CA, writes: I'd like to correct what D.E. in Lancaster writes about the fate of the two Voyager probes, according to Star Trek: The Motion Picture. The probe destroyed by Klaa was actually Pioneer 10 (launched in 1972), and the one that came back home was Voyager 6 (optimistically written to launch in then-future 1999).

---

R.L. in Alameda, CA, writes: I'd like to call L.S. in Queens one Star Trek: Prodigy and raise them a Star Trek: Lower Decks. It's hilariously animated in the Rick and Morty style (by the same showrunner), it's consistent with canon and it is chock full of Easter eggs for long-time fans of the Star Trek universe. It's about the least important crew members of the least important ship in the Federation. It just finished a 5-season run on Paramount Plus and that makes me sad.

---

M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: For L.S. in Queens:

---

J.S. in Germantown, OH, writes: For anyone who wants to make themselves a Fourth Doctor (Tom Baker) scarf, you can use doctorwhoscarf.com, which has patterns and directions. My oldest daughter made one for me this past Christmas. Unfortunately, she didn't realize that a crochet stitch is twice as wide as a knit stitch, which is what the website uses. She proudly presented my with a 30-foot scarf which, although I love it, is quite unwearble.

Phony Baloney

C.J. in Lowell, MA, writes: You asked about a term for "when a commentator ostensibly supports a policy or position, but actually undercuts or undermines it with their arguments."

The term that immediately came to my mind was "concern trolling" which is basically disingenuously playing devil's advocate and almost deliberately scoring rhetorical own-goals.

---

N.M. in Portland, OR, writes: In the pseudo-science debunking community, a "Trojan source" is a source that a pseudo-scientist uses to support their claims, but when the source is actually read it refutes their claims.

Similarly, I would propose:

• "Trojan head": A headline that misrepresents the content of the article
• "Trojan lede": An article intro that misrepresents the main content of the article
• "Trojan fret": An article that uses concern trolling to misrepresent the fundamental issues discussed in the article

(V) & (Z) respond: As a UCLA grad, (Z) knows well the untrustworthiness of anything Trojan.

Gallimaufry: Questions without Answers Edition

M.G. in Boulder, CO, writes: At least twice recently you've given us the questions in advance of answering them on Saturday. The first time, I was uncertain about it. By the second time, I read the questions more carefully and realized that in the past I had just skimmed them to see what the subject was. Getting the questions first gives me a chance to focus on the information the questioner provides and let's me watch for the answers that will interest me most. And it has already given me a renewed interest in and respect for my fellow Electoral-Vote.com readers.

Unless it makes more work for you, I'd like to encourage you to continue the practice of giving us the questions first.

---

D.C. in Portland, OR, writes: This is a quick up-vote from me for the occasions recently when you've published an incomplete posting. Particularly this weekend, a browse of the questions ahead of your answers was a pleasant digest and tease!

---

D.E. in Ashburn, VA, writes: I'm not sure why, but I LOVED the reading the questions before the answers were available!

(V) & (Z) respond: The responses were overwhelming on this point. We'll see if we can make this work on a regular basis.

---

B.J. in Arlington, MA, writes: Today you published the Saturday questions before the answers. This gave me an idea for the ongoing series of ideas for new features you all have: Electoral-Vote.com Jeopardy! You could choose a question for which you publish the answer and readers could submit their guesses as to what the question was.

(V) & (Z) respond: That sounds more like Carnac the Magnificent. That said, we'll ponder this idea, and see if we can make it work.

Final Words

R.H. in San Antonio, TX, writes: At 12:20 a.m. on March 27, 2001, the execution by lethal injection of Robert Lee Massie began in San Quentin State Prison's execution chamber. Massie was pronounced dead at 12:33 a.m.

Massie's last meal included two vanilla milkshakes, extra crispy french fries, extra crispy fried oysters and soft drinks. He spent his last hours with his spiritual advisors and his attorneys.

Massie's last words were "Forgiveness. Giving up all hope for a better past."

If you have suggestions for this feature, please send them along.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger