http;//www.Californiacontrarian.com

Reading the Sunday paper used to be one of my favorite things to do. Not so much anymore. In fact these days the paper reminds me of a noose . . . a Zero!

The sports page seems now more focused on how many of the players are kneeling etc. during the National Anthem. (For those of you who were not aware, at one of the WNBA games, the players walked off the court during the National Anthem. . . . For me, “no me importa,” as I never have watched a WNBA game, and the walking off the court during the National Anthem guarantees that I never will!)

Other than the “sports non-page,” the only things in my noose-paper are either anti-Trump, pro-Covid, or about Dem-cities’ “protests.” Since I am tired of reading these types of articles, today I spent a fair amount of time reading the obits. Yes, yes, I was bored! Actually the obits can be interesting. The life lines of different individuals are often very interesting – much more than he/she was born, lived,and died. There were thirty-four obits, and thirty-one of these deceased individuals were more than seventy-five years old, which only proves the point that it is mainly the older folk that die . . . both with and without Covid.

You might ask, “How could I spend time reading the obits?”

The answer is quite simple . . . In the thirty-four total obits, there was not one mention of Trump, Covid, or “protests.”

As I pointed out in my first book (The Quirky Contrarian) one of the reasons that Donald Trump won in 2016 had to do with his ability to appeal to various unrelated small groups. I think that this was a brilliant strategy back in 2016 as for many individuals there was one issue that they were gung-ho on. A relatively small group voted for Trump basically because of his support for issue A. Likewise there were those who were gung-ho on issue B, and Trump strategically focused on issue B. These voters in multiple small groups voted for Trump, because he supported A, B, C, D, etc.

Different than in 2016 a lot of the issues, like A and B referenced above, are no longer key relevant issues, so the question in 2020 is whether or not President Trump will have a similar type of  strategy. My answer is unquestionably yes, and in fact he has already started down that path.

For instance let’s look at the major issue of the day . . . children going back to school. For many young parents this is a humongous problem. If the kids do not go back to school, both of the parents cannot go to work. If both parents are not able to work, then there is trouble paying the rent, etc., etc. By going out on the proverbial limb on this issue, Donald Trump has established himself as the only candidate that a lot of these young parents will vote for. They may not agree with a lot of other things that Trump stands for, and they may not even like him . . . but their kids need to get back to school!

A payroll tax cut is something that President Trump supports and the Democrats do not. A lot of working Americans are struggling to regain their footing as the coronavirus and its consequent economic residua have set them back a fair amount. For a lot of people a payroll tax cut could be the life-line that they need. If this is the key issue for this group, they will vote for Trump. . . . another relatively small group.

The issue of ongoing protests and consequent mantra of “defund the police” will be a huge plus for the President. Those leftists who live in these chaotic cities will never be persuaded in voting for Trump. However, there are a lot of innocent independents living in these Democratic cities who can see nothing but big trouble for them and their families if there is a lack of police presence in their communities. Joe Biden apparently does not view this situation the same as President Trump. I do not anticipate Trump winning the overall vote in any of these Democrat run cities, but this is another small group for which this could well be the key issue.

Gun ownership. There are literally millions of new gun owners in the U.S over the past few months. The felony charges leveled against the armed St. Louis homeowners who refused to kneel to the protesters who broke onto their property in June was a clear message from Democrat prosecutors to all Americans. This relatively small group of new gun owners do not have to be aligned with the NRA, but when they see other gun owners being chastised and now prosecuted for what should be their right, i.e. defending their property without firing a shot, who are they now going to vote for? Guess!

And finally a repeat issue is the appointment of another Supreme Court Justice. There have been a slew of recent 5-4 decisions with Justice Ginsberg voting her usual. Ig Ginsberg were to be replaced by a conservative or even by a moderate, then some of liberal 5-4 decisions could have easily been 5-4 the other way. Here it doesn’t matter if the case in question concerns Indians in Oklahoma, transgender job discrimination, or D.A.C.A. Again to various small groups the appointment of an additional Justice is the key issue, as Justice Roberts continues to be lost and confused.

There will be more small groups that I will describe as we get closer to the election. Mark my words, Trump will again win them all.

As some of you may know I like to write and I recently had an idea upon which I could write my next novella. Let me first set up the basic plot:

What if in the year 2032 there was a close presidential election which was won by the older candidate, Joseph Delaware, and what if Mr. Delaware had specially chosen his running mate in order to appeal to various specifics  portion of society. 

The  VP-elect was Hispanic (Yes, Mr. Delaware did get the Hispanic vote.) The VP-elect was a female. (Yes, Mr. Delaware did overwhelming win the female vote.) The VP-elect was gay. (Yes, Me. Delaware did win the gay vote.) The VP-elect was born in New York, and presently lived in California. (Yes, Mr. Delaware did win the vote in both New York and California.) The VP-elect was a Harvard educated lawyer. (Yes, Mr. Delaware did win both the Harvard vote and the lawyer vote.) What if no one really knew much about the VP-elect other than she was an Hispanic gay lawyer who had been in Congress. (Actually not that much different from the VP candidate from about ten years prior.)

What if in 2032 there were no Presidential debates and no VP debates, because many years prior it had been decided that these debates were giving an unfair advantage to one of the candidates.

What if between the election in November and the inauguration in January the President-elect was said to have supposedly suffered a mild stroke which only affected his cognitive abilities. There were no other signs of a stroke, but Mr. Delaware now had an Alzheimer’s-like condition. Would he then be able to function as the President? Would he be sworn in, and then immediately step down? What if it became apparent that while the VP-elect was a nice person, she was in fact, a bit ditzy? Would his VP-elect be then immediately sworn in as the President?

Even though I think that this would be a terrific storyline for a novella, I decided not to embark on writing this because . . . who would believe that this could actually happen? After all is there anybody that could believe that the President-elect developed an Alzheimer’s-like condition between the election and the inauguration? Would anybody swallow the fact the neither the President-elect or the VP-elect were not asked some difficult questions because there had been no debates? Would anybody believe that the country would elect a VP that was not actually qualified to be the President?

The scary  thing is that something very similar could happen this year if the Dems can come up with a reason not to go through with the debates.

Recently I used the word, “pejorative” in one of my posts, and one of my thousand or so readers responded that I should have used the phrase, “ad hominem” instead. Ad hominem means “ attacking an opponent’s character rather than answering his argument.” For those that are not aware this is a typical tactic of the left.

An interesting example of this ad hominem response occurred recently in California, in Redwood City to be precise. The interesting part of this story , however, is not the predictable ad hominem responses from the looney leftists, but the twist . . . namely the response of Redwood City. 

Let me set the stage. 

From the Western Journal:

A “Black Lives Matter” mural was requested by city resident Dan Pease, who painted it in big, yellow letters on Broadway Street, one of the city’s main thoroughfares, as part of a Fourth of July public art celebration. The city not only agreed to allow the message – it even supplied the paint to put it down.

So far, par for the course in NorCal.

However then Maria Rutenburg, a real estate attorney steps into the picture.

She said that because the city had made the street a public forum, it should be open space for a political message she favored – and one that isn’t popular in liberal San Mateo County.

Rutenberg said, 

“I asked Redwood City to allow me to paint MAGA2020 next to BLM on the Broadway. . . . I stand for the 1st Amendment and everyone ‘s right to express their political views in a new public forum of street asphalts.”

The response of Redwood City was to remove the mural with the words “Black Lives Matter” painted on a city street after Ms. Rutenberg requested permission to put in her own sign proclaiming “MAGA 2020.”

(Interestingly, the city removed the BLM street letters in the middle of the night!)

Well what do you think happened next? Not surprising the “ad hominem” attack spigot was opened.

Unfortunately, it was predictable that Rutenburg would get vicious backlash. A quick glance at social media posts shows efforts obviously aimed at intimidation and harassment. Nobody seemed interested in arguing her point, but rather attacked her person . . . “ad hominem.”

An additional interesting twist was pointed out in the Western Journal article:

If trying to add “MAGA 2020” to the “BLM street art” worked in NorCal, it could potentially work anywhere! 

Yesterday I read three totally unrelated newspaper stories that in typical times should have no relationship to each other, but in today’s world . . . yowser!

The first article involved rescinding or cancelling the emeritus status of professors if they do or have done anything that harms the reputation of San Diego State University. This is obviously a way to stifle free speech and to punish someone for something said in the undefinable past. [In other words, if a professor has said anything in either the present or in the past that “those that know best” do not agree with . . . tough, your emeritus status is hereby cancelled (including your health benefits, etc.)] I always find it suspicious when the spokesperson for the group that first suggested this “cancel culture”-like policy at SDSU, the Academy Policy and Planning Committee, refuses to comment!

The second article described how Trader Joe’s caved to the accusation that it “belies a narrative of exoticism that perpetuates harmful stereotypes.” (When I read this, I must confess that I had no idea what the accusation actually meant!) An online petition by “Change.org” argued that a Trader Joe policy of “naming” certain foods after ethnic variations . . . in other words naming Middle Eastern foods, “Arabian Joe,” or naming “Trader Joe San” for Japanese foods was ?offensive – offensive to whom?, I might ask.

(To put this in perspective some yo-yo was “offended” by “Trader Giotto’s” for Italian foods, and got a bunch of similarly”offended” yo-yo’s to sign this ludicrous petition . . . and Trader Joe’s caved and is cancelling its further use of “ethnic-Joe” anything!

The third article involved a suit against Whole Foods by employees in Cambridge, Berkeley, and Seattle because Whole Foods would not allow them to wear face masks with “Black Lives Matter” on them. This despite the fact that the company policy prohibits any slogans, messages, or logos on worker’s attire. It will be interesting to see if Whole Foods changes its policy and caves to idiocy.

For me any store that allows BLM attire on its employees will no longer be receiving any of my business, and I encourage everyone to do the same.

Anyone who has been paying any attention knows that Chicago is a mess . . . Actually even those who are not paying attention know that Chicago is a mess! Furthermore anyone who has been paying attention knows that the Mayor of Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, is out of her league . . . Again I am not even sure that you have to be paying attention to realize that Chicago’s Mayor is a Double A baseball player masquerading as a Major League player. 

 Last week Brian Bennett, a Time magazine White House correspondent reported, 

“White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany just called Lori Lightfoot ‘the derelict mayor of Chicago’ and said she should request federal help to secure the city.”

To those of us who are paying attention actually agree with Ms. McEnany’s words, as ‘derelict’ means ‘neglectful of duty.’ Isn’t it part of the duty of any mayor in any city or town to keep his/her citizens safe? The citizens of Chicago are far from safe . . . ergo Mayor Lightfoot is derelict.

Now since Mayor Lightfoot is not only a lawyer, but also a graduate of the University of Michigan one could reasonably expect an intelligent response.

Mayor Lightfoot’s response – “Hey Karen, watch your mouth!” 

A classy response? Not quite!

A typical Democrat response . . . yes; attack the speaker, not what was said!

To me, this sounds like the sort of a weak defensive response that was said in anger . . .perhaps said in anger because she is realizing that she is not adept at playing in the big leagues.

(Err, at this point I should probably apologize to the University of Michigan for mentioning that she is a graduate.)

For those of you that have not been paying attention:

“Karen” is a pejorative term that has come to prominence to label a demanding, middle-aged white woman who displays a sense of overbearing entitlement in various societal confrontations.

(Err, at this point, I should probably apologize to all lawyers also!)

So what are some facts? 

Every weekend is a mess  in Chicago, especially for the poor people who happen to live in certain regions of the city, like my old neighborhood, Austin.

This last weekend in Lightfoot’s city … 68 shot, 14 dead! And last weekend was not out the ordinary for Chicago. This is typical! What a mess!

So far between January 1 and July 12, 182 children have been shot in the city. 34 of those kids died.

What does  Mayor Lightfoot say to the parents of those children that have been killed? Considering her “derelict response,”  my guess . . . Nothing, as I don’t Care(n)!

On Sunday my wife suggested that we go down to Mission Bay and go for a walk. It was a nice day although a bit on the hot side, so why not go somewhere that has wonderful scenery and is about eight degrees cooler to  boot.

 I thought it was a good idea so, “Okay. Let’s go.”

As we left our street there was a handwritten neighbor sign that said, “Wear masks; save lives.” (Maybe, but I am far from convinced, even though I always have my mask ready.) While on the freeway the electric signs that notify the populace of a child abduction today read: “ Wear Face Covering To save Lives” (Again … maybe, and I had my mask in my hand, ready to go.)

I was surprised that the traffic on the freeway seemed to be back to the pre-lockdown levels . . . somewhat of a surprise as my local newspaper is constantly describing that Covid cases here are “surging!”

When we got down to Mission Bay, what was surging was the number of people down there! It was jammed! At least a thousand people along the shore near DeAnza Cove – scattered along an approximate half-mile stretch with about a hundred pop-up tents Multiple,multiple groups of from four to twenty people,all within close proximity to each other. No recognizable spatial distancing that I could identify. Black, white, brown. No BLM signs or T-shirts.

About one thousand individuals enjoying the sunshine and the water in San Diego with their friends and families, despite that our governor now says that kids cannot go to in-person school.

What about masks? . . . I actually counted . . . despite the neighborhood sign and the electric freeway sign . . . fifteen masks all told! I will repeat that . . . Fifteen!! I had my mask in hand, but did not put it on as if I did, I would have been immediately identified as an outlier.

Could it be that these “wear masks” signs do not apply on Sundays? . . .  or perhaps they do not apply to those that go down near the ocean?

Consistency ?

After President Trump is re-elected, some will look back and say that the tipping point was his magnificent speech at Mount Rushmore. I would agree that that speech was very good (and not at all “divisive” as the NYT and CNN commented), but I think that what will be viewed as the tipping point occurred last week when the National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO) threw its support behind President Trump’s re-election bid because of his “steadfast and very public support” for law enforcement.

NAPO President Michael McHale pointed out how important it is to have the president’s support “during this time of unfair and inaccurate opprobrium being directed at our members by so many.”

(FYI: I too had to look up the word, “opprobrium” . . . the disgrace or the reproach incurred by conduct considered outrageously shameful; infamy.)

Here I would emphasize “unfair and inaccurate opprobrium.”

I suspect that many of you are saying that you have never heard of NAPO,and if you’ve never heard of NAPO, how can their endorsement be considered a tipping point.

First of all let me point out that this union did not support a candidate in the 2016 election but did endorse former President Obama and then Vice President Joe Biden in the 2008 and 2012 elections. 

Why this big change? Let’s consider the positions of the candidates.

Donald Trump reiterated his support for law enforcement a week or ago,

“Our officers have been under vicious assault,” he said. “Reckless politicians have defamed our heroes as the enemy…These radical politicians want to defund and abolish the police.”

Joe Biden, meanwhile, initially said he was against efforts to defund law enforcement but changed his tune in a recent interview with ‘Now This’, arguing police have “become the enemy” and expressed support for cutting funding.

So Trump is pro-Police, and Biden is pro- ???. This is not really news. Why a tipping point?

Look at Trump’s tweet:

THANK YOU 

@NAPO police and their 241,000 brave law enforcement members for a FULL & COMPLETE ENDORSEMENT! I will ALWAYS back the men and women in blue, and never let you down. LAW AND ORDER will prevail! 

241,000 members!! 

In itself in the National scheme of things, 241,000 members may not be a huge deal, but consider that most of these 241,000 have families and extended families. They have friends and community acquaintances, and for sure most of these 241,000 members will not be shy about letting them know which candidate is the one that will protect their ass when push comes to shove. I would estimate that the opinion of these 241,000 members will convince a lot of independents. Likewise a lot of people have distant relatives that are police officers, and in the past many of these individuals are either Independent or have voted Democrat in the past. Not so, anymore.

When there is trouble in your neighborhood President Trump confidently says, “call the police.”

“Mr. Biden, who ya gonna call?”

Biden . . . “Ghostbusters?”

7/19/20

Blue Bloods still is one of my favorite TV shows although I do not watch TV much anymore. For those of you not familiar with this TV series, it is about a family in New York City – more precisely a family that is a NYC Police family. The grandfather had been the Police Commissioner for many years before he retired. The father is the present NYC Police Commissioner.and the two sons are also in the NYC police department. Danny, the oldest, is a detective, while the younger son is a garden variety, on the street every day, police officer. The main question these days about Blue Bloods is whether or not it will continue.

In the show the Police Commissioner father (Tom Sellick) has an on-again, off-again relationship with the Mayor, who is not deBlasio. If deBlasio were the mayor in Blue Bloods, the relationship would only be “off,” as the present NYC mayor does not get along with the police. He does not hesitate to disrespect the police any chance he gets, and is presently on a “defund the police” kick. This inane, and at the same time, insane strategy is one of the reasons that NYC is in trouble, and this problem can only get worse.

The upcoming NYC budget has cut a $billion for police in the city by cutting out future police recruiting classes. However, the way things are beginning to look, this may be an overshoot because NYC Police are now retiring in record numbers.

From Townhall:

The astonishing rush for the door came as 503 cops filed for retirement between May 25 — the day George Floyd was killed in Minneapolis, sparking anti-cop protests around the country — and July 3. That number represents a 75-percent increase over the 287 who filed for retirement during the same time last year, the NYPD said.

Also, there’s another class hitting their 20th year in September, so that will be another group leaving, noting that cops often retire once they hit the minimum requirement for pension vestment.

“You have to be crazy to stay on a job where you are losing money (loss of overtime pay), abused by the people you are trying to protect and not appreciated by the politicians,” the source said.

All of these police leaving is occurring at a time when violent crime in NYC is spiking. Shootings in Mayor Bill de Blasio’s New York City were three times higher last week than they were during the same week in 2019.

The New York Post reports there were 74 shootings with 101 victims between June 29, 2020 and July 5, 2020, versus “26 shootings with 33 victims during that time last year.

Now back to Blue Bloods . . . an unsubstantiated rumor is that this show may now be cancelled, as it can no longer get any actors to put on the uniform and play the NYC Police, “You cannot pay me enough to be a NYC cop . . . even in pretend!

I just read an article by Victor Davis Hanson titled “The Fragility of the Woke.”

What is “Woke?”

The “Urban Dictionary” defines “woke” as being aware, and “knowing what’s going on in the community.” It also mentions its specific ties to racism and social injustice. To use “woke” accurately in a sentence, one that captures its connotations and nuances, you’d need to reference someone who is thinking for themselves, who sees the ways in which racism, sexism and classism affect how we live our lives on a daily basis. Or, alternatively, someone who doesn’t. 

Every night when I watch the woke protesters shouting and yelling or trying to tear down statues, I wonder if these a lot of these “rebels” have in fact finally woke up . . . woke up to the fact that their lives will not be the same as life was for their parents. Could a lot of these college age students have humongous  loans – loans that need to be paid off, even if they did not graduate. Loans that will prevent them from leading a normal American life? Loans that will prevent them from owning a house, from getting married, from having kids.

Many of them are now being forced to wake-up to the fact that they have been swindled. They are now “woke” to the fact that they have virtually worthless degrees in fine arts, theater arts, or something similar. They are somewhat justifiably angry at this expensive, but often worthless, bill of goods that they have been sold. It’s one thing to owe $60+ grand and have teaching credentials or an engineering degree. But it is quite different to have some worthless feel-good degree and owe that same $60+ grand. However, they say that they were merely eighteen years old, and didn’t know much. Who is to blame . . . after all it is woke these days to blame someone, isn’t it? 

The answer for these unfortunate waifs is that their parents are partially to blame. After all what parent would actually go along with some of these gender-studies-tree-hugging degrees for $60K . . . only gender-confused-tree-hugging liberal parents.

However the biggest blame for this generation of woke meandering do-nothings are the colleges and their liberal professors. Surely now there will be an awaking that shelling out $60K for online classes is not woke . . . it is just plain dumb. Although it will take time, I hope that a lot of these liberal professors will discover that peddling a lot of their crap is not going to cut it anymore. Maybe they will be forced to go out and get real jobs . . . perhaps competing with their previous, though now recently woke, students!

We can only hope!