Just wear the mask!
The United States constitutes 4.2 percent of the world's population. As of Wednesday, we registered 20.5 percent of the world's covid cases and 18.6 percent of all covid-related deaths. Exceptionalism at its finest? I don't think so.
Locally, Governor Hutchinson has received a letter signed by over 300 Arkansas physicians requesting that stricter covid-19 interventions be implemented. However, we all need to remember that this is a "hoax" (loosely defined by Webster as a malicious deception).
To paraphrase perhaps the pre-eminent worldwide expert on pandemics, Dr. Anthony Fauci, for the life of me I cannot understand why some people not only refuse to wear masks, but lamely argue that this is a question of personal freedom. And as Dr. Fauci reiterated again Wednesday, we are well past the need for national, rather than state-by-state directives to attack the covid-19 problem. This has nothing to do with freedom or states' rights. Rather, it has everything to do with common sense and the well-being of our neighbors.
Shouldn't be printed
Re "A compassionate covid strategy" in Sunday's Perspective section: Now you have dealt another blow to my confidence in your journalistic practice by publishing the lengthy piece arguing that herd immunity is the way to get the covid-19 pandemic under control.
Any self-respecting paper checks its sources before it prints something as controversial as this. In fact, it is not even controversial among the acknowledged epidemiology experts, starting with Anthony Fauci. They agree that it is wrong! If you had bothered to do even some superficial Google work, you would have found Fauci's statement, as well as warnings from the AMA and the CDC. You should read the paper at this link--tinyurl.com/gbidiocy--and see if it might offer you another take on this "herd immunity" topic.
Occam's Razor--the answer that requires the fewest assumptions is generally the correct one.
Using that principle, let's ask why Trump lost the election: Was it (A), there was unheralded election fraud on the part of Democrats that required sworn-in poll workers and vote-counters to risk a federal prison sentence, wholesale voting machine irregularities, scores of ballots burned and record numbers of dead people voting or (B), more voters wanted Biden as president than Trump?
That's not socialism
Right-wing conservatives ride a false narrative of socialism to oppose and demonize every progressive issue proposed by the Democratic Party. Their view of socialism is the communist version where the government owns and controls everything and everybody is a government employee. This version doesn't work. Cuba and Venezuela are proof that it doesn't work. Progressive issues to provide a safety net for those who are less fortunate are not promoting the narrative of socialism that the far right tries to portray.
On the Washington Mall there is a memorial to President Franklin Roosevelt. It consists of 12 vertical granite slabs, each depicting a year of his presidential reign, configured as three rooms to represent his three terms in office. (He was elected to a fourth term but served only 82 days in office when he died.) On each slab are quotations chronologically with the year in office. The one that remained with me over 20 years since my visit is for Jan. 20, 1937: "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."
I believe this quote is more aligned with the Democratic Party reaching out to those who desperately need help in these trying times rather than the false narrative that the Democratic Party is socialism and an attempt to take control of our lives.
Thoughts on Biden
If Joe Biden is confirmed and certified as the new president, I can accept that. I resolve not to riot, burn, loot or destroy anything even though I am not happy with the outcome. I do however, have a couple of questions about issues on these pages. First, will John Brummett now retire for lack of anything to write about or will he just find someone else to hate? Second, will Paul Krugman now write about something for which he has knowledge or will he just keep looking like a deer in the headlights?
For what it's worth, I will pass along something from the New York Post that I thought was interesting. Joe Biden's charitable foundation to benefit cancer research, detection, diagnosis and prevention that he and Mrs. Biden established to honor son Beau took in $4.8 million in 2017 and 2018. According to the Post and to IRS tax filings, $3.07 million was spent on staff salaries, travel, expenses, etc., and zero on cancer research, prevention, detection or diagnosis. Reminds me of another charitable foundation. Isn't it about time that such entities are required to spend a significant portion of the proceeds on the charity for which they were established? Just a thought.
Deus existo nobis.