Enough of this Praise for Cuomo

A large portion of the media has been lionizing New York's governor Andrew Cuomo. While he does have personality traits that make him likable and he appears to say the 'right things' (at times sounding unusually non-partisan) I am not that impressed with the way that his state government has handled the COVID pandemic. Results matter and New York is very short in this department.

As it stand right now the situation in New York State is dismal. The state has 28.9% of the country's total number of 'official' COVID cases and accounts for a whopping 38.6% of all American COVID deaths. New Yorkers only make up 5.9% of the American population.

In terms of deaths per million New York currently sits at 1197.Six and a half times the national average. In fact the New York death average per million is over twice as much as Italy and Spain (both heavily hit nations) and three times the values for France and the UK. Each of which have not weathered the disease well. However it doesn't stop there.

New York's high infection rate numbers have also bled into its Tri-State neighbours - New Jersey and Connecticut - that now have deaths per million of 762 and 583 respectively, These are both higher than the Italian average (that we fretted about so intensely in March). The numbers are obscene.

All three states. together account for almost 50% of US deaths. Remove the Tri-States from the US numbers and American death rates are only slightly higher than Germany. So it isn’t the rest of the country that is problem (although there are a few hotspots elsewhere)

Now the classic retort when bringing up New York is to mention its very high population density. That is certainly true of the five boroughs area, but even with correction multipliers of two or three the numbers are still outrageous. In addition population density by itself doesn't necessarily dictate fate. Seoul. Tokyo, Hong Kong and Tapiei all have high population densities but very low COVID death rate levels.

New York has been a shambles and Cuomo must take a great deal of the blame (not all - the mayor of NYC Bill de Blasio has been awful..the New York subway is a literal COVID petri dish).

For one Cuomo was late on the lockdown (whose original intent if you remember was to flatten the resource curve). The state locked down on March 20th, three or four days after most other states.

In fact as late as March 18^th  Cuolmo had this to say in an interview in the New York Times – “The fear, the panic, is a bigger problem than the virus. Telling New Yorkers they must not leave their homes scares people.". He also said that he will not "approve such edicts in New York City or elsewhere”.

Cuomo’s response was lauded by Reason magazine for not panicking under pressure. Two days later he changed his mind. New York would be in catch-up.

In fact as the number of cases started increasing Cuomo did indeed panic. Big time.

New York State looked wholly unprepared with respect to PPE, hospital beds and ventilators (an obsession with Cuomo) and unlike Gavin Newsom and other governors Cuomo seemed incapable of securing these items from other sources. Why the state was in such a shocking position at the onset of this epidemic? is a question that needs to be asked,

Fortunately for Cuomo the Federal Government stepped in. The ventilators did arrive (for better or for worse...their efficacy is now debated),  Trump bullied those that he could to gain masks for New York’s Health workers,  FEMA stepped in to set up hospital sites in the boroughs and Cuomo could breathe a bit easier. He did thank Trump for his efforts here.

To his credit Cuomo stood up well as the voice of the state but the death numbers continued to mount. Words can only paste over bad results from poor planning for so long.

The worst would follow from a terrible policy directive made earlier in the epidemic involving nursing homes. On March the 25^th Cuomo made a fatal decision mandating that all state nursing homes accept patients for diagnosis regardless of their COVID status. This decision would prove to be a knife into the gullet of one of the state’s most vulnerable population groups. By some accounts almost a third of patients entering these homes were positive for COVID. The consequences have been ugly.

Meanwhile New York state continues to simmer. New COVID cases numbers are dropping but that may be more of a function of New York City closing in on the 60% herd immunity marker than anything else. Death numbers are still very high and the state is still reeling.

Cuomo has weathered it well in the eyes a great deal of the media (would it be the same if he were a Republican?) but the number reality for New York tells a different story. A governor is elected with the mandate to serve as a safety guardian for the state,

 Cuomo tried and I will give him credit for that but there is a great deal he could have done better. At the end it is only results that matter. You don’t gain real kudos for participating with relish. New York has not performed well by any metric and Cuomo must take a great deal of the blame.

COVID NEWS #3

IRC claims that as many as one billion may be infected with COVID
I am somewhat skeptical of these longer term projection models. In this one though the International Rescue Committee (IRC) claims that up to 1 billion people may become infected in 34 'fragile' countries (check article for the list of countries). What is worth noting though is they seem confident in using the low 0.3% lethality figure to reach their conclusion that up to 3.2 million people could die.
IRC Report

JAMA study points to very high asymptomatic number

This is a very interesting study. The details are outlined in JAMA. It looked at a homeless population in a Boston Shelter.

Results

408 tested for COVID-19.

147 tested positive for the Antigen test (36% positivity rate)

87.8% of positives were asymptomatic.

This again provides further evidence that official COVID infection rates in the general population are probably eight to ten times the number officially reported.Remember those who are asymptomatic rarely test at COVID centers

JAMA STUDY

Trump's Achilles Heel...Himself.

Donald Trump's biggest problem is not his policies. These  have been remarkably sound. Clamping down on illegal immigration, removing stifling and unnecessary regulation, taking a hardline against the mullahs in Iran, recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, using tariffs as a way to force other nations to play fair if they want to reap the benefits of free trade, all make sense. 

The same is true of his advocacy for the American worker against globalist opportunists. A great deal of production has to return to the US. The country as seen by the COVID-19 crisis can ill afford to have its supply lines threatened. 

Granted he stumbled in the early stages of the COVID-19 crisis – as did virtually each and every world leader – but his decision to stop flights from China and then Europe were a definite step in the right direction. The former of course was criticized by the Democrats at the time. In fact as late as February Nancy Pelosi was encouraging people to visit SFs Chinatown. The more people the better. A month later we were talking about social distancing.

Trump’s mobilization efforts on a national scale with respect to ventilators and PPE will be judged favourably by historians, even if partisan journalist eager to spin a negative twist refuse to acknowledge his actions here. I fail to see how an FDR or a JFK would have acted differently in this regard.

Where Trump however does go wrong and this has followed him throughout his Presidency is that he has a dangerous habit of THINKING-OUT-LOUD in public.  Many of us think out loud. Only a few do so in public. Extroverts seem more likely to do so than Introverts.

Trump constantly errs in this regard and as POTUS his words have ramifications.  The latest episode with disinfectants and sunlight only highlights this. The hostile media of course jumps on such slip ups with gusto. Trump consistently gives them ammo and this will be his undoing. His words not his policies.

Lets face it we all have silly thoughts. It is part of being human. Sometimes we want to shout them out loud but as I tell my kids each day...You don’t have to tell us about every thought you have. In fact you shouldn’t. Keep it to yourself. You won't explode.

Trump of course struggles with this notion. It is a flaw in his persona and it makes him his own worst enemy.

While you and I can get away with it. This is not, nor should it be the case for the holder of the Oval Office.

The First Madam President

Which first lady played the biggest role i the Presidency?

While it is tempting to answer Eleanor Roosevelt, whose impact on behalf of Progressive causes certainly persisted long after her Husband’s death in 1945, I am going to go with Edith Wilson (née Edith Bolling) on this one.

Edith Wilson was the second wife of America’s 28th President Woodrow Wilson (March. 1913-March. 1921). Her impact in the Oval Office especially after American entry into World War One should not be understated. Some have even described her as America's First Female President. Source: Was Edith Wilson Actually America's First Female President?

Edith and Woodrow Wilson Source: Was Edith Wilson Actually America's First Female President?

From the onset of his term in office Edith was actively involved in Wilson’s day-to-day presidential duties - screening her husband’s mail, attending his meetings, and regularly offering her opinions on the various foreign dignitaries she encountered. She held great sway especially when deciding which of the president’s advisers could meet with him.

Edith did not let her lack of formal education hold her back and indeed after the US entry into World War One (April 1917), she actually stepped up her role, handing over more of the First Lady Ceremonial duties to her secretary. She was with him at his side during the negotiations for the Versailles Peace Treaty and took a key role in the fight for the League of Nations.

Then in October 1919, President Wilson had a massive stroke. Edith stepped up as a ‘Presidential Steward’ and for a year and a half was arguably the most powerful political figure in the United States. One of her priorities was to ensure that the severity of her husband’s condition was kept from his cabinet and congress. The press was supplied updates on a need-to-know basis with Edith vigilantly guarding access to her husband even more stringently than before. In fact it was common consensus among the public to believe that the President was just suffering from a mild illness.

But here is the big kicker, which should come as no surprise. She messed up again. According to William Hazelgrove, author of Madam President, over “28 acts would become law because of the president’s failure to respond within the requisite 10 days.” President Wilson didn’t even see these bills. She was unilaterally making the decisions on what was important and she would be quickly overwhelmed. It got so bad that the positions of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Interior remained vacant. See Madam President: The Secret Presidency of Edith Wilson: William Hazelgrove: 9781621574750: Books

One of her biggest errors occurred when she snubbed the British Ambassador Sir Edward Grey, over a key issue regarding the League of Nations, as she simply did not like his secretary. Fortunately for her, the error would prove to be academic with the Senate opposing US entry into the League of Nations.

Wilson’s last year in office was chaotic. A recession gripped the country, race riots broke out across the land, the US became embroiled in the Russian Civil War while the nation was still under the grip of the deadly Spanish flu.

Wilson would depart in March of 1921 leaving a mixed legacy. His presidency is widely considered a blight on individual freedom. The Wilson Administration and Civil Liberties, 1917-1921: Harry N. Scheiber: 9781610271769: Amazon.com: Books. Others bemoan his lack of transparency The Hidden Agony of Woodrow Wilson. Certainly the stewardship of Edith Wilson points to that. Some question whether he did indeed make the World Safe for Democracy as was the cornerstone of his ideological driven philosophy Woodrow Wilson Made the World Unsafe for Democracy | James Bovard

However what persists as far as Edith Wilson is concerned is whether the constitution was violated or not based on her actions?

In her autobiography My Memoir she writes

So began my stewardship, I studied every paper, sent from the different Secretaries or Senators, and tried to digest and present in tabloid form the things that, despite my vigilance, had to go to the President. I, myself, never made a single decision regarding the disposition of public affairs. The only decision that was mine was what was important and what was not, and the very important decision of when to present matters to my husband.When a secret president ran the country

Maybe so. Although her actions as outlined indicate otherwise.

However what it did help inspire, although by no means was it the only driver, was the writing of the 25th Amendment, which for better or for worse (and if not abused) specifies the nature of the transfer of power when a President dies or becomes disabled.

So maybe there is a silver lining in all of this.

Source: United States Constitution - ppt download

More thoughts on Sweden

I am growing tired of these silly graphics mocking the Swedish COVID-19 approach. They don't even tell a quarter of the story and are completely misleading.

You can't judge Sweden until we go into the second wave (at the very least). As it stands right now they are doing better than the UK, Italy, France, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands. Not to mention the Tri-State area of the US.

They do have a higher death rate than other Nordic countries but a great deal of that has occurred at Swedish care facilities where there is way more overcrowding than is the case in Norway for example.

In my opinion the jury is still out on there approach but lets apply a modicum of critical thinking before we rush to display memes that do nothing to further our understanding of the efficacy of said policies.

Max Boot loses the plot

Max Boot is one of those Beltway neo-conservatives who still doesn’t get it. He refuses to accept the reality that Conservatism begins at home. If this is his central thesis then he is essentially gaslighting.

I remember very clearly the moment that I heard Donald Trump was planning on running for President of the United States.

‘ Trump for President. You have to be kidding me?’ I remarked to my wife.

‘The guy is a big-mouth buffoon. It is just one big publicity stunt. Who would vote for him? and better still…why would they vote for him?’

I like so many others believed his candidacy had no chance. Jeb Bush was the establishment favorite and besides that, there were a host of other GOP candidates who were far better than him. My choice was Marco Rubio. I still like the Florida Senator.

Source: Free-Thought Blogs

Trump had to fail. There was no other option.

However he didn’t. In fact as we all know his campaign picked up steam.

On December 23, 2015 I wrote this in my blog

My sense at the moment is that Trump is essentially cutting across all strata and is drawing heavily from the Libertarian and Angry White Male base who feel rightly alienated from a system that under the Obama years has not served them well. In a way this makes his appeal very powerful as it draws support from groups that can shift between parties. It is the Ross Perot grouping plus more and that more, includes a substantial portion of the forty percent of Americans who don't normally vote in elections.

Trump continued to gain momentum and the answer was obvious.

He was the only candidate taking up concerns that elites in both parties refused to address. Elites such as Boot.

I added this to the blog entry.

I prematurely predicted (like so many) that Trump's candidacy would fizzle out but it hasn't. He continues to press hot button topics that both party elites have refused to confront and has juxtaposed his position as a breath of fresh air against a system well on the way to decline. I would not wish to see him as President but his Jacksonian appeal will resonate with those who see themselves disenfranchised by a Hamiltonian consensus. This is not an insignificant number of souls and unless the establishment takes these voices seriously such undercurrents will threaten the integrity of the Union. Trump may be just one in a series of 'warnings' that are likely to follow in the future.

So what then are these concerns?

Well they are numerous and except for the last of these, none are specific to white Americans.

• There is a genuine belief that under both the Bush and Obama administrations the US is in decline. The Decline of the West: Why America Must Prepare for the End of Dominance. The economy went through a tremendous recession that was further prolonged by the slowest recovery in history. It was a period of lost wealth. Obama Wins The Gold For Worst Economic Recovery Ever.
• Many key industries have been in decline. Even the Left wing Guardian understands what motivates many Trump voters. Big five US sectors whose decline has driven voters to Donald Trump.
• Add to that the fact that the benefits of Free Trade have not been forthcoming for many. China was given Most Favored Nation trading status in the 1990s which was made permanent on December 27, 2001. However they are not playing by the rules. How China doesn't play fair on trade. Politicians on both sides have acknowledged this however none act with conviction…until now with Trump. China always promises to stop cheating on trade, but never does

Source: Dumb Times

• The number of illegal immigrants in the country stood at 11.4 million in 2012 over three times the 1990 estimate of 3.5 million. Yale School of Management believes that the official number today is actually somewhere between 16 and 29 million. (1). Both Bush and Obama had no long term solution to this issue. Yes they could deport but that seemed a band-aid at best. Tough decisions had to be made to be made and neither party was willing to do so. Special Interests were ruling the roost and the American working class was paying the price.
• Race relations especially under the Obama administration had deteriorated. Most say race relations worsened under Obama, poll finds. He was supposed to be the unifying President but where it counted he stumbled badly at the time. Obama Has Some Regrets About Ferguson Response
• Interventionist wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya were costing the country lives and adding unnecessarily to the debt. Above all else they appeared to be thankless and were resulting in scenes like this.

Ambassador Stevens killed in 2012 Benghazi attack Source: Edmonton Journal

• The talking heads in Washington (of which Max Boot is one) were demanding that the US double down on such initiatives.ISIS Can Only Be Defeated by Boots on the Ground. Easy for Max Boot to talk. He is not putting himself in harm’s way. This of course was not necessary. ISIS has lost its final stronghold in Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces says and The rout of ISIS gives the world an opportunity to defeat its ideology.
• Then you had the race mongers who have placed Identity politics at the front and center of their political philosophy. For them it is the will to power. To be White carries with you the original sin of slavery, and regardless of your status in society or personal well being are inherently privileged- part of the race bourgeoisie. The Frantz Fanon rewrite of Marxism using the concept of race over class is all too common the default position among Progressive elites, who with very little exception have inculcated ‘White Privilege’ as axiomatic to their worldview.

So you complain and are told by the elites that you don’t have a case. Even living in poverty you are reprimanded to check your privilege. After all wealthy whites control America. The fact that this has zero impact on your life is of no concern.

Until it finally sets in. Your alienation reaches a climax and in someone like Donald Trump, you see a champion. That he is a flawed person is a given. But so what? At least he talks to your concerns, speaks to your frustration and stands up to the elites like Boot who offer you nothing but derision

Then later on he brings success.Trump's Top 10 Achievements of 2018 | RealClearPolitics and so you say well he was good for 2016 why not give him another chance in 2020.

Sources:

1. "The number of undocumented immigrants in the United States: Estimates based on demographic modeling with data from 1990 to 2016". PLoS One. 13 (9): e0201193. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

In praise of one of the Greatest Moments in British Football History - Hurst's hat-trick

Geoff Hurst lifting the World Cup Trophy (1966) Source: The Telegraph

As a memory refresher 1966 was the one and only time England hosted the World Cup. It was also the only time that the Three Lions would go on and win it.

Football had come home and the English had a talented squad that included the Charlton brothers (Bobby and Jack), Gordon Banks, Jimmy Greaves, Roger Hunt, Nobby Stiles and the late Bobby Moore as captain. Nicknamed the ‘wingless wonders’ they were targeted for success, provided they didn’t, in the grand tradition of English national teams, find a way of bottling it.

Nevertheless it wouldn’t be easy. They weren’t the favorites. All the usual Football superpowers were there including a powerful Portuguese team whose attack was spearheaded by the ‘Black Pearl’ himself, Eusebio. Brazil were hoping for a third title in a row having emerged victorious in 1958 and 1962. Pele was nearing the apex of his brilliance.

England were drawn in a group with Uruguay, Mexico and France. All respected football nations in their own right. They opened sluggishly with a 0–0 tie against the South Americans before dispatching Mexico and then France by 2–0 apiece. Liverpool forward Roger Hunt was the early hero, scoring three goals for the English in the group stage.

Other big name nations were less fortunate, Brazil crashed to two defeats - at the hands of Hungary and Portugal - and were eliminated (Pele limping off with an injury). Italy’s fate was even more damning, they lost to both the Soviet Union and North Korea, with the latter defeat going down as one of the biggest shocks in World Cup history.They would return home to be bombarded with a bevy of fresh produce by angry supporters.

In the knockout stage England saw off Argentina 1–0 in the quarterfinal (my dad was at that match) and then edged out the high flying Portugal 2–1 in the semi-finals courtesy of a Bobby Charlton brace. On the other side of the draw, the West Germans knocked off Uruguay 4–0 before winning 2–1 against the Soviets, who boasted the presence of Lev Yashin (arguably one of the best goalkeepers in Football history).

So destiny was set. On the 30th of July 1966 at 15:00 BST, England would face off at Wembley against the West Germans to decide football’s highest honor.

Now here is the kicker, Geoff Hurst, our man of focus, was only fourth in England’s strike force depth chart. Yes he scored the winning goal against Argentina but if it weren’t for an earlier injury to Jimmy Greaves (the most prolific scorer in top class British football) he would likely have seen himself on the bench with England manager Alf Ramsey preferring the likes of Charlton, Hunt and Greaves up front for the tournament. Fortune was to prove otherwise however as England ran out with a lineup that day, that every old time football fan would grow to know by heart

Banks (Gk), Cohen, Wilson, Stiles, Charlton J, Moore (c), Ball, Charlton B, Hurst, Peters and Hunt.

As West Ham United fans like to remind everyone three of the players were representing their club including Geoff Hurst himself.

Geoff Hurst today with Harry Kane (a possible Hurst for the future) Source: Tottenham Hotspur website

The game itself was played at a very fierce pace from the starting whistle. A defensive error gave the West Germans an early lead in the 12th minute but Hurst cancelled this out six minutes later. At half-time the score remained 1–1, and that was the tally until Martin Peters gave England the edge in the 78th minute.

All the Three Lions had to do was hold on for twelve minutes. They went in search of a third goal but the Germans held firm (they had a defense that included a young Franz Beckenbauer) and then as the game drew to a close Wolfgang Weber scored the tie goal sending the game into extra time. England were so close but now the West Germans were back into it. 2–2. Had the momentum shifted?

England’s character showed as they pushed forward with Hurst playing a key role in the attack. The chances would come and it did. Hurst fired in a shot that rebounded downward off the upright. The West Germans claimed that the ball didn’t cross the line. The Russian linesman disagreed with them. The referee awarded the goal and England were up 3–2. The teams were in the 101st minute of play.

The controversial Third goal. Source: Sir Geoff Hurst: goal-line technology in 1966 would have stopped 50 years of German moaning

However there was no guarantee that it would hold. The Germans had already come back before. Hurst though was not done. As English fans sat on their nerves he scored again beating the goalkeeper at the near post. The West Ham star had his hat-trick and England would go on to clinch the game and the World Cup - 4–2 in the final.

It was an incredible achievement. Hurst would eventually finish his career with 228 goals in 561 games at the club level. As an England forward he netted 24 times in 49 games. Well short of Bobby Charlton (49 goals in 106 games for England) and Jimmy Greaves (44 goals in 57 international games), but on that day in July he rose to the highest level and was the pivotal figure in England’s greatest footballing triumph. A tremendous achievement by a man who captured with his hat-trick what has alluded Messi, CR7, Big Ronaldo, Pele, Diego Maradona, Müller and other greats of the game. Sensational stuff. I wish I had been born to see it live.

Source: 1966 FIFA World Cup England ™ - FIFA.com

Geoff Hurst | Football Stats | No Club | Age 77 | 1959-1976 | Soccer Base