Demographics is Destiny

The trend varies among demographic groups. Native-born Hispanics and blacks used to have birth rates above the replacement rate (2.1 births per woman). Now they're below replacement, almost as low that of as native-born whites and Asians, which are down only a bit. The immigrant birth rate remains above replacement level among blacks, but only barely above among Hispanics, and below among whites and Asians.

One possible consequence: Those often-gleeful predictions that whites will soon be a minority will not be realized so soon, or maybe ever. Nor is it clear, as sociologist Richard Alba has suggested, whether often-intermarrying Hispanics and Asians will see themselves as aggrieved minorities. They might just blend in, like Italians and Poles.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/07/27/will_the_trend_of_low_birth_rates_be_reversed_137639.html

Power Corrupts, yada yada yada

Has it ever been more clear how dirty the election fight was? The more power we cede, the greater their motivation to win at any cost.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/fred-barnes/three-leaders-are-better-than-one

Kill CAFE', Make Me Smile

This article is the sort of empty headed logic that makes it clear why no one should buy newspapers nor rely on newspaper writers for analysis.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-fuel-economy-20180802-story.html#

First, if they have to meet a fuel efficiency standard across the fleet, why not make it 100 or 1000 miles per gallon? Why just 50? While we're setting these government standards, why not make it a crime to build an auto and/or not allow new autos to be sold since the building of a vehicle emits as much carbon as a lifetime of driving it?

The author makes it sound like electric cars are great pollution reducers - but they are not in the least, unless the electricity is coming from nuclear power. Even then, the carbon emitted in the production of the batteries is only brought back to even about the time the battery dies. Electric cars will only dent emissions when electricity is fully produced by non-carbon sources. Until then, electric is much ado about nothing. Besides, they are no where near doing what a normally powered auto can do.

The fuel economy standards amount to a back door method of idiot empty headed food trough wiping politicians to dictate what cars you and I can buy - if 50mpg is the standard, we will only be able to choose from tiny autos. You and I wouldn't stand for it if pols tried to do that directly, but for some reason we fall for their virtue posturing efforts with CAFE standards that are absurd.

If stupid is as stupid does, we're all stupid for putting up with 40+ years of CAFE.

Hello, I'll Take the Baby Opium Please

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5896669/when-opium-was-for-newborns-and-bayer-sold-heroin

It was wrong even when it was right

Yes, exactly. It was inexcusable what all those folks did to cover up for Bill the abuser, it was compromise to get power over principle, and there was nothing to respect about those who did what it took to support Bill.

Yin yang style, it still may have been the right thing to do. What if that was the necessary stage to get to where we are now, where Bill-behavior isn't tolerated?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/09/opinion/sunday/bills-belated-metoo-moment.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion

Truth and Nothing but the Truth?

In the context of this article, and the concept of thin slicing emotion/thought based on the frames of expression we pass through unconsciously, I wonder if technology may give us what virtue hasn't - the way to tell when we are being lied to. Sure, this article is about another topic, but what it points to is that tech may one day be able to give a true/false read on what people are saying, maybe even in real time.

What would happen if it really was best to always say what is true? Would it wreck us or free us?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/07/artificial-intelligence-can-tell-your-sexuality-politics-surveillance-paul-lewis

Both Sides Are Correct

On the one hand the basic premise of government is to defend the rights of the citizens, rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Killing a person that is unborn is still killing.

On the other hand, the government is so loaded with incompetence, it is none of the government's business what a woman chooses to do with her body and who knows about it.

That's why we'll fight about this until ... women decide abortion is wrong in great enough numbers to make legislation feasible. Women will tip the scales at some point when there is a realization of the scope of the problem and the realization that they can equally choose to stop it vice having it forced upon them by men.

The legal perspective of Roe v. Wade has always been weak.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/07/15/the_supreme_court_and_original_sin_137528.html