Vote Trump for a Moral, Just Society

By next Saturday, the election will be "over" (for certain values of "over"; I wholly expect insane legal wrangling to continue for weeks/months once the preliminary results are in). Thus, this post is officially my last pitch for President Donald J. Trump, blowhard and Cheeto extraordinaire.

To all America-loving voters: Everyone knows that Trump's personal moral character is questionable at best -- that he's no saint. But if Trump's history (or his Twitter feed) is what's stopping you from voting for the guy, I strongly, strongly urge you to reconsider your priorities. You had an excuse to hesitate in 2016 back when Trump's political commitments were in doubt; you don't have an excuse now.

Our choices here, as I see it, are pretty damned clear:

1. We can have an awkward, cringey commander-in-chief who obviously adores our country and, regardless of his flaws, will genuinely try to serve our interests and defend our foundational principles.
2. We can have a weak, ineffectual commander-in-chief who will absolutely be railroaded by elements in his own party who hate America - hate you - and wish to destroy her.

I'm sorry, but Biden does not have the wherewithal to beat back the successor ideology that's now threatening our constitutional order. The Democratic Party as a whole does not have that wherewithal because it's been captured by said ideology's adherents. And we need to beat back these adherents and their poisonous notions if we wish America to remain the imperfect but basically moral and just society we all know it is. This is priority number one. It should overshadow all other considerations.

What radical leftists want for us Americans has nothing to do with justice, either social or otherwise -- and if they take power via Joe Biden (because again, Biden will not be able to stop them), they absolutely will destroy everything that makes America good. This should not be in doubt if you're even remotely conversant with the nightly news. 

I have become increasingly convinced, for example, that social justice warriors will not be satisfied until a black guy can gut a cop in broad daylight in front of cameras and a dozen witnesses and yet still get off scot free. Why? At bottom, these activists see black people as purse puppies who should be permitted to run wild doing whatever they please with zero consequences because the "legacy of slavery" has rendered the poor dears sub-human and they consequently just can't help themselves. How else do you explain their absolute refusal to acknowledge that, oh, running at the cops with a knife will get you justifiably shot? How do you explain their absolute refusal to hold black people responsible for their own choices in general? Remember: according to the SJW left, expecting "people of color" to do something simple like showing up to work on time is in fact a manifestation of "white supremacy" that should be discouraged. Does that make sense to you? If not, you need to vote for Trump. Biden and the Democrats will let this critical race theory crap fester in our bureaucracies and our board rooms because so many of them actually buy what it's selling; Trump, on the other hand, has already acted to oppose it.

I have also become convinced that these same people seek to control everything I think, everything I say, and everything I do -- and that if they can't succeed in rendering me silent and compliant, they will do everything they can to make sure I starve instead. Do you like cancel culture? Are you comfortable with the power SJW's already have to completely destroy people's lives for the crime of - well - not being SJW's? Were you okay, for instance, with what happened to the Covington kids? To Justice Kavanaugh? And does it sit right with you that Silicon Valley execs are unilaterally deciding for all of us what constitutes "truth" when it comes to thorny political matters -- or the COVID-19 pandemic, for that matter? If not, you need to vote for Trump. We can't trust Biden to stop this cultural totalitarianism -- not because he supports it personally necessarily but because its his base that's driving it.

In my view - and I think in your view too if you're an average, decent American - a truly moral, just society fulfills the following two criteria at minimum:

1. It protects the natural rights (of life, liberty, and property) of each and every human being regardless of class, race, etc.
2. It ensures that the rules that govern it are predictable and evenly applied to all citizens.

Has America achieved these? Not completely; I think all good faith actors agree that there's definite room for improvement. But I believe - I think with good reason - that we've come closer to the ideal than any other polity. And I think we can make further strides towards greater justice and equality if we continue to abide by the classically liberal values that got us here. Freedom, readers! Freedom is the key. The ability to talk things out in a free marketplace of ideas has given us everything from modern science to the original civil rights movement. And the ability to exchange goods and services in a free economy, meanwhile, has given even poor slobs like me a standard of living that would be the envy of the pharaohs of Ancient Egypt or the kings of early-modern Europe. Freedom's record, in short, is sterling. 

But the fifth columnists lurking behind Biden don't want freedom. Indeed, they don't even want our society to fulfill the aforementioned nonnegotiables. For sure, they definitely don't want us all to abide by the same comprehensible laws and mores; on the contrary, they simply want to change who gets the "privilege" and who gets shafted. That's why they argue that race should be considered when it comes to, say, admitting students to prestigious schools: they want to ease the standards for their favorites and screw the rest (especially those damned Jews and Asians who have the temerity to succeed despite their difficult histories). So here's the essential question: do you think this path - a path that centers what divides us and uses it to pass out bennies to just a few - will actually result in a society that's more fair? If not, you need to vote for Trump.

Leftists have also openly declared that people don't have a natural right to keep the things they've acquired through their labor, stumping on public radio for the revolutionary virtues of looting. And while Biden himself likely doesn't embrace this fringe view, he and the other members of his party don't seem all that motivated to stamp it out with force. Indeed, they all seemed more offended by Trump's expressed desire to use federal troops to stop the rioting than by the actual rioting. Do you really want people like this in charge of our country? Do you really want to be led by politicians who just can't bring themselves to aggressively punish violent commies trying their best to burn our cities to the ground? If not, you need to vote for Trump.

Of course, some people will read this and tell me that I am scared over nothing. But no: I'd say I have a lot more evidence to point to regarding the left's dangerous intentions for me and mine than any Biden voter has for the supposed threats of a continued Trump presidency. Aside from one creepy rally in Charlottesville a few years ago, I haven't seen much action from this "radical right" that's supposedly riding on Trump's coattails and menacing us all. What I've seen is incident upon incident of leftists outright terrorizing their neighbors -- and a Democratic Party that's not getting in their way. If you've seen this too, you need to vote for Trump -- even if it makes you unpopular at suburban cocktail parties.

Substance Over Surface

Of all the things that drive my upcoming vote for Trump (which will be my first, recall; I voted 3rd party in 2016), perhaps the most important has been the left's complete loss of contact with anything resembling reality -- or even one God-damned moral principle. And you know what I think partially drives this evolution? The left's obsession with appearances.

With the left, it's all about the external. Take the exam school controversy I discussed last week, for example. Blacks, Hispanics, and Indigenous Americans are under-represented in top secondary schools, and that is a problem that needs to be addressed. But what does the left propose we do? Make the outcomes look equal by openly considering race in admissions and lowering the standards for these disadvantaged groups. These "anti-racist" activists offer nothing that will actually fix the root causes that drive the disparity, which include everything from widespread family breakdown, chronic (Democratic) mismanagement of urban school districts, incompetent teaching (including the promotion of curricula that abandon essential skills like, say, memorizing your multiplication tables), cultural pressures to avoid "acting white", and - yes, perhaps - lingering economic inequality that can be traced to past racist policies. (I'm willing to consider anything as long as you have the evidence.)

Or consider the San Diego Unified School District's decision to adopt an easier grading policy because Black, Hispanic and Indigenous students are over-represented among students who fail. According to this new policy, students will no longer be penalized for late assignments, poor attendance, or poor behavior; instead, they will be given essentially infinite chances to get their A's. Now: when it comes to learning outcomes, I happen to believe that mastery learning is the best approach -- that no student should be ushered on to the next level without demonstrating full proficiency on the previous step. Thus, I do think struggling students should get ample opportunity to review, revise, and remediate. At the same time, though, it is also important to teach teenaged students in particular proper work habits. In the adult world, everyone must properly manage his time, meet deadlines, and prioritize between competing responsibilities; if we don't prepare our students for this road, we are setting them up to fail later on. But does the left care about that? No. Once again, "anti-racists" are fixated on superficially burnishing the outcomes so everything appears equal; they have zero interest in doing anything hard (but genuinely helpful) like, oh, mentoring students in particularly difficult circumstances so they can meet ordinary expectations like turning their homework in on time.

Back in June, I wrote a little didactic tale in which the main character does something difficult and tangible to help a neighboring community in distress -- but because she fails to wear the correct symbol of concern (in this case, a blue scarf), she is attacked. My purpose there was quite overt: to point out the left's current defective modus operandi. According to the left, if you don't post that black square on Instagram, you're not fighting for "black lives." According to the left, if you're not perfectly proper in the language you use, you're a damned dirty racist who should be run out on a rail.

But when it comes to real-world successes -when it comes to truly changing things for the better - what people say matters very, very little; what matters much more is what people do. Think about it, and think hard. Who, in the end, is actually advancing the cause of racial equality: the gruff, unattractive, ethnic-joke-loving plumber and volunteer tutor who drills black kids in inner-city Detroit on their arithmetic -- or the impeccably-dressed suburban freelance journalist who writes long think-pieces on the inherent "violence" of "digital blackface" while sipping lattes in an upscale coffee shop? Anyone with two brain cells in his head realizes that the right answer is clearly the former.

So: 'Trump. Trump is the plumber. He's said a lot of cringe-worthy things (though the media, of course, have exponentially exaggerated these offenses against etiquette through open, brazen lying). But what has he done - what has he actually done - that merits the hysterical "racist/Nazi/fascist" labels that are heaped upon his head? I want receipts. I want evidence. And I don't want to hear about what he tweeted; I want to hear about policy and documented impacts. 

In the meantime, here's what I see: I see that before COVID, economic prospects were looking up for struggling minority communities thanks to Trump's economic policies. I see the Trump administration talking to people concerned about criminal justice reform. I see the Trump administration actually avoiding needless foreign wars while still offering a muscular defense of our interests. I see, in short, Trump working towards many of the stated goals of the left. Yet the left refuses to give Trump credit for any of his efforts in this vein -- because the guy is just so gauche. He's just so ugly and common and gross. He doesn't wear the blue scarf.

And here's what I also see: I see leftists bleating all the right phrases and sporting all the right totems -- while simultaneously promoting - or at least enabling - activity that has worsened prospects for our most vulnerable. I've said it before and I'll say it again: How does trashing an urban neighborhood help any of the people who live there? How does creating new food and pharmacy deserts benefit minority communities? Leftists can't offer real answers to these questions because for them, it's all about the performance of compassion -- not about making observable progress.

BLATE: My vote for Trump is a vote for substance over surface.

Our Exam Schools Have Done Nothing Wrong

I'm sure everyone wants me to talk about the ongoing social media censorship of the NY Post's little October surprise (which I'm going to link because you can't stop the signal). And yes -- said censorship does set a dangerous precedent, reinforces the continuing double standard in re: the treatment of Trump versus the treatment of his opponents, and is yet. one. more indication that our blue check elites are execrable sports who are totally in the tank for Biden and will go to any lengths to protect that sad figurehead from the consequences of his own corruption. But the thing is -- I don't think I have anything unique to say on that matter. So in lieu of bitching about the sins of Jack Dorsey, I'm going to continue to obsess about the ongoing, nationwide threat to exam schools like Lowell High School in San Francisco or Thomas Jefferson in suburban DC.

As I mentioned last week, "anti-racist" activists are working hard to destroy or dilute the entrance standards for exam schools because the demographic breakdowns of their incoming classes don't "represent" the demographics of their service areas. For example, Fairfax County in Virginia - from which the lion's share of TJ's students are selected - is roughly 61% white, 19.3% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 9.7% black -- but 73% of the students admitted to TJ's Class of 2024 were Asian. Yeah. You see the problem for people who assume, erroneously, that all sub-groups in society behave in exactly the same way, that all should therefore accrue the same end results, and that any violation of this is therefore proof positive of "systemic discrimination"?

But TJ's own stats reveal that different groups aren't behaving identically. Asian students not only were admitted to TJ in numbers out of proportion to their presence in the Northern Virginia population but also applied in numbers out of proportion to their presence in said population. Doesn't that matter? TJ can't enroll the invisible. It can only work with the student profiles it does see. And interest level isn't the only relevant variable in play. There's also the fact that Asian applicants to TJ, on average, have higher GPA's -- that, in fact, their credentials are simply better than those of their competitors (including their peers in the white majority, who are also radically under-represented in the class of 2024 at this supposedly "white supremacist" school).

So then the question we need to ask is: why? Why are Asian students more engaged in the TJ admissions process, and why are they performing better overall? The activists would have us believe that these students are simply buying their way into TJ with expensive test prep. One such activist recently compared Asian students to athletes who cheat in sports via performance enhancing drugs. But this is a crap argument - and vicious slander - for several reasons. Number one, if you are concerned about the uneven availability of test prep, the logical solution would be to expand free and/or discounted test prep options in the region for students who can demonstrate financial hardship -- not to drop the standards by jettisoning the test entirely. Number two, studying is not cheating! Studying can be made accessible to all, leads to genuine learning, and should come with real rewards. But most importantly, test prep doesn't really have that much of an effect. I have worked in test prep for fifteen years now (and may be risking my job here in sharing trade secrets), and while I personally have accomplished some relatively impressive score improvements with my students after hours and hours of focused skills remediation, I have never been able to get a student into a top school like TJ who wasn't already demonstrating far-above-grade-level academic mastery in other ways. NEVER. So even if these Asian kids are prepping, that doesn't mean they aren't in fact as gifted as they appear on record.

Of course, the next retreat of the enemies of these exam schools is to claim that tests don't show merit for their favored groups -- usually because said tests are "racist". But sorry, cupcakes -- you're tangling with someone who, once again, has fifteen years of experience with standardized tests like the SHSAT, SAT, ACT, etc. I know how those tests are written. I know how these psychometricians twist themselves into pretzels trying to avoid cultural bias. I know how their questions are field-tested to ensure they are appropriate. These tests obviously are not the be-all and end-all of merit (which is why they're not considered in isolation at TJ or most anywhere else), but according to meta-analyses, they do nonetheless show something real and relevant to school admissions -- something that becomes apparent the instant you have a student who scored a 1250 on the SAT in the same class with a student who scored a 1450. So if Asians are doing extraordinarily well on the TJ admissions test and whites and blacks are doing less well, it is more likely this reflects the actual skills each group of students brings to the table and not some inherent "racist" quality of the test itself.

So no: don't shoot the messenger, you idiots. Think carefully about what the message might mean. As I stressed last time, it might mean that certain feeder schools are doing a piss-poor job educating their pupils -- which would be the fault of those schools and the leaders in charge of their district, not the top schools at the end of the pipeline. And I hate to say it, but it might also mean that certain families are doing a better job emphasizing the importance of education to their children than others. You are instantly called a bigot for even suggesting such a thing, but I can't ignore the evidence of my lying eyes. I'm not super expensive as a tutor (and in point of fact, my outfit offers financial aid). Most students around here can probably afford my rates. Yet there are definite racial trends in who shows up to ask for my help (Asians, West Indians, and African immigrants) and who simply doesn't (American blacks, whites, and Hispanics). If I can't even voice that out loud without being shouted down as a Nazi, then we have a serious, serious problem.

You can't keep treating certain people like children and expect to make any real progress when it comes to the so-called "diversity" of exam schools. You have to be frank. You have to tell all comers that getting into an exam school is not an entitlement. It requires hard work and an excellent grade-school education. And yes, you will need to make sacrifices in time and, yes, some money in order to earn your spot no matter who you are. As I keep saying, the local government should act to ensure that the opportunity to succeed academically is as evenly distributed as humanly possible, but when all is said and done, sitting around and waiting for the government to rescue you with set-asides because "muh oppression" and "representation" is the path of the loser and, if I may be so bold, the true cheat.

I understand why people want to get into places like TJ. They want the prestige. They want access to TJ's labs, internships, and excellent, unusual courses. And they think all of that will continue to exist even if TJ starts admitting students who are objectively less prepared for its strenuous curriculum. But the purpose of TJ is to serve students with documented high ability in science and math who would likely be bored at a base high school -- not to make people feel good about their secondary credentials or to make life superficially "fair". Forcing yourself into TJ through not-so-stealth quota games without earning your right to be there is essentially stealing from special ed kids (because high-ability kids are, in many ways, special ed). Better, instead, to work toward making sure instructional quality is excellent across your district -- for both high-ability and average students alike.

I'm Back!

So what the heck happened to me?

On September 3, I went to the local ER because I was feeling very unwell -- nausea, severe muscle weakness (including difficulty swallowing solid food), dehydration, etc. That afternoon, the hospital's routine work-up revealed an alarmingly high level of troponin in my blood, which most commonly indicates a heart attack or heart injury. Promptly, I was admitted to the ICU for 24 hours so that my cardiac function could be monitored more closely.

Over the next two weeks, I stayed in a general cardiac ward where I underwent two echoes and a cath (in addition to a bunch of other diagnostic scans and blood tests). These all revealed that my blood vessels were squeaky clean and my heart was pumping normally. At this point, the aforementioned local institution was stumped, so they transferred me to a larger teaching hospital where I could be seen by specialists in cardiology and rheumatology.

After a completely normal cardiac MRI at the new hospital, a primary heart problem was ruled out, and the focus turned to an autoimmune cause for my weakness and other signs/symptoms. Several tissue biopsies were conducted, and a feeding tube was inserted so I can still get nutrition while my throat muscles remain inflamed and weak. The results of the biopsies are still being reviewed by the big-time specialists at Johns Hopkins, but the suspicion at this point is that I have a mixed connective tissue disease. I am showing classic signs of dermatomyositis (an autoimmune disease of the skin and muscles), CREST Syndrome, and - of course - the rheumatoid arthritis I already knew I had.

I am now home from the hospital on high dose immunosuppressive medication. Over the next month of follow-up appointments, we're going to work on finding exactly the right combination of medical therapies that will - hopefully - restore function and allow me to, once again, lead my normal life.

TL; DR: My body essentially collapsed for reasons unknown, and I am still trying to bounce back.

I did keep up with the political landscape while I was in the hospital, though. Neither of the debates were, for me, especially enlightening. (Trump is not the smoothest, most polite public speaker? This is my shocked face.) And the responses to said debates were even less of a surprise. (Pence was "mansplaining"? Really? Stop making me hate my own gender, you absolute media assclowns.) 

And as for the other stories in the news? Yeah: they're making me even more inclined to crawl over fields of broken glass and swim through gator and shark infested pools to vote for Trump. 

Particularly of concern to me is an effort by Democratic, "antiracist" politicians in my own backyard to completely gut our prized STEM magnet because, damn it, too many ambitious Asian immigrants are getting in (and not enough blacks and Hispanics). My take on this controversy lines up with my take on affirmative action in general: look at the pipeline. Which elementary and middle schools are adequately preparing students for Magnet High School's entrance exam and rigorous academic expectations, and which schools aren't? Do a comprehensive analysis -- and then fix the schools that are underperforming so quality instruction is more justly distributed across the region. 

You see, as a teacher, I actually care about educating kids for real. Lowering the admissions standards for a top high school does not serve that goal. All that does is reinforce existing inequities; all that does is put lipstick on a pig. Unfortunately, more and more supposedly educated (mostly white) people around here have been captured by this season's delusional, cultish ideology-of-the-moment, which argues against all common sense that playing quota games to buff the numbers for Magnet High School (and other exam schools nationwide) is in fact to strike a blow against "systemic racism." Because black and Hispanic students can't in fact earn spots at this school in the traditional way if they're just given more opportunities to do so -- apparently. 

Wait, what does racism mean again? Sigh.

Anyway -- I should have a more normal post ready for you next week. Any prayers for my continued recovery are, of course, greatly appreciated.