But kids are safest in school, per disease-control director.

Remote learning has not been a sound “plan” for students. More like the opposite. But what about the main union contention, safety?

“The truth is, for kids K-12, one of the safest places they can be from our perspective is to remain in school,” then-director of the Centers for Disease Control Robert Redfield said in November.

COVID-19 infection rates at elementary schools in particular have been, compared to the country as a whole, microscopic—0.2 percent for teachers, 0.1 percent for students, according to economist Emily Oster’s database of 5,000-plus K-12 schools. The positive rate in New York City’s program of random school testing—currently standing at 0.52 percent from more than 360,000 tests since October—has consistently been around one-tenth of the overall community positivity rate.

And, observed Redfield, “The infections that we’ve identified in schools when they’ve been evaluated were not acquired in schools. They were actually acquired in the community and in the household….The data strongly supports that K-12 schools—as well as institutes of higher learning—really are not where we’re having our challenges.”

But unions, like murder, will out. We hope.

Meanwhile,

No wonder preference for school choice is spreading. Parents want to be able to predict when their kids will attend school. It’s amazing that teachers unions do not yet seem to understand how much public sentiment is poised to turn against them.

Power is their game.

Nice guys? Either way, Republicans finish last.

From the story: … the Republicans had their chance to address the problem of over-mighty Big Tech and completely flunked it. Only too late did they realize that Section 230 was Silicon Valley’s Achilles heel.

Only too late did they begin drafting legislation to repeal or modify it. Only too late did Section 230 start to feature in Trump’s speeches.

Even now, very few Republicans really understand that, by itself, repealing 230 would not have sufficed. Without some kind of First Amendment for the internet, repeal would probably just have restricted free speech further.

H/T again, Salem’s Daybreak Insider.

. . . fresh from the wonderland world of the Trump-deranged circle of Democrats at large.

THE DEMOCRATS’ WEIRD, TIME CAPSULE ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT. A lot has changed in the last two weeks. President Donald Trump has become former President Donald Trump. President-elect Joe Biden has become President Joe Biden. The former president has moved to Florida. The new president, in the White House, has begun to dismantle many of the executive actions of his predecessor.

And yet, on Monday evening, several members of the House of Representatives delivered to the Senate an article of impeachment that reads as if Trump were still president. It starts off like this:

That was just the beginning. The first paragraph of the article reads, “Resolved, That Donald John Trump, President of the United States…” The next paragraph says the same thing. The paragraph after that quotes the Constitution saying that the President of the United States “shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The next few paragraphs detail conduct by Trump that occurred in early January, when he was indeed president. (The article of impeachment was passed on January 13.) And then, another step back in time when the article says, “Wherefore, Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office…”

If allowed to remain in office? Donald John Trump is no longer in office. You can Google it.

I went ahead and did so, and he’s right.

At the very end of the article, the House says, “Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.”

Removal from office? There they go again. [He’s
still president!!] It is only in the final clause — the assertion that Trump should not be allowed to hold any federal office in the future — that Democrats get to the real purpose of the impeachment trial.

Ah-hah.

Domestic terrorists.

The Portland-based journalist – a regular presence documenting violent Antifa activity in the Pacific Northwest (and having been assaulted for his coverage) – has fled to the United Kingdom.

“My hometown of Portland, Oregon is the epicenter of American Antifa,” Ngo told Sky News Australia in a Saturday interview. Ngo noted tthat US politicians who rightly condemned the January 6 riots at the Capitol were “at best silent last year when my city was literally under siege.”

“At worse they actually promoted some of the crowd funded campaigns,” he added.

Nancy And Paul Pelosi Bought More Than $1 Million In Tesla, Disney And Apple Calls In December

…the Speaker now clearly has a vested interest in the success of names like Tesla, whose trajectories as public companies can be altered drastically by government decisions.

Can’t keep a good man down.

President Trump established the office in Palm Beach County, Florida to “carry on the agenda of the Trump Administration through advocacy, organizing, and public activism.” The office gives the ex-president a formal vehicle to coordinate future public appearances, statements and official activities.

“President Trump will always and forever be a champion for the American People,” the press release said.

Note:

Obama had a similar ‘office of the former president’ in DC during the Trump administration.

Read this story end to end, and you have two reasons for not face-masking, (a) they do no good as currently required and commonly worn and (b) they can harm the wearer, for a no-win, no-win situation.

Collateral damage. Did the Western poo-bahs see this coming? Do they? Our leaders.

Well, China was rooting for Joe for a reason.

Heavy lies the hand of a cardinal in dudgeon.

When Cardinal Blase Cupich took out his iPhone Wednesday afternoon, he might not have appreciated the importance of the tweet thread he was about to produce.

Twitter can be like that. We often fail to realize what a tweet might mean for us until after we have sent it — until the replies and quote tweets start pouring in.

He is unwise in the ways of controversy. Easily surprised.

Twitter should not be underestimated. Most Americans learned that lesson during the reign of the tweet-happy President Donald Trump, who spent four years tweeting zealously: Firing cabinet secretaries, fighting with Congress, and setting foreign policy, all in 280-character chunks typed out with his thumbs on a cell phone.

By comparison, the impact of Cardinal Cupich’s Jan. 20 tweetstorm might seem insignificant. But the thread from Chicago’s cardinal is a moment of significance for the U.S. bishops’ conference, and may offer a moment of revelation about Cardinal Cupich, and his role in the Church.

Yes, let us consider the man.

Cupich was tweeting about a statement released by USCCB president Archbishop Jose Gomez, which pledged the bishops to work with incoming President Biden on areas of agreement, while also calling out the “moral evils” of the Biden administration’s policy agenda on issues like abortion, gender ideology, and religious liberty.

The cardinal thought Gomez’ statement was “ill-considered,” produced with insufficient consultation, and evidence of unspecified “internal institutional failures” at the USCCB.

Take that, you foolish opponent of mine, for whom I have zilch respect.

“I look forward to contributing to all efforts” to address those institutional failures, Cupich tweeted, though he has since declined to clarify to The Pillar precisely what failures he thinks should be addressed.

Impulsive retort, since regretted?

In fact, the consultations required by USCCB policy took place before the Gomez statement was released, and bishops tell The Pillar that additional consultation, as suggested by Cupich, would not have been customary for Gomez to release a statement in his own name.

Gomez followed protocol. Elected to dog, needed no Cupich OK.

Nevertheless, the cardinal has made clear that he is not happy, and that he does not intend to let the matter rest.

He’s talking to Rome about this. Watch out.

It is unusual – and a breach of customary episcopal etiquette – for a U.S. bishop to air a dispute with his brother bishops in public, and especially on Twitter.

Indeed. Many the non-insider would catch that.

Since Wednesday, some commentators have suggested that Cupich has fired the first shots of a coming intra-conference civil war.

One would think that, though said commentators might have been linked here. In any case, more analysis follows, with a conclusion:

When Cardinal Cupich took out his phone Wednesday, and decided to challenge openly the bishops’ conference president, he may have thought it the moment at which to take a stand. But before posting the tweet thread he might now regret, he may not have expected to find himself standing alone.

We hoy polloi await.