As I said in my last article, few decisions have been as controversial as the recent overturn of Roe v. Wade. As such, I could not cover everything in one article. Last time I discussed the courts and politicians, but the new ruling has also set off the Internet warriors who have spewed their hatred towards anyone who might disagree with them.
The problem with abortion is that it is a moral issue. We argue plenty over things like economic issues, but those we can compromise on. We tend to reserve hate for moral issues, where we can see no compromise. What is interesting about this particular debate is that a second moral issue is occurring simultaneously, that of mass shootings and gun control. The interesting part is that both sides are making their arguments for or against abortion and gun control by using abortion and gun control as evidence of their superior position. Historically speaking, this concept is not new. During the 19th Century, the biggest moral issue was slavery, yet slaveholders justified their practice by attacking the moral practices of northern industrialists.
Since the announcement of the change in abortion laws, assigned talking points seem to come from both sides. When the left attacks the right over abortion, one of their talking points is to ask if the right is so concerned about babies, then why do they not pass gun control laws to protect children? Yet, at the same time, the right makes just the opposite argument when discussing gun control. They ask if the left is so concerned about protecting lives, then why do they support killing the unborn? Both sides try to hold the moral high ground on one issue by showing moral superiority on the other.
In the past, a similar argument started in 1794 with the invention of the cotton gin. With this new technology, cotton and the slaves who grew it became a vital part of the American economy. Suddenly, slave owners could no longer afford to look at slavery as the “necessary evil” that it was called during colonial times. Beginning in the 19th century, slavery became a positive good, according to the South.
The new reliance on cotton was not the only change. The growth of a new anti-slavery element known as abolition also grew. An anti-slavery element in the U.S. had always been present, but many people saw slavery as harmful to Whites. This new abolitionist movement saw slavery as morally wrong for both Whites and Blacks and called for its immediate eradication. Slaveholders now had to dig in their heels and show why slavery benefited everyone, including the slaves.
Slavery presented a difficult moral stance for slaveholders, but they found ways to support it. They argued that the Bible supported it, the ancient Greeks and Romans condoned it, and science proved that Blacks were inferior. However, a favorite talking point for slaveowners was basically people in glass houses should not throw stones. Instead of having to defend slavery, slaveholders instead attacked northern industrialists and the treatment of their workers. With the birth of industrialization, the condition of a growing urban population severely declined, leaving many to live in absolute squalor. It was easier for slaveholders to tell northerners to mind their own business, solve their own problems, and leave slavery alone. Many even went as far as saying slaves were better off than northern workers. Slaves received food and shelter their entire lives, no matter how they worked. Could northern bosses claim the same about their workers?
A similar argument today has come from the pro-abortion side. An Internet post shows a graphic showing all the children who are in foster care in each state with text that suggests if anti-abortion supporters care so much about kids, why do they stop caring once they are born? While this is a strong argument, I am sometimes asked by students if some slaves had it better than some northern workers. I always give the same answer. In some rare cases, that may be true, but how many of those northern workers would switch places with a slave and give up their freedom? As for today, while the foster care argument holds some validity, how many of those kids do you think wish their mothers had made a different choice?
Dr. James Finck is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma in Chickasha. He is Chair of the Oklahoma Civil War Symposium. Follow Historically Speaking at www.Historicallyspeaking.blog.
Commentary: EXODUS 20:22 – Upheaval in Gorky Park
Are we watching the last days of Vladimir Putin’s rule in Russia? The Russian President is cornered like never before. The Russian people are in the streets, his friends have vanished, his army is in tatters, and his allies are running for cover. Exodus stage left.
In the wake of a colossal setback on the battlefields of Ukraine, he recently called for 300,000 Russian reservists for immediate duty on the front lines. Mr. Putin is quite aware of how this is perceived in foreign capitals. Desperate times require desperate measures. These reservists are desperately needed to fill holes formerly defended by his elite Guards Tank Army. The remnants of that army were last seen fleeing back to Russia a few weeks ago. The opposition is currently upgrading their tank brigades with the spoils deserted by Putin’s legions. The last time Russia mobilized the populace was in response to Operation Barbarossa. (Hitler’s invasion in 1941). Putin is enduring mass protests and a mass exodus from Mother Russia. Long lines of cars are making for the borders, and international flights to anywhere are overbooked. Despite Putin’s best home-spun propaganda – the Russians aren’t buying it anymore and frankly just don’t have the will to fight this war. They want him to leave.
For Putin, this is the worst nightmare he can fathom. The fundamental problems undermining Putin’s effort to mobilize his people to fight are so deep that they cannot be fixed in the coming months.
Time to commit the Reserves
Unfortunately for Putin, Russia does not have the infrastructure to organize, train, and equip these reserves, which can result in any semblance of combat power in the near term. The last time many of his reservists donned a uniform, it was adorned with Soviet patches. That was 1989. Many of these recruits are older, no longer in good physical shape, and obviously aren’t motivated. They are headed to the meat grinder, and they know it. Drone coverage and mainstream media reports mass departures of military-age males in response to Putin’s call to arms. Additionally, most of Russia’s military ‘boot camp’, like training personnel, have already deployed to Ukraine. Putin is not concerning himself with technicalities, though – he just needs people to jump into foxholes immediately.
Aside from the challenges of getting reservists ready for battle, there is also the question of whether the Russian military has enough modern weapons and other equipment for the hundreds of thousands of new troops being pushed forward. All the new stuff has been expended, destroyed, or captured already.
How did things go south so rapidly?
After all, the west has been cowering in the face of his intrusions in Crimea, Libya, and Syria for almost a decade. A quick answer is that the antagonist in all this is one man – Vladimir Putin – not the Russians themselves. He alone is responsible for the deaths and carnage. He has painstakingly fostered a cult of personality – centered on himself and gradually pushed his rivals aside in his march to dictatorship. Bravado and a few uninvited visits into foreign conflict zones helped his mystique along. The masquerade is convincing, given that he does have the world’s largest arsenal of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons in his pocket. His conventional facade surely impressed NATO and fooled the Western Intelligence Community. Now we see that the threat of nukes is all Putin has. Russia’s hollow interior and failures on the battlefield are smudging the strong man’s veneer. His regime is ridden with increased elite in-fighting, bureaucratic empire building, and systemic corruption. Cronyism rules. The economy has transformed into a source of personal enrichment for competing elites. Now we find out that the state’s vaunted military modernization was rubbish. The Russians are forced to open their Cold War storage facilities in hopes that the old tanks and machinery still work.
Over the past 20 years, Putin’s state-controlled propaganda ministry has promoted the theme that Russia is great again. Twenty years of hype has crumbled in the aftermath of Putin’s ill-advised invasion. The war has delivered a body blow to the state and to Putin’s painstakingly crafted image. His military has proven to be a paper tiger. The battlefield setbacks and the impact of Western sanctions are choking the economy, along with unrestrained theft of scarce resources by the Russian elite.
The impact of Putin’s decisions
The invasion in February proved to be the spark that threatened to burn the Russian state. Putin is rapidly losing legitimacy at home and abroad. The secret police are angry with him for blaming them for the military fiasco. The generals that haven’t been killed yet are angry that the war is destroying the armed forces. And the blinded populace is, alas – opening their eyes.
As former U.S. Army General and Secretary of State Colin Powell said, “In prosperity, our friends know us; in adversity, we know our friends.” Putin is running out of friends. Iran may be his only pal now. Russia’s foreign allies are starting to telegraph their concerns and gradually distancing themselves from Putin, as illustrated in multiple scenes on the international stage. As alluded to earlier, the mobilization announcement has resulted in mass upheaval. Thousands massed in Gorky Park to protest. The public is becoming aware of the meat-grinder and doesn’t want their husbands and sons sent to the front. Over a thousand people have been arrested; many others have bought one-way airline tickets or driven their cars to the nearest border. The exodus is only being stifled by state controls and bordering nations like Norway – closing their gates.
Meanwhile, an armed ANTIFA-like resistance movement appears to have emerged in Russia and is actively fire-bombing draft boards and derailing trains. A social media channel that caters to Russian partisans provides instructions on how to assassinate officials. Recently, a military officer at a recruiting station was shot. Local elites throughout Russia are demanding Putin’s resignation.
The Russian army increasingly refuses to fight, and desertions are mounting. So much so that the Duma has passed recent legislation imposing stiff penalties for desertion, surrender, and insubordination. Given the poor condition of front-line soldiers, Moscow has taken to enlisting senior citizens, mercenaries, and hardened criminals. None of these groups can be expected to fight with enthusiasm. The criminals are more likely to vanish into the countryside at first sight. Imagine being an officer in charge of this lot – especially when you sympathize with their disdain.
Putin’s military machine kills foreigners and commits atrocities with abandon — and now it is sending in old men to stop bullets. All that’s left to do is for Russian elites and masses to realize this predicament and do something about it. They need to force the restructuring of the Russian Federation with a post-Putin regime. Most of us can’t believe what we are seeing, but the realization of the Russian state’s collapse is approaching.
On the other hand, Vladimir Putin is quite the savvy operator. He didn’t become dictator of Russia by luck. Unfortunately for us, he still has an ally lurking around the corner – the infamous Russian winter. Putin is counting on the winter to slow the Ukrainian advances and dampen the local protests as the masses move indoors to the fireplace. Meanwhile, he will use this winter pause to shore up his forces and enact measures on the home front to suppress the upheaval.
All this is not lost on Ukrainian President Zelensky. He is rapidly moving food, petrol, and ammunition forward and issuing winter garments to his troops. He must take advantage of his opposition’s low morale and sustain the wave of euphoria from recent victories. He would very much like to utilize the frozen bogs as thoroughfares for an armored spearhead. After all, what else is he expected to do with the influx of Russian armor he recently inherited? Hopefully, he takes a page out of George Washington’s playbook and hits the Russian camps in the winter.
With luck, we will soon be rid of Mr. Putin and write a new chapter with his Exodus 20:23.
I was advised early in my business career to learn from history because if you don’t, it will likely happen again with the same consequences.
I have been following the new town developments regarding the reluctance of the Council to release the resumes of individual applications for the open Council seat.
Let’s look back over the last several years of the lack of transparency of the Council when a mayor was selected without the Council releasing any of the resumes of the other individuals that were being considered
This lack of transparency continued when the council selected an interim Town Manager without vetting the individual resumes of the individuals being considered.
We are still dealing with the negative aftermath resulting from the Council’s lack of transparency of not vetting or sharing all the interested individuals for these positions
Now fast forward to the recent appointment of the Republican Party Officer to the council. I personally have nothing against the individual appointed. While researching the qualifications of the other candidates, it became apparent there were other candidates that were much more qualified with both management and financial experience that would be great to have in this position.
This continues to propagate the community’s belief that the Council selections, both past and current, are for the betterment of a small group of people that are focused on their self-interest and party instead of the community in a nonpartisan town environment.
It’s time again for the Council to appoint another person to fill Joe McFadden’s seat. Again, as history repeats itself, it seems the citizens will not have an opportunity to see the different resumes of the interested parties or even know who these individuals are that could be representing us on Council.
History will continue to repeat itself if we do nothing to stop it.
Abortion: Don’t tread on me—or my values
While he may not want to talk about it, it’s no secret that Ben Cline is staunchly anti-abortion, believing that human life begins at conception and, accordingly, that a woman has no right to terminate a pregnancy. He has signed onto proposed legislation prohibiting abortions nationwide, with no exceptions for rape, incest or protecting the life or health of the mother. He has also voted against a law safeguarding the use of contraceptives like birth control pills to prevent pregnancy. I certainly can respect another’s deeply-held moral or religious beliefs, Mr. Cline being a conservative Catholic. What I do object to, however, is having him or anyone else impose those beliefs on me and oblige me to conform to them.
If a couple is unable to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, they can face catastrophic consequences, and their lives can be devastated. A child may demand a level of financial, emotional and material support completely beyond the ability of the couple to provide. The end result is that the child becomes a ward of the state, and we all pay the costs through our tax dollars. While talking about these effects of an unwanted or unplanned child may seem heartless or cruel, they are undeniably real.
I just cannot accept that Mr. Cline or anybody else feels that he can have control over a very private decision that belongs to me and my wife. I’m sorry, but in matters of ending a pregnancy or using birth control pills, the woman gets to decide what to do–naturally in consultation with her partner, in the privacy of their bedroom and consistent with her own moral and religious beliefs. Mr. Cline and the government have no business getting involved–at all. Since he apparently believes otherwise, I do not plan to vote for him in November.
Dr. Petrolove or: How I learned to stop worrying and love fossil fuels
We always knew it would come to this.
That it would start … out there. Out on the Left Coast where all the loonies live: California, the land of surfboards and wildfires; of Google, Apple and Microsoft; of swimming pools and movie stars. And godless liberals.
That’s the sort of place where wild-eyed, un-American ideas get seeded by some radical who dares to think beyond this decade and where it would take root and, before you knew it, creep across the purple mountain majesties and the fruited plain like kudzu.
Sure ’nuff, it happened: a sneak attack. OK … a sneak attack with 13 years’ notice, but that’s no time at all when you’re talking about ending the sale of new gasoline-powered cars.
Youngkin’s my name. Glenn Youngkin. I command this conservative outpost called Virginia, and if those granola-munching, tree-hugging, Birkenstock-wearing lefties are spoiling to go toe-to-toe over our precious petroleum fluids, well … hold my Chardonnay.
A slick-haired, tan-from-a-can dandy named Gavin Newsom, my counterpart in California started this dust-up. And I aim to finish it. It was his doing and that of the lefty legislature out in the so-called Golden State that flat-out dictated that come 2035, there would be no more brand-new cars sold that rely on internal combustion of petroleum distillates for locomotion. If you buy it new off a dealer’s lot or order it online factory-fresh, it’ll run off hydrogen fuel like some spaceship or you’ll have to plug it in like some lowly vacuum cleaner or washing machine.
That’s pretty rich, ain’t it? A state that barely a week ago was warning of rolling blackouts on account of a freak heat wave draining its power grid is going to force folks to buy cars that run off the very electricity that they already can’t make enough of.
Not that it’s any skin off ol’ Glenn’s hind parts if Californians won’t have the privilege of paying upwards of seven frogskins a gallon for regular gas – nearly nine bucks for high-test – as they did several weeks ago. What slaps my chaps is that what Newsom did means I’d have to do the same thing across the country here in god-fearin’, carbon-lovin’ Virginia, too.
Like hell I will.
I’m pulling Virginia out of this Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and I’m asking the General Assembly to repeal this perfidious state law the Democrats passed in 2021 that requires us to follow California’s lead on emissions policy. Seventeen other states are part of this same devil’s deal, but I can only strike a blow for the good of our fossil fuels here in Virginia (unless I strike it lucky in the 2024 presidential primaries, but that’s another tale).
Here comes Lionel Mandrake, my somewhat uptight, British-born environmental policy wonk, walking into my office. Right on time.
“Mandrake, have a seat,” I said, motioning to the chair opposite my desk.
“Good evening, sir. Do I understand correctly that we’re threatening to leave the multi-state vehicle emissions compact and that you’ve placed the House of Delegates on Condition Red?” Mandrake said. “Good idea. Keep the lads on their toes.”
“I’m afraid this isn’t a drill, Mandrake,” I replied.
“Oh dear. Is California involved?”
“Looks like it. Could get pretty hairy.”
I took a sip of my preferred cocktail, an oaky Pinot Grigio and rainwater. “Mandrake, I can no longer sit back and allow leftist infiltration, leftist indoctrination, leftist subversion and the international leftist conspiracy to sap and impurify our precious petrochemical fluids!”
“But sir, might we be acting a bit … rashly? I mean, the whole bloody point will likely be moot by 2035 whether we act or not. The mass conversion to electric vehicles is well under way. Detroit and the world’s other automakers are retooling and switching entire model lines pell-mell from internal combustion engines to electric motors. Why, there’s even a new start-up right here in Virginia that’s in business converting big-rig tractors from diesel engines to electrical. Our own transportation department just announced plans for a major expansion of electrical charging stations along interstates across Virginia. And our friends at Dominion are ever so keen on the idea of vehicles that use electricity,” Mandrake said.
“Friends? Dominion?” I said, giving Mandrake the stink-eye.
“Dreadfully sorry. Habit from the not-too-distant past,” he said.
“Mandrake, do you realize that EV dominance is the most monstrously conceived, leftist/environmentalist plot we’ve ever faced?”
“Nevertheless, sir, carmakers are going where the money and incentives are, and if a market the size of Cali goes EV, so shall they. Were California, its own country, it would be the world’s fifth-largest economy ,right behind Germany and just ahead of the United Kingdom — God save the king. California’s almost $3 trillion annual GDP accounts for nearly 15% of the entire American economy,” he continued in a pleading tone.
“And sir,” Mandrake continued, “General Motors has already announced it will bring 30 new EV models to market in just the next three years and manufacture EVs exclusively by 2035. Ford has invested $22 billion into electric vehicles, and 40% of all that it produces will be all-electric by 2030. Besides, sir, this shan’t affect the sale of pre-owned petrol-powered cars by one tuppence.”
“Sit down and chill, Mandrake. I’ve already gotten the ball rolling with Todd Gilbert and our boys in the House. There’s no stopping it now,” I said.
“I beg of you, Glenn – politics aside — have you considered the climatological implications? It brings us incrementally closer to … the Doomsday Machine,” he said ominously. “It’s getting worse every year, sir: triple-digit temperatures in Portland, Oregon, and even Scotland, for goodness sake; a full-blown hurricane now forecast to blast the Canadian coast near Newfoundland; estuaries and reservoirs drying up in the American Southwest; hundred-year floods happening every year.”
“The libs have been using that global warming hooey to try to scare the bejeebers out of us for decades now. Every study the petroleum industry pays for proves the same thing: science can’t be trusted,” I replied.
“But you don’t have to believe me, Mandrake,” I continued, buzzing my receptionist. “Can you send in Dr. Petrolove?”
“Petrolove sir?” Mandrake asked. “Wasn’t he …”
“Yeah. I put him on retainer after he made parole for his part in that Enron nastiness back in the 2000s. Knows every dirty secret in the oil and gas biz and some they haven’t even thought up yet. If your ‘Doomsday Machine’ exists, Petro will know about it.”
“’Sup, chief?” Petrolove called out in his Texas twang as he strutted into my office.
“Petro, Mandrake here tells me there’s the risk of some ‘Doomsday Machine’ that could plunge humanity into environmental oblivion if we keep standing up for our friends in the carbon-energy sector,” I said. “Go ahead and tell him how full of malarkey he is.”
“Um …,” Petro said, shuffling his cowboy boots, unable to look at me.
“Go ahead, Doc. School Mandrake for me.”
“Well, el hefe,” Petrolove said, haltingly clearing his throat, “the Doomsday Machine is real and terrifying, but completely credible and easy to understand. If we don’t decrease the carbon that we’re pumping into the atmosphere, it will create a doomsday shroud around the planet.”
Chills ran down my back. I swallowed hard. Suddenly I understood. Why hadn’t I seen the devastating truth of this all along? Why had I clung to naïve beliefs in the face of clear evidence? It was, indeed, an inconvenient truth, but it was high time I accepted it … and spoke it.
“Damn shame the libs got to you, too, Petro. You’re fired.”
by Bob Lewis, Virginia Mercury
Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sarah Vogelsong for questions: email@example.com. Follow Virginia Mercury on Facebook and Twitter.
Let me ask you one thing, what limits you?
Response to Letters to the Editor by Mr. Waller Wilson
First, some house cleaning: it is his, not her; C.J. stands for Cyril Joseph. Second when I submitted the article to the Royal Examiner, I had footnoted my sources in the article’s footer. I don’t know why they did not appear in the post. They are repeated here for info: “Hot Talk Cold Science” by Singer, Chapter 6 p77, “Dark Winter” by Casey, Appendix 3 Figure A3-2 p89.
As to the question on CO2, chapter 10 of “Hot Talk Cold Science” (revised and expanded third edition copyright 2021) is devoted to the subject of CO2in the atmosphere. Chapter 10, page 130, states: “Greenhouse gas” means only that CO2 absorbs some radiation; it does not guarantee climate warming, the forcing of CO2 depends on where it is in the atmosphere. Its actual behavior depends mostly on atmospheric structure, expressed by atmospheric lapse rate (ALR), and is defined as the change in atmospheric temperature with altitude.
The Atmospheric Lapse Rate (ALR) is different for the three regions of the atmosphere. The ALR is positive for the Stratosphere, Zero for the Tropopause, and Negative for the Troposphere. This supports the principle that depending on where in the atmosphere, the radiation on the CO2 molecules can produce cooling. The following statement on the Climate4U website is taken from a graph of CO2 in ppm and HadCRUT3 temperature.
Climate4You website 20080927: Reflections on the correlation between global temperature and atmospheric CO2 “By this, the diagram illustrates that the overall relation between atmospheric CO2 and global temperature apparently has changed several times since 1958.
In the early part of the period, with CO2 concentrations close to 315 ppm, an increase in CO2 was associated with decreasing global air temperatures. When the CO2 concentration around 1975 reached 325 ppm, this association changed, and increasing atmospheric CO2 was now associated with rising global temperatures. However, when the CO2 concentration at the turn of the century reached about 378 ppm, the association possibly changed back to that, characterizing the period before 1975, before apparently changing again around 2014.” So the curve fit shows a decrease after 1958 followed by an increase until July of 2022, when it slope became negative again. The data and graph were updated on 8 September 2022.
These are the sources (and some additional data) you requested.
Cyril J. Cook