Category Archives: Commentary

Election Commentary

Posted on by

I expect everyone is overdosed on election analysis, so I hope to keep this short and to the point. I went into the election disgusted with the choices for President, and I’m not celebrating the outcome. I didn’t want either of them to be elected, but I guess one of them had to be. One thing I can celebrate is that many commentators are saying the mainstream media are in shock over the results. They were convinced Clinton would win. They began to believe everyone had to have been influenced by their onslaught of negative Trump reports. The results indicate many average Americans in flyover country dismissed the “superior intellect” of the so-called elite.

One statistic that gives me hope is that Clinton gathered several million fewer votes than Obama’s totals. That indicates many Democrats who were supposed to blindly accept the candidate put forward by the party made a statement by voting for someone else. Americans are still thinking even if the major parties aren’t.

Last Spanish War Volunteer Dies

Posted on by

The Spanish Civil War at the end of the 1930s was called the dress rehearsal for World War II as the Germans and Italians supported Franco’s Fascists and the Soviet Union supported the Republicans or Loyalists. There were some 2800 Americans who travelled to Spain to fight with the communist Republican forces in what was called the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. About 800 of them were killed fighting on the losing side. Delmar Berg was a dishwasher in California when he saw Young Communist League billboard advertising for soldiers to serve in the conflict. He made it to Spain and was wounded in battle. He remained a communist throughout his life and died at the age of 100. He was the last remaining U.S. volunteer.

The members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade returned to the U.S. to be treated as heroes by liberals who celebrated their service against the Fascists. In actions that would later weigh against him J. Robert Oppenheimer and his wife hosted and attended fund raising events to support the veterans. The service became a liability for the veterans during the Cold War when the “Red Scare” became a nationwide concern and anyone with ties to communism began to be viewed with suspicion.

Third Party Presidential Candidates

Posted on by

Ed Asner recently moderated a debate by three third party candidates at Colorado University on the Boulder Campus, and I commend the Free and Equal Election Foundation for arranging that debate. The participants were Rogue De La Fuente representing the Reform Party, Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party, and Gloria LaRiva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

I’ve been reading some admonitions that a vote for a third party candidate is wasted, and I disagree. I’ve stopped watching the 24 hour news cycle, because they can’t get enough of Clinton and Trump. I became disgusted with the news shows when it was obvious they were being used by the master self-promoter Donald Trump to get free media coverage. The few times I’ve watched any news shows now makes it obvious the media is making its money talking about how disgusting Trump is and ignoring all of the information being released by Wikileaks et al confirming that Clinton has no regard for either laws or ethics.

I believe the two major political parties have proven they have abandoned any pretense that they are looking for decent people to nominate for national political positions. I eagerly tell people I’ve never been prouder to be an Independent. I won’t advise anyone who they should vote for, but I will say that I don’t think either of the two major parties deserve the loyalty many are still willing to give. Perhaps enough third party votes would be a message to them that they should begin to try to better.

Objectivity of Rocky Flats Reporting

Posted on by

A recent Denver Post article by Bruce Finley has some interesting information about plans for opening twenty miles of hiking, cycling, and horseback riding and a visitor center on the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge in 2018. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is holding public meeting to solicit public input. They undoubtedly will have the usual activists show up to warn of the supposed dangers. Dave Lucas, The refuge manager mentions in the article, “Downwind of the plant there’s residual contamination. Plutonium is one of the contaminants, but it is at levels that were determined to be acceptable.” As I understand the plans, the trails being considered are on the dominantly upwind side of the plant where plutonium concentrations are about the same as fallout levels all throughout Colorado.

One paragraph in the article discusses “…the apparent end of litigation with surrounding suburbs over roadways has the cleared the way for work on relatively undisturbed wildlife habitat that extends into the mountain foothills.” I was unaware that the litigation had ended, but that is good news.

There are some inflammatory comments scattered through the article. For example, it says the “…feds…hope to tell the Rocky Flats story of evolution from American Indian hunting grounds through the Cold War military activities that ruined the environment and workers’ health to the current open oasis amid dust-churning monster house development.” Another short sentence proclaims, “Plutonium-tainted and other radioactive waste was buried at Rocky Flats causing an environmental disaster.” It’s no wonder why some people might avoid going to the refuge when it opens to take a beautiful and safe hike.

Better Cruel Truth, Darn It

Posted on by

In my years at Rocky Flats, I occasionally heard rumors that low levels of radiation were good for health – that Rocky Flats workers were healthier than they “should” be, that workers in the plutonium area got very few colds. One friend suggested it was because smoking was banned in so many places, while others said it was just because you had to be healthy to hold down the job. I shrugged it all off.

Now I’ve run into a Skeptiod episode by Brian Dunning entitled “Radiation Hormesis: Is It Good for You?” Dunning was, as you might guess, skeptical, in part because

“Those trumpeting the benefits of radiation hormesis the loudest are often the same ones who deny anthropogenic global warming. This may be the result of people getting their information from political sources rather than from science sources”

and cited other warning signs that the position may not be science

Dunn provides background, explaining the difference between ionizing vs non ionizing radiation and a dose-response curve. He notes that the “linear no threshold” approach used with radiation, which assumes there is no safe level of exposure, has been adopted to be “prudent.” Since we all live bathed in background radiation, “it seems reasonable to infer that very low doses of even ionizing radiation are harmless.” Even the Health Physics Society has stated “no threshold” is an oversimplification.

The hypothetical radiation hormesis says the actual dose-response curve is U-shaped, starting at zero response to zero exposure, but then dipping down below the zero-risk line

“indicating radiation at that dose actually reduces the risk of cancer, less risk than you’d have with no radiation at all — and then, as the dosage increases, the curve comes back into the increased risk zone, and continues curving upward as the dosage increase.”

After a literature review, Dunn says hormesis

“is one claim of a pattern that some say can be found in the data, but that most dismiss because the data is simply far too noisy at that low level to support the drawing of any conclusions at all.”

So there may be a positive effect, a negative effect, or no effect – all tiny responses lost in the noise of the data. I’m not surprised – though maybe a little disappointed. With so much hyperbolic criticism of Rocky Flats, it would be ironically delightful if working there improved my health. Too bad the science isn’t there. I do believe, as Edward Abbey said, better a cruel truth than a comfortable delusion.

There’s No Place Like Home

Posted on by

joys of travelI recently heard an interview with Thomas Swick, a long-time travel writer who has a new book out – Joys of Travel. This isn’t a travel guide to finding restaurants and cathedrals; it’s about the experience of traveling.

Luckily my husband enjoys travel, which has allowed me to be a tag-along. Personally, I’m a home-body. The idea of a travel bucket list makes me envision racing through famous places. 1,000 Places See Before You Die tires me out just thinking about it, so I appreciated Swick’s opposite advice. He says, the less glamorous the location, the more rewarding it can be. Don’t simply be a tourist looking for the “best” hotels, restaurants, and museums. Try to live, if only briefly, the life of a local. He made one specific suggestion: go to the local post office, stand in line, hopefully chat with people, and buy stamps.

In Europe, 71% hold passports. Only 36% of Americans hold passports. That doesn’t count non-citizens, of course, who live in the US with their own country’s passport, so the total number of residents with passports is 42%, but that doesn’t mean many of us travel every year. William Chalmers figures that in 2009, just 5% of American residents traveled outside North America.

The size of the US must be considered – we can travel vast distances without ever “leaving home.” I’ve seen mountains, deserts, and oceans; museums and historical sites; bustling markets and live theater – all without leaving home. But none of the deep-seated cultural differences that world-travelers experience.

One of Swick’s “joys” is appreciating home. Whenever you travel, you’re learning about home. He says the multi-cultural make-up of the US is something he has come to appreciate.

Maybe that makes up a little for what this home-body has missed.

BTW – Swick’s seven joys of travel are: anticipation, movement, break from routine, novelty, discovery, emotional connection, and appreciation of home.