Advertisement

Where the money is

December 3, 2021

Wondering why leftism and wokeness are poisoning the sciences? Partly because of peer pressure and fear of the Twitter mob, but also because that’s where the money is.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/government-science-grants-increasingly-promote-woke-ideas-study-finds

A Ph.D. candidate in computer science at Northwestern University was studying how to make a grant proposal when he noticed the same woke buzzwords popping up in all the proposals he read. So he did a study and found that nearly a third of the abstracts for grants from the National Science Foundation, the government’s primary science grant distributor, contained highly politicized terms. He found that 30.4% of them included at least one of these terms: “equity,” “diversity,” “inclusion,” “gender,” “marginalize,” “underrepresented” or “disparity.”

This was especially common in education and human resources grants (53.8%), but even 22.6% of math and physical science grants contained them, up from 0.9% in 1990. Wokeism is doing the same thing to science grants that crabgrass does to lawns: rapidly expanding and choking out the good stuff.

The researcher said this is evidence that the NSF is getting increasingly politicized, and the growing sameness of the grants reflects a political litmus test that discourages conservative researchers from applying or being honest on applications. Ironically, this rewarding of woke leftism is resulting in less diversity, as only grants from one viewpoint get funded. In other words, there's a big disparity in grant awards diversity and inclusiveness because conservatives are being marginalized and underrepresented.

But I guess that’s okay, since being woke means you define “diversity” as giving a fair chance to people of every race, gender and skin color, as long as they agree with you 100%.

"Infrastructure"

December 1, 2021

I’ve repeatedly warned readers not to fall for the idea that the $1.2 trillion “infrastructure” bill was actually going to buy $1.2 trillion worth of roads, bridges and airport improvements (hence our habitual use of quotation marks around “infrastructure.”) That’s partly because only a fraction of the money goes to things that any sane person would consider to be actual infrastructure (Democrats only win arguments by redefining words, in this case turning “government giveaway programs” into “human infrastructure.”) But it’s also because Democrats, in thrall to environmentalist donors, have created so many laws that make it darn near impossible to build a new road, highway, dam or any other major construction project.

We went through the same thing under Obama. Remember the promise that spending nearly a trillion tax dollars would create thousands of “shovel-ready jobs?” Then we discovered that it took a 10-year environmental impact study just to get permits to buy a shovel. Even Obama himself admitted that he found out there were no “shovel-ready jobs.”

Well, one of the hallmarks of modern liberals is that they never learn from prior mistakes. So now we have a freshly-signed $1.2 trillion “infrastructure” bill, and the New York Times, which pushed hard for passage, has suddenly realized that it probably won’t actually build or fix very much infrastructure.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/business/joseph-vazquez/2021/11/29/shocker-nyt-throws-cold-water-bidens-massive

The Times actually printed an analysis by independent journalist Ralph Vartabadian in which he found that the bill “carries enormous risks that the projects will face the same kind of cost, schedule and technical problems that have hobbled ambitious efforts from New York to Seattle, delaying benefits to the public and driving up the price tag that taxpayers ultimately will bear.”

It would have been nice if the Times had looked that closely at the bill before it was passed with their support and we taxpayers got stuck with the tab. But even if it never results in a new road or bridge, it will accomplish its actual goals of (A.) giving Biden a legislative “win,” (B.) expanding government size and control, and (C.) showering money on Democrat donors and voting blocs.

In short, the Times will never learn because keeping their readers willfully ignorant until it’s too late advances the left’s political agenda. But the rest of us can learn from this never to pay attention to the New York Times.

We’ve received many letters in response to yesterday's story on the Salvation Army. (A follow-up story ran today.) Here are few that called out for responses.

From Larry (excerpt):

Love your show and your website, have for a long time. Just want to express a concern about people falling in the trap of using racist terms that are promoted by the left. You used one of the most racist terms in your article when you said " people of color." ...White is a color, it's just not one the racist democrats like.

It's just one of many things that non-Democrats fall prey to because they don't stop to think about a word before they just accept it and start using it.

As I said, we've always thought you were, and still are, one of the smartest people in the public eye that speaks for Conservatives and Christians. Best wishes.

From the Gov:

Thanks for writing, Larry, and for your kind words. We’re really sensitive to the language and how leftists try to shape it, and are glad to see you are, too. Keep in mind that commentaries include quotations, and these are run in quotation marks exactly as they were originally stated. The commentary you refer to included lengthy excerpts from a CRT-based publication, and that’s the term they used. I wouldn’t soften or censor what someone else said unless it was vulgar or otherwise over-the-line offensive.

We all have different ideas on how to use language respectfully to refer to race, and it continues to evolve. Personally, I’m baffled as to why leftists like the abbreviation “POC” for “people of color,” because it also stands for something offensive. But, again, I and my staff didn't use either of these; we were just quoting someone else.

From Jane (excerpt):

I am of heavy Irish descent. In fact I am Irish Catholic, which is amongst the Irish the most discriminated against, including by our own government (my grandfather was only allowed to work for the government if he professed himself to be an orange man)...I guess the existence of Irish slaves in the colonies (who were considered to be less valuable than the black slaves) is an inconvenient truth to yet another position that the Democrats take in order to control people. So, are there any non-woke charities out there that we can donate gently used items to?

From the Gov:

Thank you, Jane, for a history lesson that most people never receive. This is why it does no good for some groups to do a personal accounting of the accumulated grievances that were done to their ancestors. An ideology based on past victimhood poisons the present. As for non-woke charities, I’m sure there are still quite a few, and it’s always good to start close to home.

From Dale:

I am really disappointed that Huckabee would write something that can be damaging to the Salvation Army. They have already recanted and removed those Guides which could be wrongly construed. I will be canceling my daily Huckabee Newsletter because of this!!

From the Gov:

Dale, I hope you’ll stay. Actually, if you see the update today, the SA is “reviewing” those guides but has not recanted. Perhaps they will, and I’ll update the story if they do. But so far, they’ve blamed readers for believing they’ve promoted damaging ideas they actually HAVE promoted. This poison has turned some once-laudable organizations into something very different in 2021.

I did not specifically call for a boycott of the SA, and will not. But it would be a failure on my part not to report on what’s happening to major charities in the U.S. That’s the only way they’re going to be brought back to sanity.

Finally, this from Duncan:

News flash, woke people!!! EVERYONE has 'unconscious bias' about someone or something. If you claim to be completely conscious you better notify the Dalai Llama. He might have some advice for you to help you cope with total enlightenment.

It does behoove all of us to be aware of the possibility that we may be unaware of our faults. On the other hand, let's not let fear(s) paralyze us to living and growing. The most simple and central tenant of Christianity, ‘Treat thy neighbor as you would be treated,' pretty much says it all.

Thanks Governor for your ongoing clear common-sense publications. Keep it going!

From the Gov:

Thanks, Duncan. You have indeed said it all, so you get the last word.


Why are liberal media outlets outrageously claiming that “a car” drove into the Waukesha Christmas parade, killing six people and injuring 62 more, when we all know that it was (“allegedly”) a leftist career criminal who was out on $1,000 bail after being charged with even more heinous crimes, including running over his girlfriend with that exact same “car”? Or is the car a recidivist, too?

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/488120/

Miranda Divine at the New York Post has a must-read article on why these media outlets are trying to downplay and memory-hole this atrocity, even as they push for life sentences for Trump supporters. It’s because, as she says, the stark truth of this massacre threatens the very core of their insanely misguided “criminal justice reforms” that are allowing career criminals to be turned back out into the streets to prey on the public again and again and again.

https://nypost.com/2021/11/24/liberal-media-ignores-waukesha-christmas-parade-horror-devine

Milwaukee County D.A. John Chisholm fatuously claims to be investigating how the suspect got such a low bail amount, when that’s been his crusade for years. All that matters is racial equity of outcomes, not punishment commensurate with the crimes. And Chisholm can’t even claim that he was too stupid to see this coming. In an astounding 2007 interview with the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, he said this:

“Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into [a] treatment program, who’s going to go out and kill somebody? You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen.”

But he claimed that the guaranteed death of an innocent or two was worth it in the name of justice reform. He just didn’t foresee that one of them would go on a killing spree. It’s a lot easier to turn a blind eye and sweep it under the rug when the needless deaths are spaced out, one at a time. But now, the number of crime victims has reached critical mass. Let’s hope the patience of the public for tolerating their enablers in government has also reached critical mass.