Monthly Archives: August 2021

Its been one year since an immigrant watched every vehicle in his car dealership go up in flames, one year since Rodes Camera Shop became a pile of ashes and the country woke up to learn the name Kyle Rittenhouse after the teen killed two people. A year since businesses frantically tacked Black Lives Matter signs onto their storefronts and families spraypainted Please, kids above onto boarded-up windows hoping the mob would pass over them ominous symbols that still remain after a full trip around the sun.

One year ago, a town in southeast Wisconsin reaped the consequences of the left-ignited race war when onlookers imposed racist motives onto a police officer who had acted within his professional duty to protect the lives of a mother and her children and subsequently set a city ablaze. That one incident and the nights of violence that ensued would not only change the people of Kenosha; it would also change the politics.

It isnt that riot violence is partisan, although the 2020 summer of rage was undoubtedly fueled by the reckless race-baiting of the left-wing ruling class and carried out by Marxist so-called racial justice revolutionaries. Rather, the infamous riots that ravaged Kenosha last summer are politically significant because they unearthed the incontrovertible difference between our red and blue political leaders on upholding the law.

I think those individuals in Kenosha recognize that President Trump supported enforcing the law and supported public safety, Rep. Bryan Steil, the congressman representing Wisconsins 1st Congressional District, which is home to Kenosha, told The Federalist. And the Democrats were beholden to the far left, and in particular, those calling to defund the police and refusing to support the men and women of law enforcement.

Steil was referring specifically to Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers. Although the states top Democrat and his media sycophants have tried for the past 365 days to rewrite the events of last August, history condemns them.

With each executive decision, the governor prioritized the most radical wing of his party over law and order. In fact, Evers didnt merely respond incorrectly to the violence; he helped ignite it, blasting out anti-police statements before any facts of the Jacob Blake shooting had come to light. For example, in the hours after Blake was shot on Sunday, Evers tweeted:

We must see the trauma, fear, and exhaustion of being black in our state and our country, Evers said, stoking the flame in a video address he posted the following day. He also tweeted about his administrations legislative efforts to increase accountability and transparency in policing and endorsed statements decrying racial injustice and systemic oppression in Wisconsin communities. Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes jumped in the ring too.

The executive came out and decided that it was incumbent upon him to be judge and jury and executioner and issued a statement that was so inflammatory, that cops across Wisconsin came out and said, We prefer you not say things like that at all, former Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch told The Federalist.

Kleefisch was talking about a letter the presidents of four different law enforcement organizations in the state sent to Evers on Aug. 27, four days after the Blake shooting, asking the governor to discontinue and refrain from making statements about the Blake shooting until the facts of the case were investigated because they said he was putting police in danger. They said his comments were premature, judgmental, inflammatory and only add[ing] to the anger and divisiveness of an already dangerous situation.

Everss rhetoric just shows a governor who is completely out of touch with Regular Wisconsinites, Kleefisch said, noting a nationwide poll from Marquette University showing 80 percent favorability toward police. Hes particularly out of touch with the needs of people in crisis, like the folks in Kenosha who desperately needed help.

But it wasnt just the Democrats race-baiting commentary that fueled the citys fiery nights. It was also Everss lack of leadership and refusal to deploy adequate National Guardsmen or federal back-up, despite pleas from local leaders all the way up to the president of the United States.

Kenosha county board members formally requested 1,500 National Guard members on Aug. 26, a request Evers did not accommodate. In fact, more than 24 hours after the Blake shooting, during the second night of rioting, Evers sent only 125 guardsmen, saying it was the best he could do. Thats fewer than he deployed for crowd control last month for the NBA finals in Milwaukee.

The National Guard wasnt his only option, however, as Steil explained. Beyond simply deploying guardsmen for crowd control, the governor could have requested federal assistance to fill a more traditional law enforcement role, such as U.S. marshals, FBI agents, or people from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to handle arson issues. Thats why, hearing the pleas of Kenoshans, the congressman called the White House switchboard and worked his way up until he got on the phone with Trump to request assistance.

Well, Bryan, your governor hasnt called me, Steil said, recalling Trumps response to his request. Let me get this straight, Bryan. You want me to call your governor? And thats exactly what the president did.

Despite the White House extending a hand, however, the Evers administration turned it down that is, until the fatal Rittenhouse shooting, which happened exactly one year ago last night. Thats what it took for Evers to accept help from the Republican president. In fact, the official response from the governors office was that he would not need federal assistance in response to protests, but would welcome additional federal support and resources for our states response to COVID-19.

Donald Trump was the man who showed leadership in the throes of riots and crisis, Kleefisch said. In fact, Tony Evers did not even show up in Kenosha until four days after the fact. Two men had to lose their lives and 50 businesses had to be destroyed in order for Tony Evers to bother showing up.

Evers eventually relented, accepting federal help and upping the National Guard count to 500 troops, after an estimated $50 million dollars in property damage affecting 100 businesses (with 40 of them now out-of-business for good), three people shot, and two of them dead. Steil said that if Evers had accepted help sooner, the Rittenhouse shooting on Tuesday night of that fiery week for sure wouldnt have happened.

Nobody should have been on the streets on Tuesday night, nobody, Steil said. They should have had sufficient resources and enforced a curfew and all of this. Everything that occurred on Tuesday night could have been avoided.

To this day, Evers defenders say he fulfilled all requests for assistance we received via official channels, but his detractors say, Who cares?All it would have taken was the governor turning on the news or answering a call from a concerned citizen to know that his public relations prattle about official channels wouldnt be enough to protect his constituents in Kenosha and their livelihoods.

Talk to them, figure out what they need, Steil said. Youre the governor, you get to decide whether or not something is needed or not in the end. And clearly, the evidence is overwhelming that for three nights in a row, he failed to provide sufficient resources.

Evers version of official channels is mind-boggling, Kleefisch added. This is the same man who permitted a secret recording of legislative leaders. I wonder if he thinks things like that are somehow official channels.

Evers office did not return The Federalists request for comment.

None of this bodes well for Wisconsins governor, who will be up for reelection next November. Despite the medias best efforts, evidence shows many of the states voters are fed up with crime and with leaders who arent willing to crack down on it. For instance, in the inner city of Kenosha, now-President Joe Biden fared worse than expected in the 2020 presidential election, losing the purple county by 3 percentage points.

Even Democrat voters are concerned about crime. A 2022 Democratic primary poll conducted last month in Kenoshas neighbor Milwaukee showed that lowering crime and increasing neighborhood safety are top issues for even blue voters.

Election results are about more than riots, however, and in the 2022 gubernatorial race, theyll be based on Wisconsins 72 counties, not just battered Kenosha. But polls show crime concerns are much bigger than isolated riots. According to the Marquette University poll, 69 percent of registered Wisconsin voters think crime is rising nationwide, with 43 percent saying it is higher in their communities.

If you take a look at what has happened in Wisconsin over the last year, youve seen a drive-by shooting in the Wisconsin Dells, waterpark capital of the world, right? Youve seen a shooting two blocks off of State Street, where we like to advertise the worlds largest outdoor farmers market right by the Wisconsin State Capitol. You saw a state senator beat until he was unconscious and left on the Capitol lawn while rioters destroyed statues and tried to firebomb the City County building, Kleefisch said. Even the NBA championship celebration was interrupted by shootings.

These are the news cycles that our everyday Wisconsinites are watching, Kleefisch continued. And to see this type of thing bleed into everyday conversations is a sad change from what we saw just a few short years ago, and I think it is a direct result of the abdication of leadership and the weakness of Gov. Tony Evers.

Everyday Wisconsinites are watching, and like the Kenoshans whose windows are still boarded, they wont soon forget.

Read the rest here:

Kenosha Is A Liability For Democrats Because They Let It Go Up In Flames - The Federalist

CLAIM

Theres no science behind masks on kids.

DETAILS

Inaccurate: There are many scientific studies suggesting that mask-wearing in schools can be an effective way of limiting transmission of the virus.Lacks context: While childrens risk of serious illness and death from COVID-19 is very low compared to adults, a certain proportion of children still experience serious illness and die from COVID-19, and cases of COVID-19 among children are increasing in the U.S.

KEY TAKE AWAY

Many studies show that the use of masks in schools can limit the transmission of the virus, especially when complemented by other preventative measures like ventilation. Using a single study that found a non-statistically significant decrease in COVID-19 incidence in schools with mask requirements compared to schools with optional masking to claim theres no science to back mask mandates overstates scientific confidence. Additionally, while it is true that the risk of serious illness and death is far higher in adults than children, children can still experience severe COVID-19 and die. The main benefit of masks in schools is to protect both children and the community at large by reducing the spread of COVID-19.

REVIEW Its back to school season in the U.S. and with rising COVID-19 case numbers, including among children too young to receive the COVID-19 vaccines, American schools have become battlegrounds over disagreements about preventative measures. Many of these disputes focus on whether masks should be mandatory or optional for children; in some cases, these disagreements have escalated to physical altercations, disorderly conduct and threats from parents who dont believe masks should be required.

Among American politicians, Florida governor Ron DeSantis is one of the more vocal critics of mask mandates. In an executive order signed on 30 July 2021, two of the reasons given by DeSantis to prohibit mask mandates in schools and ensuring parents freedom to choose masks in schools, are (a) that studies have shown that children are at a low risk of contracting a serious illness due to COVID-19 and (b) that the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Preventions (CDC) recent guidance on universal masking in schools lacks a well-grounded scientific justification.

An article in The Federalist from 24 August 2021 by Shawn Fleetwood recently addressed a CDC study on masking in schools, and crowed that the study vindicates Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis because it showed that there is no science behind masks on kids.

As well show below, it is inaccurate to claim there is no science behind the use of masks for children, especially considering the surge in COVID-19 cases currently occurring in the U.S.

Critics of mask mandates in schools often claim there is a lack of scientific evidence to support the CDCs recommendation. In his executive order, DeSantis said that the CDC guidance lacks a well-grounded scientific justification. PolitiFact fact-checked this claim, and found it to be false (see here). Speaking to PolitiFact, Lynn Goldman, the dean of the Milken Institute of Public Health at George Washington University, said that what the science actually shows is that for children ages two and above, masks are not only protective but needed.

The Federalist article cited a specific CDC study that looked at mask use and ventilation in elementary schools in Georgia (kindergarten through grade 5) between November and December 2020 to support this claim[1]. This study found that the incidence of COVID-19 was 37% lower in schools that require teachers and staff to wear masks and 39% lower in schools that improved ventilation.

Because a little over half of the schools also required students to wear masks, the study also investigated whether there was a difference in the incidence of COVID-19 between schools where masks were required and schools where masks were optional. The study found that the incidence of COVID-19 was 21% lower in schools with required masking, but this result wasnt statistically significant compared to schools where mask use was optional.

Statistical significance is a method for evaluating whether a result of an experiment was due to chance or if its a real result. In the case of required vs. optional masking in schools, if the 21% lower incidence of COVID-19 had reached statistical significance, one could be confident that the result was due to the mask requirement; since statistical significance was not reached, we cant be confident the result wasnt due to chance.

For The Federalist, the lack of statistical significance appeared to vindicate DeSantis, who has been a vocal opponent of the policy due to its lack of scientific evidence. However, the Georgia school study isnt the only study to look at the effect of masking requirements in schools. In a science brief on COVID-19 transmission in schools, the CDC stated that most studies that have shown success in limiting transmission in schools have required that staff only or staff and students wear masks as one of the schools prevention strategies. The CDC listed six studies in the science brief,[2-7]. A seventh study done in Florida primary and secondary schools that looked at factors associated with student case rates of COVID-19, found that schools without mask mandates had higher student case rates (p-value: <0.01)[8].

One study cited by the CDC involved 11 North Carolina schools, representing over 90,000 students and staff, and they found low transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools, despite the study occurring during a time (August to October 2020) when community transmission was high[2]. Students were required to wear masks, and other prevention strategies, including routine hand-washing and daily temperature checks among others, were adopted.

When asked about how to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 in schools, Kanecia Zimmerman, the first author of the North Carolina study and a professor of pediatrics at Duke University, told Duke Today that:

There are two effective ways to do that. 1: Vaccination. 2: Masking. In the setting of schools [] the science suggests masking can be extremely effective, particularly for those who cant get vaccinated while COVID-19 is still circulating.

Compared to adults, the risk of serious illness and death in children is very low. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Childrens Hospital Association, as of 19 August 2021, over 4.59 million children (14.6% of all cases) have tested positive for COVID-19 in the U.S. since the beginning of the pandemic. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as of 18 August 2021, 430 children (0 to 18; 0.07% of all COVID-19 deaths) have died of COVID-19 in the U.S.

This low risk is the basis for many arguments that measures adopted to keep adults safe from COVID-19, such as staying at home and wearing masks, provide few benefits for children and are therefore unnecessary, including DeSantis executive order.

However, as Debbie-Ann Shirley, a pediatric infectious diseases specialist at University of Virginia (UVA) Health in Charlottesville, told Science News, anything that kills more than 350 children a year is going to automatically rank in the top 10 causes. Later in the same Science News piece, Taison Bell, a critical care and infectious disease doctor at UVA Healths medical intensive care unit, provided a comparison: think about if 300 children had died over the past year from lightning strikes or from shark attacks [] We would be doing things a lot differently when it came to going to the beach or being outside when it was raining.

Moreover, the low risk of serious illness and COVID-19 deaths isnt equally distributed within the U.S. Even though pediatric COVID-19 cases tend to match the countrys demographics, children of color are more likely to get severely ill and die of COVID-19 compared to White children. Hispanic or Latino children account for over 36% and Black children account for 22% of COVID-19 deaths, despite representing only 18.5% and 13.4%, of the U.S. population, respectively.

Currently, pediatric COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations in the U.S. are rising sharply. An NBC News analysis of data released by the Department of Health and Human Services found that on 18 August 2021 an average of more than 1,200 children a day are in U.S. hospitals for COVID-19. To put that number in perspective, thats four times the number of hospitalized children in early July 2021.

Given the increase in COVID-19 cases in the U.S. and the Delta variant, which is more contagious, the CDC now recommends universal indoor masking by all students (age two and older), staff, teachers, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status. The AAP had previously made the same recommendation in July 2021. Both the CDC and the AAP stressed the importance of layering prevention strategies, also known as the Swiss Cheese Pandemic Defense. This involves a combination of different protective measures, such as masks and physical distancing, to make in-person learning safe.

Figure 1. Virologist Ian Mackay created this graphic illustration showing how combining multiple, imperfect measures provides the greatest protection against the spread of COVID-19

Though not addressed in The Federalist article, DeSantis executive order also claimed that making children may lead to negative health and societal ramifications, and that forcing children to wear masks could inhibit breathing, lead to the collection of dangerous impurities including bacteria, parasites, fungi, and other contaminants, and adversely affect communications in the classroom and student performance.

DeSantis is not the only one to claim that masks are detrimental to the health of children. In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal published on 8 August 2021, surgical oncologist Marty Makary and pediatrician H. Cody Meissner listed a few other concerns including fogged glasses, severe acne caused by masks, and increased levels of carbon dioxide in the blood.

PolitiFact recently did a thorough breakdown of the claims about the health detriments of masks for children made by DeSantis and members of his office, concluding that masks are largely safe for children.

Among the most common claims is that masks are dangerous because they lead to oxygen deficiency and increased levels of carbon dioxide in the blood; this was previously debunked by many fact-checking organizations, including Health Feedback (see here and here). In summary, both carbon dioxide and oxygen molecules are far smaller than the filter size of face masks, allowing them to pass easily through masks, even N95s. However, this isnt the case for the virus SARS-CoV-2, which travels via droplets that get caught by the masks fabric. Health Feedback previously addressed how masks form a barrier for respiratory droplets (see here).

Another claim about face masks is that pathogens like bacteria and fungi can accumulate on them. Claims that masks wearing cause bacterial infections were also fact-checked multiple times; in a Reuters fact-check, a team from the Meedan Digital Health Lab made up of global health scientists and infection preventionists said that there was no evidence to suggest face masks can increase the chance of developing pneumonia, or any other bacterial, fungal or viral infection in the lungs.

Johns Hopkins University pediatric infectious diseases specialist Matthew Thomas debunked many claims about face masks in a 22 July 2020 post from Johns Hopkins All Childrens Hospitals Newsroom. On the topic of mold buildup on cloth masks, Thomas said that clean, dry masks will not develop mold or make you sick and that proper daily laundering of face masks removes any viruses, bacteria or respiratory secretions that may build up on the mask.

Disposing or properly washing ones mask after use can also help prevent maskne (a portmanteau of the words mask and acne). As for how to keep glasses from fogging, there are a number of solutions, but the best one is to use a well-fitting mask.

As for whether face masks can impact communication in schools and student performance, experts told PolitiFact that this is more plausible. In an opinion piece for Scientific American, David Lewkowicz, a scientist at Yale University who studies perceptual and cognitive development in infants and young children, wrote that masks may impact speech and language development because babies lip-read and use it as a visual speech cue. However, Lewkowicz also wrote that caregivers can compensate for this by following CDC guidelines when outside, but engaging in a lot of unmasked communication with babies when at home.

In September 2020, when the New York Times asked scientists who study how children use cues that masks might hinder, whether masks might impact development, all mentioned the ability of children to adapt to masks and find ways to communicate. Moreover, as Eva Chen, a developmental psychologist at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, told the New York Times, there is no evidence that children from cultures with much more extensive face covering are any worse at recognizing faces or emotions.

In summary, while masks may impact communication, scientific evidence suggests that masks are safe for children. As the AAP, which recommends universal school masking, put it:

Face masks can be safely worn by all children 2 years of age and older, including the vast majority of children with underlying health conditions, with rare exception. Children 2 years of age and older have demonstrated their ability to wear a face mask.

Despite claims that masking children doesnt work and masks arent necessary for children, the science suggests the opposite. Evidence shows that masks are largely safe for children two years of age and older and that universal masking can limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools.

Read the rest here:

Multiple scientific studies suggest that masking can help limit transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools, contrary to claim in Federalist article -...

Circling back to the bloody crime scene on the ninth floor of a posh Manhattan apartment building, the no-nonsense police detective encounters a motley crew of amateur sleuths: a 20-something woman flanked by two men in their 70s, all residents of the Upper West Side property. They engage the detective about forensics until she stops them.

Look, this is suicide, she says with annoyance. Which podcast are you all hooked on? I swear, if I meet one more true-crime nut

Halfway through the premiere episode of Only Murders in the Building, a 10-part mystery series premiering August 31 on Hulu, this moment encapsulates its tone: tense drama with tongue-in-cheek self-awareness. Comedy legend Steve Martin and writer/producer John Hoffman (Grace and Frankie on Netflix) ironed out a serialized dramedy with a mix of magnetic personalities and wild twists that keep adding layers of complexity.

Fans of Steve Martin and Martin Shorts comedy schtick from 1986s Three Amigos, to two Father of the Bride movies, to multiple live tours in recent years will feel right at home, as the set-up gives them maximum opportunity to play off each other. Its also the longtime friends first TV show as co-stars, reflecting a years-long trend of big stars migrating to the small screen.

In these funhouse mirror versions of real life, Martin portrays a washed-up actor and Short a down-on-his-luck Broadway director. When a shocking death shatters their sense of safety and the building is cleared, the two meet in a cafe along with a third resident played by Selena Gomez. It turns out theyre all obsessed with the same true-crime podcast a delicious parody titled All is Not OK in Oklahoma to the point of drawing detailed maps of the crime scene and surrounding area.

Quickly deciding to launch their own crack investigation into the strange death and produce a podcast out of it, the three commence what might appear to be only a comedy of errors. Yet this suspenseful whodunit keeps viewers hooked by smartly balancing the macabre with droll amusement.

Some light spoilers follow.

Thrown into the mix of the comedy duos natural rapport, one might imagine Gomez would be a third wheel. But the singer-actress holds her own, bringing to life an intriguing character whose presence allows the shows free-flowing humor to address generational and gender differences.

A pop star who hasnt acted in a TV series for roughly a decade, Gomez shared in a recent interview how much she learned from her co-stars. They have a sense of humor thats just classic I feel like it doesnt exist anymore, she said.

Each of the trio gets moments to shine as the story grows in complexity. An unattached interior designer living in her aunts apartment, Gomez initially conceals her personal connection to the victim and raises suspicions. After the triad of investigators begins to work as a team, Martin strikes up a romance with another resident, which complicates things.

Meanwhile, Short relives some of his former hits and mishaps on Broadway in an elaborate flashback sequence. Playing to his strengths, he leans into laughs in scenes opposite comic Nathan Lane (The Birdcage), who plays a deli owner named Teddy Dimas.

When Short hawks a sponsorship for the podcast, Dimas recounts all the opportunities hed missed thanks to the plucky director. Les Mis Its such a downer, Teddy, and all over a loaf of bread.Well, it was, Short deadpans. And Hamilton! He grimaces: I said they picked the one founding father with no pizzazz. That was wrong, I guess.

Similar to later seasons of The Office, the series integrates a constellation of stars into its narrative, each gelling as part of the ensemble rather than seeming out of place. Tina Fey shows up as a character at first played for laughs who also ups the stakes.Superstar Sting seems a likely suspect at multiple points. A pity they couldnt work Tim Curry in for a cameo, considering Clue clearly provided some inspiration. Perhaps season two.

The series earns its TV-MA rating for a few moderately gory scenes and mostly for language, as characters constantly drop f-bombs. (Note this review reflects 8 episodes provided to screen.) Considering Martin and Shorts history of tamer comic material, the coarseness seems unnecessary and reinforces Disney-owned Hulus reputation as not exactly family-friendly.

Did you guys hear about that mysterious death in the park last night? asks Short to his two companions in the pilot. We could multitask a little bit, silo out a second investigation and do a second podcast. Martin stops him: No, we need to focus only murders in the building.

More than an offhand conversation that names the show, the exchange also reflects a truth about the series. Amid all the eccentric people and absurd situations, viewers find its influenced as much by Alfred Hitchcocks Rear Window as by Clue. The trio continually narrows in on the horrific crime: who had the motive, means, and opportunity? Answers lead them to a cover-up involving multiple suspects over several years.

Red herrings abound, with the final episodes not only action-packed but also emotionally resonant. Even funnyman Short waxes philosophical when hinting at how it all wraps up. I understand someone feeling theyre the victim, he said in an interview. Some people learn from their mistakes, and some people are destined to repeat them because they wont accept any fault within themselves.

Show co-creator Martin has expressed hopes that Only Murders in the Building will resonate so theyll get the greenlight for future seasons. Whether it becomes the next binge-watch obsession or a hidden gem like Hulus Hardy Boys update, the story doesnt give away its secrets easily keeping viewers guessing possible outcomes to the end.

Rated TV-MA for coarse language, some violence and mature situations, Only Murders in the Building premieres its first three episodes August 31 on Hulu.

Josh Shepherd covers culture, faith, and public policy for several media outlets including The Stream. His articles have appeared in Christianity Today, Religion & Politics, Faithfully Magazine, Religion News Service, and Providence Magazine. A graduate of the University of Colorado, he previously worked on staff at The Heritage Foundation and Focus on the Family. Josh and his wife live in the Washington, D.C. area with their two children.

See the article here:

Hulu's 'Only Murders In The Building' Mixes Laughs With Thrills - The Federalist