In This Episode: Whose “fault” is it that the United States is divided like never before? Wait: it’s too easy to point at Donald Trump, or even to the “right” or the “left,” because there is fault all around. By applying the Uncommon Sense of a foreign observer, and without being partisan, let’s explore what both sides can learn from this election so we can move forward.
For many, many years now, some readers have complained I must be a “heartless conservative” …while some other readers have complained I must be a “bleeding heart liberal.” And here we are again, with one side whining that I hurt their widdle biddy feewings because I didn’t give their side a pass: I let some of their party officials speak for themselves by (gasp!) quoting them.
I Hadn’t Even Geared Up to write (or edit the stories from the guys) when I got an email from Premium reader Mike in New Hampshire: “OK, this is just a perfect example of results that can happen when you just vote the party line without thinking,” he said, and included a link to an article on Fox News. As soon as I saw it I understood his “perfect” comment, and went right to work on the story, finding a second source and more details. As soon as I was done, I knew it was not only the lead story for this week’s newsletter, but it would also be the sharable “Story of the Week” — and here it is:
Two recent This is True stories demonstrate the “Streisand effect,” and this page brings those two stories together (plus a third from 5 years ago), and then leads to more commentary on the “effect.”
Let’s start with the first of the two recent stories, from True’s 8 December 2019 issue:
A story in this week’s issue needs a lot more room for explanation, not to mention a full-sized copy of the graph involved. First, let’s start with the story, from True’s 18 May 2020 issue:
In This Episode: Everyone says they want to “go back” to “normal” rather than have the constant uncertainty of the pandemic. But what “normal” do we want to “go back” to? It’s time to think about a new normal — what do we want to go to as this craziness ramps down?
In This Episode: An American company that makes masks and other PPE chose NOT to ramp up production to help with the COVID pandemic. That sounds like a decision to be criticized, but it’s actually an example of Uncommon Sense. This episode explores why.
In This Episode: Colorado, having seen constant partisan manipulations of redistricting in the past — Gerrymandering — actually did something about it, and did something radical in the process: they exercised Uncommon Sense.
A story in this week’s newsletter is already being discussed intently online, so let’s jump in. Let’s start with True’s version of the story, from the 24 November 2019 issue:
In This Episode: I love watching others and recognizing signs of Uncommon Sense. I’m going to tell you about another friend of mine (who has no idea I’m going to talk about this), since it’s a great example of taking something you see with a grain of salt, and calling B.S. when it’s necessary. And then, I take on the universe.
I Think the Concept of a recalled mayor immediately winning election to the same seat he had just lost was awfully interesting, and Alexander’s tag about it pretty thought-provoking. He decided to expound on it a bit. But first, let’s start with the story, from True’s 17 March 2019 issue:
There has been a significant update in a story from this week’s issue (12 August 2018). Let’s start with my original story:
I Expect to Be Called Names for my tag on the last story this week. Let’s start with the story, in the 29 January 2017 issue:
I Really Hate to Keep sending traffic to Facebook, since they’re eating the Internet already, but man have I been having fun there lately. Baiting the political partisans is like shooting fish in a barrel: easy and hella fun.
Another politician, another hypocrite — this time, the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Missouri. Let’s start with the story, from the 17 May 2015 issue:
I Have a Few Comments on Mike Straw’s story this week. Let’s start with the story, from the 18 January 2015 issue:
I have quite a bit to say about the lead story this week. Let’s start with the story, from the 23 November 2014 issue:
I got a protest unsubscribe this weekend from “EJ” in California, who complained:
Simply put, I fully believe in the idea that “all men* are created equal” and are entitled to equal protection under the law.
*(“men” being a generic word for humans, as in “mankind” — I believe the statement equally applies to women.)
I’ve made no secret that I’m pretty much 100 percent egalitarian. I’ve defended the religious, the non-religous, the “the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians,” and many others in True’s stories. I’m interested in whether people walk their talk, not whether they’re religious, gay, atheist, pagan, Muslim, employed, educated — whatever.