About a month ago in Spanish News Today:
(the site doesn't allow for any of my copy-n-paste shenanigans)
Sep 8, 2021
About That Ivermectin Stuff
Rebecca Watson is the founder of the Skepchick Network, a collection of sites focused on science and critical thinking. She has written for outlets such as Slate, Popular Science, and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. She's also the host of Quiz-o-tron, a rowdy, live quiz show that pits scientists against comedians.
COVID-19 Update
Because everything's up for grabs now. Or at least there are malevolent actors who need us to believe nothing is as it seems. The Daddy State's war on reality continues apace.
Krugman reminds us that political fuckery is the GOP's stock in trade - and they just don't give a fuck about the human cost.
So what we have now is a Republican party platform consisting of Cruelty, Immiseration, and Death.
In the heady days of spring, when the United States was vaccinating 3 million people a day, President Biden predicted a “summer of joy.” But then the vaccination campaign stalled, and the Delta variant fueled a new wave of infections, hospitalizations and deaths.
This didn’t have to happen. True, Delta’s contagiousness has led to rising caseloads almost everywhere. But America has pulled away from other advanced countries in hospitalizations and deaths:
There’s no mystery about why this has happened: It’s political. True, there are many Americans refusing to take the vaccines for nonpolitical reasons. There’s general distrust of authority figures, there’s distorted word of mouth — a friend of a friend heard about someone who had a bad reaction. (Even in my sheltered social set, I know people like that.) But the systematic refusal to get vaccinated, refusal to wear masks, etc., is very clearly tied to the unique way that common-sense public health measures have been caught up in the culture war.
According to a recent NBC poll, 91 percent of Biden voters have been vaccinated but only 50 percent of Trump voters. Or look at death tolls: Blue states look more like Canada or Germany than like Florida or Texas:
And aside from, you know, killing people, the politically driven Covid resurgence is taking an economic toll. The August jobs report wasn’t terrible — the recovery hasn’t stalled — but it was disappointing. And while there was, as always, some dispute about exactly what the numbers are telling us, with some labor economists pushing back against calling it purely a Delta story, the best bet is that the resurgent virus was the biggest factor in the disappointment, as people cut back on going out to eat, traveling and so on.
By the way, this economic hit took place despite the absence of anything like the lockdowns we experienced earlier in the pandemic. There have been very few new restrictions on economic activity imposed by state and local governments; some places have reimposed indoor mask requirements, but shopping and even flying while masked is entirely doable. No, what’s happening is individual caution reasserting itself.
And the economic hit isn’t looking nearly as bad as what we experienced in earlier waves of the pandemic. That’s the good news. The bad news is that in those previous waves, America did a surprisingly good job of stepping up to help those suffering from the economic fallout. This time we aren’t.
Given America’s historical track record of failing to help those in need, our initial response to the pandemic was almost miraculously good: generous unemployment benefits, checks sent to most households, expansions of other benefits. Why was this politically possible? Partly, I think, because at first even many conservatives saw pandemic unemployment as an act of God, not a personal failing on the part of the unemployed. Partly, also, progressives had ideas about what to do, while the Trump administration and its allies were clueless. So there was an element of the “Yes, Prime Minister” effect: We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do it.
In any case, the result was remarkable: Despite huge job losses, poverty actually fell.
But the most important of the pandemic relief programs, enhanced unemployment benefits, has now expired, with no prospect of renewal, given brutal political divides and the return of Republicans to their traditional view that helping the unemployed makes them lazy. If we’d had the summer of joy we were promised, this wouldn’t be so bad. But the stalled vaccination campaign — again, largely although not entirely a political phenomenon — has fed a viral resurgence that’s holding back the economy, which means that millions of workers are still stranded. And this time they aren’t getting the relief they need.
Now, there was a hiatus in enhanced unemployment benefits last fall, and for the most part, families made it through: Many had accumulated savings in 2020, and this tided them over until benefits were restored that December. And maybe, just maybe, this won’t work out too badly. There are hints in the data that the Delta wave is subsiding, and vigorous job growth may resume in time to rescue the unemployed.
But maybe not. Politics has already given us a completely unnecessary tragedy: thousands of preventable deaths despite the ready availability of lifesaving vaccines. And we may be about to suffer a gratuitous economic tragedy on top of that.
Paul Krugman, NYT: (pay wall)
In the heady days of spring, when the United States was vaccinating 3 million people a day, President Biden predicted a “summer of joy.” But then the vaccination campaign stalled, and the Delta variant fueled a new wave of infections, hospitalizations and deaths.
This didn’t have to happen. True, Delta’s contagiousness has led to rising caseloads almost everywhere. But America has pulled away from other advanced countries in hospitalizations and deaths:
According to a recent NBC poll, 91 percent of Biden voters have been vaccinated but only 50 percent of Trump voters. Or look at death tolls: Blue states look more like Canada or Germany than like Florida or Texas:
By the way, this economic hit took place despite the absence of anything like the lockdowns we experienced earlier in the pandemic. There have been very few new restrictions on economic activity imposed by state and local governments; some places have reimposed indoor mask requirements, but shopping and even flying while masked is entirely doable. No, what’s happening is individual caution reasserting itself.
And the economic hit isn’t looking nearly as bad as what we experienced in earlier waves of the pandemic. That’s the good news. The bad news is that in those previous waves, America did a surprisingly good job of stepping up to help those suffering from the economic fallout. This time we aren’t.
Given America’s historical track record of failing to help those in need, our initial response to the pandemic was almost miraculously good: generous unemployment benefits, checks sent to most households, expansions of other benefits. Why was this politically possible? Partly, I think, because at first even many conservatives saw pandemic unemployment as an act of God, not a personal failing on the part of the unemployed. Partly, also, progressives had ideas about what to do, while the Trump administration and its allies were clueless. So there was an element of the “Yes, Prime Minister” effect: We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do it.
In any case, the result was remarkable: Despite huge job losses, poverty actually fell.
But the most important of the pandemic relief programs, enhanced unemployment benefits, has now expired, with no prospect of renewal, given brutal political divides and the return of Republicans to their traditional view that helping the unemployed makes them lazy. If we’d had the summer of joy we were promised, this wouldn’t be so bad. But the stalled vaccination campaign — again, largely although not entirely a political phenomenon — has fed a viral resurgence that’s holding back the economy, which means that millions of workers are still stranded. And this time they aren’t getting the relief they need.
Now, there was a hiatus in enhanced unemployment benefits last fall, and for the most part, families made it through: Many had accumulated savings in 2020, and this tided them over until benefits were restored that December. And maybe, just maybe, this won’t work out too badly. There are hints in the data that the Delta wave is subsiding, and vigorous job growth may resume in time to rescue the unemployed.
But maybe not. Politics has already given us a completely unnecessary tragedy: thousands of preventable deaths despite the ready availability of lifesaving vaccines. And we may be about to suffer a gratuitous economic tragedy on top of that.
Sep 7, 2021
The Erroneous Predictions Multilith
Behaving stupidly isn't a new thing, of course, and it's not a particularly American thing either - recent events notwithstanding.
WaPo: (pay wall)
Few things in life are as satisfying as serving up a heaping helping of “I told you so.”
Something like that must have been on the mind of the U.S. politician or bureaucrat who in the mid-1960s commissioned a wonderfully readable 48-page government report known internally as “The Erroneous Predictions Multilith.”
The document was produced by the Legislative Reference Service — what we today call the Congressional Research Service — and it is a compilation of some of history’s most spectacularly wrong forecasts. (Why “multilith”? That refers to the printing process used to produce such publications.)
The full title of the report is “Erroneous Predictions and Negative Comments Concerning Exploration, Territorial Expansion, Scientific and Technological Development; Selected Statements.”
I learned of the report from Dennis Chesters and Cynthia Lockley of Adelphi, Md. Dennis is a retired NASA scientist. Cynthia is a senior fellow of the Society for Technical Communication. They are curious who commissioned the report — and why — and wondered if I could find out.
We’ll get to that, but first, here’s a taste of “The Erroneous Predictions Multilith.” It starts in 1486 with the royal committee that advised the king and queen of Spain not to fund a numskull named Christopher Columbus. Sailing west to Asia, the committee insisted, would take an impossibly long three years. And, besides, there was nothing between Europe and that destination but a vast, featureless ocean.
Speaking of vast and featureless, nearly 400 years later, New York Rep. Orange Ferriss couldn’t believe the United States paid Russia $7 million for the Alaska Territories. “Of what possible commercial importance can this territory be to us?” he fumed in Congress.
In 1892, Alabama Rep. Hilary A. Herbert wanted to “put in the knife” into funding for the U.S. Geological Survey. Herbert said the agency wasn’t necessary to “carry on the government” and it didn’t contribute to “the protection of life or liberty or property.”
Rep. Henry C. Snodgrass of Tennessee felt the same way about establishing the National Zoo. “I do not believe the American people, hundreds and thousands of whom are today without homes, ought to be taxed to afford shelter and erect homes for snakes, raccoons, opossums, bears and all the creeping and slimy things of the earth,” he said in 1892.
Three decades earlier, Sen. Simon Cameron of Pennsylvania wondered why Congress was being asked to fund the Smithsonian Institution. “I am tired of all this thing called science here,” Cameron said.
Wrong calls on technology make especially delicious reading now.
Writing about airplanes in the March 1904 issue of Popular Science Monthly, Octave Chanute proclaimed: “The machines will eventually be fast, they will be used in sport, but they are not to be thought of as commercial carriers.”
Astronomer William H. Pickering didn’t see much of a future for airplanes, either. Replace Atlantic steamships with passenger airplanes? Pshaw!
Said Pickering: “It seems safe to say that such ideas must be wholly visionary, and even if a machine could get across with one or two passengers the expense would be prohibitive to any but the capitalist who could own his own yacht.”
Capitalists with their own yachts made me think of today’s space-obsessed billionaires. And space, I think, is what prompted the creation of the report. It was compiled by a Legislative Reference Service researcher named Nancy T. Gamarra, who wrote other reports of a technical nature.
She prepared it at the behest of the Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences. The first draft came out in 1967. A revised draft was issued in 1969. My guess is that someone on the committee was getting grief from constituents about the cost of the U.S. space program. “The Erroneous Predictions Multilith” was a way to silence critics: You don’t want to go into space? What if Columbus hadn’t sailed the ocean blue?
This is only a guess because the current policy of the Congressional Research Service is to treat all research requests as confidential. I can see why. I bet a bunch of senators and representatives are even now badgering CRS with “How do I delete — I mean really delete — my browser history and all of my text messages?”
It would be just awful if the names of those congresspeople were made public.
Anyway, back to the report. In 1839, the French surgeon Alfred Velpeau wrote that he saw no future for anesthesia, insisting that “ ‘Knife’ and ‘pain’ are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient.”
There’s even a section on early opposition to vaccination. Edward Jenner’s attempts to use relatively harmless cowpox to prevent deadly smallpox prompted one 18th-century doctor to complain: “Smallpox is a visitation from God, but the cowpox is produced by presumptuous man; the former was what Heaven ordained, the latter is, perhaps, a daring violation of our holy religion.”
The more things change, eh?
Isaac Newton said that he was able to make his discoveries only by standing upon the shoulders of giants. All too often, we have to stand under the heels of idiots.
COVID-19 Update
And they aren't legislators either, but that's a different rant for a different day - which is all too often less that a day away.
Anyway - WaPo:
Last month, an Ohio judge ordered a hospital to treat covid patient Jeffrey Smith with ivermectin after his wife sued, alleging that the facility refused to give her husband the drug, despite him having a doctor’s prescription.
Since mid-July, Smith has been in West Chester Hospital’s intensive care unit, battling a severe case of the coronavirus, according to court records. Ivermectin — a deworming drug that some people are using to prevent or treat covid-19, despite several public health agencies advising against it — was Smith’s last shot at survival, his wife and guardian, Julie Smith, argued.
But on Monday, after Smith’s wife and the doctor who prescribed him the ivermectin failed to provide “convincing evidence” at a court hearing to show that the drug could significantly improve his condition, a different judge reversed course. Butler County Judge Michael A. Oster Jr. ordered the hospital to cease administering Smith, 51, the unproven treatment, arguing that “judges are not doctors or nurses.”
“Based on the current evidence, ivermectin is not effective as a treatment for COVID-19. … Even Plaintiff’s own doctor could not say [that] continued use of ivermectin would benefit [Jeffrey] Smith,” Oster wrote in an order filed on Monday.
Oster added: “After considering all of the evidence presented in this case, there can be no doubt that the medical and scientific communities do not support the use of ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.”
The judge’s reversal is the latest attempt by a government official to steer people away from using the medicine — long used to kill parasites in animals and humans — as a treatment for the coronavirus. In recent months, the Food and Drug Administration and other public health agencies have urged people to refrain from taking the unproven treatment, warning it could be “dangerous” and potentially fatal.
“You are not a horse,” the Food and Drug Administration tweeted last month. “You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
The drug, which has garnered support in conservative circles, has been promoted by some doctors, Republican lawmakers and talk show hosts.
Doctors dismayed by patients who fear coronavirus vaccines but clamor for unproven ivermectin
Smith, a father of three, tested positive for the coronavirus on July 9 and was admitted to West Chester Hospital’s ICU less than a week later, according to the lawsuit his wife filed in Butler County Common Pleas Court. The hospital treated Smith with remdesivir, plasma and steroids, and he eventually reached a “period of relative stability,” court records state.
But on July 27, his condition deteriorated, according to the lawsuit, and he was sedated and put on a ventilator days later. When Smith was placed in a medically induced coma on Aug. 20, his wife reached out to Fred Wagshul, who prescribed the drug without seeing Smith, court records state.
Wagshul is listed as a founding physician of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance. The nonprofit organization, which promotes ivermectin as a preventive treatment for covid, is referenced in the lawsuit. Neither Wagshul nor the nonprofit responded immediately to a message from The Washington Post late Monday. Wagshul does not have medical privileges to work at West Chester Hospital, according to Oster’s order.
Smith’s wife requested that the hospital administer the drug, but doctors told Julie Smith they could not treat her husband with ivermectin because it could interfere with other medications, the lawsuit states. There was nothing left to be done for him, the doctors said.
Julie Smith alleges that she offered to sign a release relieving the hospital and its doctors of any liability related to the drug treatment, a statement the hospital denied in its response to the court. Jonathan Davidson, an attorney representing Julie Smith, told The Post that his client was not available for an interview Monday night.
On Aug. 23, Butler County Judge J. Gregory Howard ordered the hospital to administer 30 milligrams of ivermectin to Smith daily for three weeks, as requested by his wife. The order, which was first reported by the Ohio Capital Journal and the Cincinnati Enquirer, did not include any explanation for the judge’s decision.
But Oster on Monday struck down that order, saying that neither Julie Smith nor Wagshul were able to demonstrate how the ivermectin treatment had changed Smith’s prognosis.
When asked whether the drug was improving Smith’s health, Wagshul “was only able to say that [Jeffrey] Smith ‘seems to be’ getting better after receiving ivermectin,” Oster wrote. And when Oster asked whether continued use of ivermectin would benefit Smith, Wagshul answered, “I honestly don’t know,” court records state.
Julie Smith, for her part, told the judge she believes the drug is working.
The judge wrote in his order that several public health organizations, including the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, do not recommend the drug be used to treat covid-19. At the moment, no studies or data analysis support said treatment for the virus, Oster wrote.
“While this court is sympathetic to the Plaintiff and understands the idea of wanting to do anything to help her loved one, public policy should not and does not support allowing a physician to try ‘any’ type of treatment on human beings,” the judge wrote.
Nevertheless, Oster said that Jeffrey Smith could safely be transferred to another hospital where Wagshul has medical privileges if he wishes to continue with the ivermectin treatment, an option that would not require the court’s intervention.
The attorney representing Julie Smith said his client was “disappointed” by the court’s decision, adding that the drug has improved her husband’s illness.
“I know this was a decision that Judge Oster did not take lightly,” Davidson told The Post in an email. “Fortunately, Mr. Smith was able to receive 14 days of treatment of Ivermectin, during which time his condition did improve. While he has likely received his last dose at UC West Chester hospital, we can only hope his condition continues to trend positively.”
Neither a spokesperson for UC Health, which includes West Chester Hospital, nor an attorney representing the hospital immediately responded to messages from The Post late Monday. Julie Smith’s attorney did not respond to a question about whether the couple had been vaccinated.
Sep 6, 2021
Today's Tweet
There is a death cult logic to it.
Imagine the irony of antivaxxers protesting outside hospitals while health workers struggle to save the lives of antivaxxers inside. pic.twitter.com/dQO08kA66p
— Dr. Amit Arya (@AmitAryaMD) September 2, 2021
Today's Today
Labor unions represent a larger percentage of U.S. workers than at any time in the past five years, as the pandemic took its biggest bite out of non-unionized jobs.
Why it matters:
America's labor movement isn't quite resurgent, but it is showing signs of life after decades of decline.
By the numbers:
In 2020, 10.8% of all wage and salaried workers were members of unions, up 0.5% from 2019, according to government statistics.That's the highest mark since 2015 (11.%).Men were more likely than women to be in a union (11% vs. 10.5%), and the highest age cohort was 45-64 years old.Black workers (11.2%) were more likely to be union members than white (10.3%), Asian (8.8%) or Hispanic (8.5%) workers.A huge gap remains between public sector (34.8%) and private sector (6.3%) workers.
Caveat:
The actual number of union members fell in 2020 by over 321,000, but the decline in nonunion jobs was much steeper.
What's next:
The big question is whether labor unions can successfully adjust to the changing face of American work, which is becoming much more about service work than manufacturing.They still face a steep uphill climb, as evidenced by last fall's failure to unionize an Amazon warehouse in Alabama and of a ballot referendum in California to change the legal status of gig economy workers like Uber drivers.Labor may still win out in both cases, though, as the NLRB has recommended a revote by those Amazon workers and a California judge just struck down what was known as Prop 22. Plus, Starbucks is facing a rare unionization push in Upstate New York.
Historical reminder:
Labor Day celebrates all American workers, but it was the outgrowth of organized labor marches in the late 1800s that effectively doubled as one-day strikes. It became a federal holiday 12 years after the first such march, which took place in New York City.
COVID-19 Update
JHU Recap for 09-05-2021:
What do you get for your 12-year-old on their birthday this year?
NYT: (pay wall)
Zoe Tu, a seventh grader in Brooklyn, likes to celebrate her birthday with dulce de leche Haagen-Dazs ice cream cake. This year, her 12th, was no exception, but the day was also marked by a treat of another kind: her Covid vaccine.
Zoe got the shot the first day she became eligible, on Aug. 2, and it was accompanied by a $100 gift certificate given as a vaccine incentive at the Barclays Center. (Her mother allowed her to spend it on anything she wanted.)
“The nurse was really excited about wishing me a happy birthday,” Zoe recalled.
Zoe’s mother, Nicole Tu, said she had told her daughter she could wait if she wanted. But, Zoe said: “I knew that was the quickest I could get it. I was excited because I could feel safer.”
Many birthdays are rites of passage, especially for young people. Getting to 14 or 15 opens the doors to high school; turning 17 grants permission to view R-rated movies; 18 delivers the right to vote; and 21 brings the legal age to buy alcohol in many states.
But since early May, 12th birthdays have new significance, because the Food and Drug Administration gave the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid vaccine emergency use authorization for children 12 and older.
At least 52 percent of children ages 12 through 17 in the United States have received at least one dose of a vaccine, and about 40 percent are fully vaccinated, according to early September data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Scientists say a decision on whether children younger than 12 can get the shots could still be months away.
At least one school district, in Culver City, Calif., has announced that it will require eligible students to get a Covid vaccine, and more mandates could be issued as the Delta variant fuels significant increases in cases among young people. A recent poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 55 percent of Americans supported vaccination requirements for eligible students.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious-disease expert, has said he supports such mandates for school children.
But parents are now navigating a tricky moment in which some children are vaccinated while many others, who are under 12, are not. Some parents, including Ms. Tu, are for the most part limiting their children to indoor play dates with vaccinated friends.
After Zoe got the shot, her mother posted on Instagram to mark the moment: “Turning 12 in 2021 means a different kind of celebration,” Ms. Tu wrote, with syringe and birthday cake emojis.
Zoe’s vaccination was a milestone moment for her parents, too. “On her birthday we’re one step closer to being safer because our whole family can be vaccinated,” Ms. Tu added. “It’s a new chapter for us.”
For some young people, getting vaccinated adds poignancy to a birthday. Many spent the past year isolated from friends, yearning for normalcy and confining their friendships primarily to phones and computers.
Several studies have shown deteriorating mental health, including bouts of anxiety and depression, among teenagers during the pandemic. Getting a Covid vaccine offers some teenagers a glimmer of promise for more socializing.
Some students did not want needles to mar their actual birthdays. Sebastian Holst, 12, of Brooklyn, was relieved that his parents had scheduled his vaccine appointment for several days after his birthday in May. That way, he was able to hold a Zoom birthday party with friends, take a walk with his mom and enjoy his dad’s tacos, free of worry about any possible side effects.
- more -
The angst is real, and the New York Times will always go to great lengths to make sure we all feel every last bit of it.
Sep 5, 2021
Another Thought
An aspect that had never entered my mind: What about the kids who never were because a young woman was forced to have an unwanted child, and never got the chance to have kids she did want?
via Lexington Chapter - Kentucky Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice:
They asked me to tell you what it was like to be twenty and pregnant in 1950 and when you tell your boyfriend you’re pregnant, he tells you about a friend of his in the army whose girl told him she was pregnant, so he got all his buddies to come and say, “We all f*cked her, so who knows who the father is?” And he laughs at the good joke….
What was it like, if you were planning to go to graduate school and get a degree and earn a living so you could support yourself and do the work you loved—what it was like to be a senior at Radcliffe and pregnant and if you bore this child, this child which the law demanded you bear and would then call “unlawful,” “illegitimate,” this child whose father denied it … What was it like? […]
They asked me to tell you what it was like to be twenty and pregnant in 1950 and when you tell your boyfriend you’re pregnant, he tells you about a friend of his in the army whose girl told him she was pregnant, so he got all his buddies to come and say, “We all f*cked her, so who knows who the father is?” And he laughs at the good joke….
What was it like, if you were planning to go to graduate school and get a degree and earn a living so you could support yourself and do the work you loved—what it was like to be a senior at Radcliffe and pregnant and if you bore this child, this child which the law demanded you bear and would then call “unlawful,” “illegitimate,” this child whose father denied it … What was it like? […]
It’s like this: if I had dropped out of college, thrown away my education, depended on my parents … if I had done all that, which is what the anti-abortion people want me to have done, I would have borne a child for them, … the authorities, the theorists, the fundamentalists; I would have born a child for them, their child.
But I would not have born my own first child, or second child, or third child. My children.
The life of that fetus would have prevented, would have aborted, three other fetuses … the three wanted children, the three I had with my husband—whom, if I had not aborted the unwanted one, I would never have met … I would have been an “unwed mother” of a three-year-old in California, without work, with half an education, living off her parents….
But it is the children I have to come back to, my children Elisabeth, Caroline, Theodore, my joy, my pride, my loves. If I had not broken the law and aborted that life nobody wanted, they would have been aborted by a cruel, bigoted, and senseless law. They would never have been born. This thought I cannot bear.
The life of that fetus would have prevented, would have aborted, three other fetuses … the three wanted children, the three I had with my husband—whom, if I had not aborted the unwanted one, I would never have met … I would have been an “unwed mother” of a three-year-old in California, without work, with half an education, living off her parents….
But it is the children I have to come back to, my children Elisabeth, Caroline, Theodore, my joy, my pride, my loves. If I had not broken the law and aborted that life nobody wanted, they would have been aborted by a cruel, bigoted, and senseless law. They would never have been born. This thought I cannot bear.
What was it like, in the Dark Ages when abortion was a crime, for the girl whose dad couldn’t borrow cash, as my dad could? What was it like for the girl who couldn’t even tell her dad, because he would go crazy with shame and rage? Who couldn’t tell her mother? Who had to go alone to that filthy room and put herself body and soul into the hands of a professional criminal? – because that is what every doctor who did an abortion was, whether he was an extortionist or an idealist.
You know what it was like for her. You know and I know; that is why we are here. We are not going back to the Dark Ages. We are not going to let anybody in this country have that kind of power over any girl or woman. There are great powers, outside the government and in it, trying to legislate the return of darkness. We are not great powers. But we are the light. Nobody can put us out. May all of you shine very bright and steady, today and always.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)