Another violent year in Chicago has concluded. There are really no words to describe 792 MURDERS, and over 4,170 people shot. If you factor in the armed carjackings, the Counties 1,600 opioid deaths from overdoses and the 8,200 deaths from COVID-19 the word slaughter crosses one’s mind. Cook County’s final total of over 970 murders, somehow didn’t even register as far any outrage from any county politicians. The old ostrich theory on display for all to see, HEADS BURIED DEEP IN THE SAND. Oh! sure, there was a demonstration against violence, organized by the usual assortment of priests and local reverends, and neighborhood activists, but as I looked on I did not see one county or city politician among the 150 or so participants. As usual, the demonstrators carried banners with the names of the dead and called for the end of the violence. Heavy press coverage showed the weeping mothers, loved ones, and friends of the dead and the usual competition by the march leaders to get before a camera and pontificate and express their outrage.

One might ask why these marches always take place in areas miles and miles from where the mayhem is devastating entire neighborhoods and not in the killing zones where the mayhem is taking place on a daily basis. One westside neighborhood finished the year with 100 murders, at least 15 miles from the Gold Coast neighborhood where the marchers inexplicably choose to invade. Newspaper stories and editorials gave the annual end of the year numbers of murders, and folks shot and as usual gave the same solutions all Chicagoans have been hearing ad nauseam for some 60 years. In order to stop the violence, we must address the ROOT CAUSES.

Through all of this and the so-called list of Root Causes, I never once heard the words GANG VIOLENCE. Astonishing as that may sound it’s true. Anybody that does not know that Gang Violence is the number one driving factor for the mayhem that has gripped the city since the early 60s has to either have an agenda of some sorts or is a complete imbecile. Groucho Marx back in the day had a Television Quiz Program called “You bet Your Life.”  It featured a 3 or 4-minute interview with Groucho, if at any time the contestant uttered what was called THE MAGIC WORD he or she would be awarded $100.  This word was selected before the show and was unbeknownst to the contestants. I’m guessing that all of Chicago and Cook County politicians would never have collected Groucho’s $100.

Newspaper editorials, and one story after another, and not one mentioned the Magic Word GANGS. One editorial always seems to seek out members of academia for the usual ROOT CAUSES spiel, the  University of Chicago Crime Lab, Loyola University to name a few, Professorial Local Gadflys who seem to draw the press like flies on stinky stuff whenever they need a quote. Their usual theme is of course those ROOT CAUSES. I’m guessing here but I’m thinking they never met a gang member (except maybe Congressman Bobby Rush who founded the Black Panther Party in Chicago back in the 60s and was its defense minister) and it’s estimated that there are close to 150,000 of them in the city alone. At least they have something to say on the matter, most politicians are adhering to the old Mafia Dictator, Tony (Big Tuna) Arccardo’s famous saying”A FISH WITH HIS MOUTH CLOSED NEVER GETS CAUGHT.” President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the Great Society Movement in 1964-65. Fifty-Five Years of addressing those “ROOT CAUSES” such as poverty, unemployment, missing parents, lack of education, unsympathetic cops, and scores more, simply haven’t come near stopping the slaughter for the past 6 decades. The gang lure has captured the hearts and minds of thousands of our youths and fighting them with words and speeches and billions of dollars have not worked.

Whether  State, City, and County politicians in what many people call the most corrupt in the country are suffering from nervous shakedowns or are just plain spineless is difficult to differentiate, and of course, we cannot overlook clueless. The fact is the gangs are having their way and at some juncture, there has to be a tipping point. What will it be? Chicago has a mayor along with many other pundits looking to deflect any type of blame by saying the Covid-19 Virus is mainly responsible for the horrid numbers of killings and shootings. Ask yourself this, what about the years from 2016 to the beginning of 2020 when there was no VIRUS?  2016 had the most murders and shootings for over 20 years. The following years were not much better. From 2016 thru 2019 the city averaged 651 murders a year, and 3,421 people shot, add to the record number of armed carjackings up 130% from the previous year, and it becomes extremely difficult to buy into the IT’S THE VIRUS BULLSHIT. All of that violence is 78% to 82 % GANG RELATED. The ROOT CAUSE is the refusal to recognize the gangs are at war and no one in power is challenging that power.

It’s time to step back and question the God-given wisdom about how contagious is COVID-19 and the mutant that’s making all the headlines.

At least one scientist questions the methodology of the models that determine the contagiousness of the virus, suggesting that the danger of the pandemic could be overstated.

The study, “The Coronavirus Response: Boxed in by the Models,” by Ray Pawson,* appears in the journal Evaluation in November. Its abstract is worth quoting in its entirety.

Science has a mixed record when it comes to predicting the future. Engineers build bridges based on foreknowledge of the forces that they are likely to encounter – and their constructions tend to withstand the test of time.

Predicting the future course of epidemics and building intervention to contain them are much more precarious. And yet simulation models produced in prestigious centres for mathematical biology have played a significant role informing coronavirus policy in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. The predictive uncertainties include the inherent variability of the pathogen, considerable variation in host population immunity as well as the concern of this article, namely, the constantly adapting human judgements of those designing, implementing and experiencing the national response to an outbreak.

Assumptions about how interventions are implemented and how people will react are, of course, built into modelling scenarios – but these estimates depict behavioural change in fixed, stimulus-response terms. Real reactions to the complex restrictions introduced to combat the virus unfold in scores of different pathways – people comply, they resist, they learn, they grow weary, they change their minds, they seek exceptions and so on. Model building is intrinsically speculative, and it is important that crisis management is not boxed in by its latent simplifications. A more pluralistic evidence base needs to be drawn on, to understand how complex interventions operate within complex societies.

Or as Pawson states in his conclusion:

I have made the case that two influential models are potentially misleading, often arbitrary and clearly self-affirming. The mechanical assumptions and fixed statistical estimates built into the Imperial simulations completely fail to reflect the complexity of the societal response to the COVID-19 interventions.

Furthermore:

Research progresses by eschewing certainty and by encouraging debate and competition. All research methods are fallible, and the science of COVID-19 would benefit from greater humility. The profound philosophical and sociological accounts of the privileged status of scientific knowledge recognise that it owes that status through ‘organised scepticism’ (Merton, 1968) and close mutual monitoring from the ‘disputations community of truth seekers’ (Campbell, 1988).

I encourage skeptics to read the lengthy article for its reasoning, methodology and subtleties.  I came across this study some time ago, but it is particularly relevant now that the media are full of near-panicky reports of a new strain of the virus, officially called SARS-CoV-2 VOC 202012/01, or for short, SARS-CoV-2.

With full certainty, the reports that the new variant spread a lot more quickly, fueling (unproven) worries that it’ll be worse than COVID-19. Here we go again, scaring the bejabbers out of everyone by overstating “the science.”

One thing to keep in mind is that a sample of one of the variants grew in the lab, “propagating more quickly in human respirator epithelial cells….” So be it, but a more complete analysis of the contagiousness of the strain would include those factors that affect its spread in the real world. That analysis is missing.

For a more complete understanding of the new strain, consult the Center for Disease Control’s “Interim: Implications of the Emerging SARS-CoV-2 Variant VOC 202012/01.” Among the CDC’s cautions is this

At this time, there is no evidence that this variant causes more severe illness or increased risk of death….

The [new] virus would likely need to accumulate multiple mutations in the spike protein to evade immunity induced by vaccines or by natural infection.

Sadly, such caveats are missing in most of the reporting. Just as this study should not be taken as the final word, nor should any report that begins, “Science says….”

*Ray Pawson is Professor of Social Research Methodology in the School of Sociology and Social Policy at the University of Leeds. Pawson’s main interest lies in research methodology.

I returned from the mailbox giddy as a 7th grade girl.  I tore open the smallish envelope before I even walked in the door.

My sewing needles had arrived!

Now you might think receiving a bunch (18) of needles was no biggie. But it was to me! Literally.

These babies had bigger than average eyes. Not exactly Anya Taylor-Joy (think “The Queen’s Gambit”) or even Bette Davis eyes, but big enough to thread a needle easy-peasy.

I had been having trouble threading needles since the start of the pandemic. I recently had undergone cataract surgery. While most things now appeared, thankfully, clearer, sharper and brighter, threading a needle was almost impossible.

I thought about looking for needles with bigger eyes in March when COVID began to dominate our vernacular. Back in BC (Before COVID), I wouldn’t have thought twice about making a stop at a fabric supply store.

But now I didn’t want to go inside a store for just one thing (just like I don’t go to the supermarket anymore for, say, a single can of soup. I will, however, take my chances to buy a full load of groceries. I don’t know if it makes any sense, but maybe you can relate).

It was the day after Christmas, and my husband Allan and I had no plans. Still needleless, I googled “needles with bigger eyes.”

Amazon and Etsy came to the rescue. There were dozens and dozens of suppliers at both sites, but I settled on one on Etsy.

I made my first ever purchase with a company called QuiltingSundries. I picked it because it got all five star ratings, and I liked the price–under $5 including tax and shipping.

The old-timey fonts and design appealed to me, too. In my mind, they equaled a solid, longtime needle manufacturer.

The reviews and my instincts proved correct. The needles arrived fast– the Tuesday after Christmas. They were perfect for my needs. Made of steel, not plastic, like some other needles companies had offered. The invoice also came with a handwritten personal note, a touch that touched me.

Although my grandmother had been known for embroidering intricate floral patterns on tablecloths and cloth napkins and handkerchiefs, I inherited no such skills. I am not, I repeat, not, a great seamstress.

I took sewing classes back in the 1980s and actually made a dress (with a zipper!), but whatever lessons I learned back then, are long gone as is the dress. All I have to show for my effort are some really good scissors, which I purchased for the class.

Now, I needed needles with bigger eyes to mend an array of items that needed mending.

Within five minutes of examining my new needles, I threaded one of them on by first try. Then I darned a sock with a hole. I stitched up an afghan that my mom knitted.

I attached a button that had come off my peacoat. I fixed a couple of nice sweaters that either time or moths had gotten to as well as a worn-but-warm flannel nightgown that was ripped at the seam.

Holy moly, I was on a roll! I even sewed up some underpants, which had revealed parts of me that weren’t meant to be revealed.

On reflection, it occurred to me that something as tiny as a needle had made me so, sew-happy! And I realized in this time of COVID, or really any time in your life, sometimes it’s the little things and seemingly small moments that matter, are most meaningful, that bring the most joy.

It’s not the new car or diamond necklace or the new shirt you just HAD to have.

It’s a hike in the woods. Holding hands with a loved one while couch-potato-ing in front of the TV. The first bite of a deep-dish pizza (Lou Malnati’s!). Sharing a belly laugh with your bff.  Spotting a bright red cardinal on a gray winter day.

And although it often feels elusive, sometimes you can find happiness going through the eye of a needle. Or your own version of it.

Type your email address in the box and click the “create subscription” button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Judge Leslie A. Gardner (left) and Stacey Abrams. (Facebook)

True the Vote, a group that is challenging the legitimacy of some vote counting, filed suit in a federal court to disqualify thousands of allegedly fraudulent votes in the contested George election.

It’s a complicated technical, legal issue. Suffice to say that the suit went before a federal judge who dismissed the lawsuit.

Fair enough. Until you get to the part of the story where the federal judge is the sister of Stacey Abrams, the super-partisan and far-left former Georgia gubernatorial candidate.

Even in Chicago, where partisanship advances all kinds of self- and conflict-of-interests, this would be, err, remarkable. At least in Chicago, an effort is made to thinly disguise such hi-jinks.

But the sister, Leslie A. Gardner, shockingly argues it was her duty. As the Augusta Chronicle reports:

Leslie A. Gardner, the sister of Stacey Abrams, said recusing herself from a voting rights case would be a dereliction of duty and a violation of her oath as a federal judge.

Gardner explains:

One can only assume that the argument is something to the effect that if my sister is actively engaged in a cause, I cannot be impartial. This argument is mere speculation, unsupported by any facts that would support a finding of partiality.

In these troubled times, we owe Gardner thanks for these belly laughs. Abrams, too, who considers herself a “voting rights advocate” who believes that Republicans stole her election as governor.