As we kick off another survey of the things that frustrated and bewildered me the most this week, let's start in Boston, where the president of Boston Public Schools has declared a "temporary masking period" for students and staff coming back from Christmas Break.
The president, Mary Skipper, says it is not a mandate and no one will be punished for not wearing one. But she says she's doing it because of a "significant increase in pediatric hospitalizations" due to RSV, Covid, and seasonal flu. So here's what I don't understand: There's no science that suggests, nor any studies that indicate that masking is an effective mitigation strategy for any of those maladies.
Studies have shown how ineffective they are. Medical masks are too porous, are never worn properly by the general public (particularly kids), are worn after saturation, and are regularly removed.
Further, even the science we made up during Covid – literally made up, like the arbitrary 6-foot intervals of social distancing or the "don't mask…wait, yeah you have to mask" decrees – all said masking doesn't work as mitigation if only some people wear them.
That's the very policy BPS is now pushing, a suggestion that will result in only partial participation.
And they aren't alone:
This is all theater.
And it's a terrible play at that.
Next, can someone please explain to me what the appeal of Pete Buttigieg is among Democrats? Being from Pete's home state of Indiana, I remember rumblings about him being the next "rising star" on the Left several years before his uninspired presidential run in 2020.
It always seemed to center around his intellect (he's a Rhodes Scholar, remember!) and his sexuality. I never made sense out of how the last part should really matter when it came to leadership, but I've learned it's just best not to question it these days. Truthfully, I don't really get how the first part matters all that much when it comes to leadership either.
The smartest guy in the room is usually not the best leader.
Or the wisest.
Or in Buttigieg's case, the most competent.
I can't help but think the town of South Bend, Indiana, where Buttigieg cut his teeth as mayor, is cracking up watching the train wreck he has made of the transportation department. He alone is not to blame for all the troubles happening under his watch.
But you have to admit that it's a pretty impressive coincidence that ports, trucking, rail, and airlines have all seen crises and breakdowns since Buttigieg took over as chief regulator of their industry.
As a conservative, I've always questioned the purpose and need for a federal transportation department. What is it they do that couldn't be done better by private enterprise? The answer I've heard has always been the same – we need the department to regulate and manage them.
When news broke Wednesday that the largest grounding of U.S. flights since 9/11 was taking place, which came on the heels of the Southwest Airlines meltdown, which came on the heels of railroad strikes, which came on the heels of broken supply chains, I couldn't help but be relieved that we had such competence doing the regulating and managing.
So again, I ask: What is Buttigieg's appeal?
Finally, a question I saw posed this week got me thinking. I just watched an entire NFL season from start to finish. Despite plenty of outbreaks, I don't believe a single player was forced to miss games for a Covid diagnosis compared to last year when every week key players were contact traced and suspended from team activities.
So, why the policy change?
Is Covid less potent, dangerous, and deadly now? Or is this a tacit, but unannounced admission that the cancelling of games, contact tracing mania, testing rituals, and unadulterated freakout over potential organization breakouts was all a big overreaction?
Seems like that should be fairly significant news, right?
