It Was Tough Enough Keeping Her Business Going

Brenda Buenviaje (Chronicle photo)

Louisiana-born Brenda Buenviaje never claimed she was Black. The Filipino-Italian-French restauranteur owns Brenda’s French Soul Food, which some social media sites mistakenly listed as Black-owned. She was accused of race fraud.

The activist Chronicle food writer says this attempted cancellation was going too far:

race in no way limits culinary expertise. I know Black chefs cooking Italian food, and as is the case with Brenda, a multiracial Filipina chef cooking Creole food.

“I don’t know what to do here, because I’ve never at any time said I was Black,” Brenda told me last week when the dialogue around her race was reaching a peak. “I’ve talked about my identity before, and even on my YouTube page and on my website, you can see pictures of me. I wish I could clear this up.”

I imagine some of this anger was born out of disappointment, as Black folks who only knew Brenda’s food and not Buenviaje herself hoped her popular Creole spots were Black-owned. And, honestly, I can understand that desire. Eventually, the situation cooled off for Brenda online as people talked, and some clarity was gained about her background.

Brenda, like most business people, embraced the power of the Internet to showcase her cooking talent. Unfortunately, she was unwillingly sucked in to today's culture wars, which restricts careers, political, religious, and artistic expression, even speech and language, to members of approved groups.

Once Yelp created a category for Black-Owned Restaurants, controversies became inevitable. Thank goodness in this case there appears to be no lasting damage to Brenda and her restaurants. And if you don't have a friend in the media, God help you.

Disappointing, But Not Shocking

Screenshot of tweet with red circles added

The shoes are the same, and the "news" organization is the same.

The opinions about the wearer's fashion choice are very different.

If the critical responses were reversed, the howls about racism would be deafening.

True, fashion is of minuscule importance compared to Middle East peace (silence), riots (silence), systemic racism (wall-to-wall coverage), and police use of force (wtwc).

The bias pervades matters large and small. They don't even bother trying to hide it.

Sad!

Lies, Damned Lies, and Headlines

Peaceful protest, no photos of violence in Time.

Those who are familiar with the art of spin can easily spy the conclusion that Time wants readers to draw:

Headline: 93% of Black Lives Matter Protests Have Been Peaceful, New Report Finds

The use of percentages is a dead giveaway that the writer is trying to downplay the violence, rioting, and destruction in some BLM demonstrations. Here's the text: [bold added]

The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) analyzed more than 7,750 Black Lives Matter demonstrations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. that took place in the wake of George Floyd’s death between May 26 and August 22.

Their report states that more than 2,400 locations reported peaceful protests, while fewer than 220 reported “violent demonstrations.” The authors define violent demonstrations as including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.” Their definition includes anything from “fighting back against police” to vandalism, property destruction looting, road-blocking using barricades, burning tires or other materials. In cities where protests did turn violent—these demonstrations are “largely confined to specific blocks,” the report says.

The meaning would be quite different if, using the same facts, the headline were
"220 U.S. Locations Report Violent Demonstrations in 3 Months".

Source: NY Times 9/7/2020

In the opposite vein writers accentuate the horror of COVID-19 by tracking the absolute number of deaths, which have reached 189,000 in the United States.

Reporters who wanted to downplay the virus' magnitude could say only 1.9% of the U.S. population (328.2 million) have contracted the disease, and if someone is unlucky enough to have been infected, he has a 97% chance of survival. To really minimize the virus' importance one could say that an American has a less than 0.1% chance of dying from it this year.

None of the above is an opinion about BLM violence or COVID-19's severity. It just illuminates what the media would like you to think--BLM violence occurs rarely, while COVID-19 is spreading out of control. Read and believe what you want, dear reader, but do read critically.

Give It a Rest

I peruse Accounting Today's Tax Fraud Blotter to keep up with the goings-on in accounting and tax. (I study these schemes to spot them, not to use them, of course---besides, the crooks got caught!)

The first item caught my eye for non-tax reasons:

Media failed to disclose that he's a Starbucks
customer, too (Providence Journal photo)

Pawtucket, Rhode Island: Former state senator and businessman James E. Doyle II, 47, has been sentenced to two years in prison for engaging in a $74 million dollar check-kiting scheme in which he wrote tens of thousands of worthless checks and failed to report more than $1 million dollars in income.

He admitted that as owner of Doyle Respiratory and Doyle Sleep Solutions he engaged in a fraud during which $74 million in worthless bank transactions were executed in check-kiting schemes through his accounts. He also admitted that for tax years 2013 through 2016, he and his wife failed to report to the IRS more than $1 million dollars in income and failed to pay $305,426 in federal taxes. Doyle executed the scheme daily, at times in excess of 50 transactions per day, including using ATMs to lengthen the time it took for checks to be presented for clearing.

He was also sentenced to three years of supervised release upon completion of his prison term, and ordered to pay $426,707.25 in restitution.

Was Mr. Doyle II another example of perfidy by a Republican businessman and ex-state senator? (Providence Journal: "Doyle, a Democrat representing Pawtucket".) The fact that his political party was never stated in the tax article or in AP/U.S. News is a clue. It's another example of "name that party".

every time a Democrat is caught in misconduct, the media will either “accidentally” forget to mention his party affiliation or will bury it at the tail of the article were [sic] fewer people will see it...On the other hand, when a Republican is caught in a crime his party affiliation either leads the piece or even appears in the very headline of the report.

Some media outlets have begun mentioning the party affiliation of every crooked politician, but just once I'd like to see such an omission for a Republican miscreant.

But back to the original article: "Doyle executed the scheme daily, at times in excess of 50 transactions per day." He seemed to be in panic mode, with checks flying between his accounts. Two years of rest in prison, away from the busy-ness of his world, may actually do him some good.

Energy Efficiency: Let the Market Work

(LED's. NY Mag photo)

Lately we've been buying LED's (light-emitting diodes) to replace our compact fluorescents (CFL's) and incandescents. We're installing LED's independent of any government incentives or penalties.

The price-performance relationship of LED's for us beats the other products, and we've come to that conclusion on our own....which is why your humble blogger finds the following headline irritating:

Trump administration could hamper shift to more efficient light bulbs

Energy efficiency is good, goes the thinking, so the Trump Administration should force the adoption of LED's by increasing the cost of incandescents or even outlawing them. Haven't we learned the lesson from the last energy-mandate fiasco? [bold added]

Congress established the first national light bulb efficiency standards in 2007, which were signed into law by President George W. Bush. Starting in 2012, the law required new light bulbs to use 28 percent less power than existing incandescent lights — essentially ending the sale of the older, inefficient bulbs.

(Photo from snopes)

Back in 2012 light-emitting diodes were costly, so most people installed CFL's. But the latter's mercury content made clean-up and disposal extremely expensive. Below are the EPA's recommendations for cleaning up a broken CFL bulb:

Before Cleanup

Have people and pets leave the room.

Air out the room for 5-10 minutes by opening a window or door to the outdoor environment.

Shut off the central forced air heating/air-conditioning system, if you have one.

--Collect materials needed to clean up broken bulb:
--stiff paper or cardboard;
--sticky tape;
--damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes (for hard surfaces); and
--a glass jar with a metal lid or a sealable plastic bag.

During Cleanup

DO NOT VACUUM. Vacuuming is not recommended unless broken glass remains after all other cleanup steps have been taken. Vacuuming could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor.

Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder. Scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder. Place the used tape in the glass jar or plastic bag. See the detailed cleanup instructions for more information, and for differences in cleaning up hard surfaces versus carpeting or rugs.

Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.

After Cleanup

Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials, including vacuum cleaner bags, outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of. Avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors.

Next, check with your local government about disposal requirements in your area, because some localities require fluorescent bulbs (broken or unbroken) be taken to a local recycling center. If there is no such requirement in your area, you can dispose of the materials with your household trash.

If practical, continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.

We've always followed grandma's admonition to turn out the lights when leaving the room, so maybe we've saved a hundred bucks in electricity over the last seven years for switching to CFL's but sacrificed 10-20 man-hours for CFL cleanup and disposal, not to mention spending more time worrying about mercury poisoning.

So, Chronicle headline writer, leave alone the person who wants to replace an incandescent bulb with another incandescent; perhaps she will turn it on once a week in a storage locker, or maybe she likes its warm glow, or maybe she wants to heat up the lava lamp. Don't make her a criminal, and (sigh) stop making every story about the dastardliness of Donald Trump.

We Are Wiser and More Believable Now

Sen. Gillebrand (NY Daily News)

Senator Kirsten Gillebrand (D-NY), a staunch long-time supporter of both Clintons, now says President Clinton should have resigned 20 years ago during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

The comment drew immediate fire from Philippe Reines, a top aide to Mrs. Clinton, who was first lady at the time of the affair. “Over 20 yrs you took the Clintons’ endorsements, money, and seat. Hypocrite,” he wrote on Twitter. “Interesting strategy for 2020 primaries. Best of luck.”

After decades of silence, Democrats are finding it advantageous to denounce sex-abuse and sex-crimes committed by members of their own party (during this period there's been no such reticence about pillorying Republicans), though it means throwing the Big He and She under the bus.

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.--Groucho Marx

Before A Word Has Been Uttered

(Image from info254.com)

In a hypothetical criminal case developed for an experiment, judges went easier on a "remorseful" defendant who was trying to make amends. (Their decisions should have been based on the law and the facts, not the defendant's characteristics.)

While 87% of the judges upheld the conviction of the extremist Serb, no matter what the precedent, only 41% did for the remorseful Croat. In other words, rulings were driven by the defendant’s personal attributes rather than by legal precedent.

Even more interesting were the judges’ explanations for their decisions. Did they write about how legal precedent is one thing, but at the end of the day the most important thing is the individual on trial? No. Most cited the precedent if it supported their decision. Others discussed legal or policy matters.

In other words they made their decision based on emotion or other non-legal factors, then used legal reasoning to support the decision.

There's a strong suspicion that that is how most of us behave: base a decision on whether we like a person (sometimes merely whether he is in or out of our "tribe"), then justify the decision based on "facts", "reason", and "logic." That is why we usually know what a politician, reporter, or judge will say on a subject before a word has been uttered.