BLACK, PLUS BLUE: Terri Sewell is plenty sharp!

MONDAY, JUNE 8, 2026

The year when our politics flipped: Rep. Terri Sewell (D-Alabama) is a high achiever.   

Also, Rep. Sewell is plenty sharp. The leading authority on this topic offers this overview:  

Terri Sewell

Terrycina Andrea "Terri" Sewell (born January 1, 1965) is an American politician and lawyer serving as the U.S. representative for Alabama's 7th congressional district as member of the Democratic Party since 2011. The district includes most of the Black Belt, as well as most of the predominantly African American portions of Birmingham and Tuscaloosa.

A native of Huntsville, Sewell studied at Princeton University for a bachelor's, Harvard Law School for a Juris Doctor degree, and St Hilda's College, Oxford for a second bachelor's that was promoted by tradition to an MA. Before entering politics, she was a securities lawyer for Davis Polk & Wardwell and a public finance lawyer for Maynard, Cooper & Gale, where she was the first Black woman to make partner. She is the first African-American woman elected to Congress from Alabama and, along with Republican Martha Roby, was one of the first women elected to Congress from Alabama in a regular election. 

Sewell is plenty sharp. In our view, a bit of humor lurks at the end of this additional texr: 

Early life and education

...She was the first Black valedictorian of Selma High School.

After graduating from high school, Sewell went to Princeton University...Sewell completed a 158-page long senior thesis, "Black Women in Politics: Our Time Has Come." During her time at Princeton, she interned with Richard Shelby (then a Democrat) and Howell Heflin.  

It's true! The chronology establishes the fact that the future Senator Shelby actually was "then a Democrat," just as the overview says. 

For the record, Senator Heflin was a Democrat all through his 18-year Senate career (1979-1997). But this was back in the time when (conservative) white Democrats still dominated the electoral politics of the states of the Deep South. 

Rep. Sewell graduated from Princeton in 1986. That November, the Alabama electorate sent five (conservative) Democrats to the House of Representatives, and only two Republicans. 

That same year, the former Rep. Shelby was elected to the Senate. He was still a (conservative) Democrat at that point, but that party affiliation was eventually going to change.   

In November 1994, the dam burst across the South, but also around the nation. Republicans gained 54 seats in that year's congressional elections, winning control of the House for the first time in forty years.  

As part of that shocking partisan change, a slow-rolling party switch across "the solid South" achieved a milestone that year: 

"In a significant political realignment, the South underwent a dramatic transformation," the leading authority states. "Before the election, House Democrats outnumbered House Republicans in the South. Afterwards, with the Republicans having picked up a total of 19 Southern seats, they were able to outnumber Democrats in the South for the first time since Reconstruction."

The "Republican / Gingrich Revolution" had arrived on the national and regional scene! In Alabama, all seven House incumbents were re-elected in 1994, including those five Democrats. But here's where the humor comes in:  

The very next day, right around noon, Senator Shelby switched! We've always seen this as a source of humor, though it also serves as a marker of a major political realignment in a challenging political age. 

The leading authority nails down the basic fact of the matter:  

Richard Shelby  

Richard Craig Shelby (born May 6, 1934) is an American lawyer and politician who served as a United States senator from Alabama from 1987 to 2023. First elected to the U.S. Senate in 1986 as a Democrat, Shelby switched to the Republican Party in 1994. Shelby is the longest-serving U.S. senator from Alabama, holding office for exactly 36 years.   

...Shelby served in the Alabama State Senate from 1970 to 1978, when he was elected from the 7th district to the United States House of Representatives. He served in the House until 1987; during his House tenure, he was among a group of conservative Democrats known as the boll weevils.

In 1986, Shelby was elected to the U.S. Senate in a tight race. In 1994, the day after the Republican Revolution in which the GOP gained the majority in Congress midway through President Bill Clinton's first term, Shelby switched parties and became a Republican. He was reelected by a large margin in 1998, facing no significant electoral opposition thereafter.   

Senator Shelby switched the very next day! And yes, that's what he did!

On Election Day, he had been Senator Shelby (D-Alabama). From the next day on, he was Senator Shelby (R-Alabama)—or, as we have always scored it, he had seemed to become Senator Shelby (Permanent majority).   

For the record, Senator Shelby had every right to switch! Also, none of this, in any way, reflects poorly on Rep. Sewell, who interned with Rep. Shelby three times when he was still a Democrat.  

We're also prepared to say this: 

Rep. Sewell continued to speak well of Senator Shelby, long after he had switched.  In our view, this news report speaks well of Rep. Sewell's personal decency, and of her all-around smarts.

In our view, this matter joins other aspects of the careers of Sewell, Shelby and Heflin which may shed light on the efforts made, within our struggling nation, to find our way out of the brutal racial history created for us by our ancestors.

That said, the senator's morning-after switch has always struck us as wonderfully comical. It also stands as a marker of the slow-rolling political switch in which "the solid South" remained largely solid, but switched from being solidly Democratic to being solidly GOP.   

We'll also tell you this:   

As you probably know, Rep. Sewell's congressional district—Alabama's 7th congressional district—has been very much in the news of late as the current mid-census redistricting war piledrives across the South.  

Last Wednesday, Nicolle Wallace devoted a segment on Deadline: White House to the recent Supreme Court decision in which Alabama has been allowed to proceed this fall with one majority-Black congressional district—with one such district, not two. 

Wallace started her segment with several chunks of a videotaped statement by Rep. Sewell. If you want to watch the segment, you can start by clicking here.

Terri Sewell is very sharp. She's a major high achiever. 

We strongly agree with one of the things she said on that tape. Then again, maybe and possibly not with another thing she said.   

How should Black voters in Alabama regard that recent decision? How should Democrats—in general, how should Blue America—regard the current turmoil regarding the deliberate construction of congressional districts which are majority Black? 

Those are very important questions, and the topic is highly complex. We won't be able to hit all the stops in the course of this one little week.

Tomorrow: Two of the things she said.

SATURDAY: The Atlantic joins the human race!

SATURDAY, JUNE 6, 2026

Helen Lewis, superb again: As you may recall, it's the cover report in the June edition of The Atlantic. On the magazine's somewhat bluer than pale blue cover, the essay is described this way:

THE MEN WHO FEAR WOMEN
By HELEN LEWIS

We wrote about Lewis' essay last week. Online, it appears beneath this dual headline, and begins in the manner shown:

THE MEN WHO WANT WOMEN TO BE QUIET
A virulent form of misogyny has become the single most important force holding together the American right.

By Helen Lewis

Douglas Wilson has a modest proposal to improve American life: He wants to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment, which gave women the vote. In his ideal system, “we would do it in our politics the same way we do it in our church structure,” he told me recently. “And that is, we vote by household.”

Wilson is a co-founder of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, based in Moscow, Idaho. Over the past five decades, he has built a small empire there, dedicated to disseminating his theocratic vision for the United States: a publishing house, a school, a liberal-arts college, and a video-streaming service. His denomination, which has about 170 affiliated churches, counts Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as a member, and Wilson was invited to lead a prayer service at the Pentagon in February. So when the pastor casually suggests disenfranchising half of America, people listen.

That's the way the essay begins.

People have written about Pastor Wilson before—about the pastor whose denomination includes the perpetually furious Secretary Hegseth as a member. In her essay, Lewis goes into substantial detail, first about Pastor Wilson, but then about an array of pastors, podcasters and streamers, not excluding "a loose collection of trolls known as Groypers," all of whom are part of a burgeoning gender-based movement.

As you may recalls, Lewis is writing about a loose affiliation of millionaires and other furious men. They're sometimes said to belong to the movement she starts to describe in this passage:

Wilson is a prominent voice in what is sometimes called “masculinism”: a movement to fight back against the advances of feminism and reassert the primacy of men. His version is religious, influenced by the notion of male “headship” of the family and Saint Paul’s belief that godly women should “be quiet.” There are also plenty of secular masculinists, as well as nominally Muslim ones, such as the streamer Sneako, the self-proclaimed pimp Andrew Tate, and the podcaster Myron Gaines. Woman-bashing plays well on social media and sells lots of ads for crypto, sports betting, and supplements. You can make good money telling men that they’re the truly oppressed sex.

Masculinism! For ourselves, we'll go ahead and take a guess—the attitudes which Lewis goes on to describe are deeply bred in the bone. Some men are condemned to have a bit too much of the neural wiring which inspires them to loathe women in a significant way.  

The chemicals float around in their brains, perhaps in slightly excessive volume. Such men are thereby inspired to a dimwitted loathing they may find it hard to quit.

The invention of podcasts and similar technologies have helped these afflicted parties find each other and become angrier still. They may end up going on the Fox News Channel and offering ugly insults posing as jokes—such self-revelations as this:

And finally, the New World screwworm, which eats animals from the inside out, has been finally found in America, inside a cow. 

Scientists say this is just the latest of many reasons to avoid sex with Joy Behar. 

[PHOTO of Joy Behar]

AUDIENCE: Cheering, applause

The manifest nutcase who offered that musing never tires of the joy of comparing Behar to cows—or, perhaps, to horses, cattle, pigs and dogs, or once in a while to "livestock." He himself would never have sex with such an animal! 

(For the record, there would be a substantial age difference. Believe it or not, the pitiful boy who offered that quip is 61 years old! Behar, with whom he would never have sex, is 83 as we speak. Adjusting for age, and considering the norms of the culture, she looks amazingly good.)

At any rate, he would never have sex with that cow! Moments earlier, he had pleasured viewers with a joke in which (brace for punchline) he said that Ted Danson "will continue to apologize to his penis for ever having sex with Whoopi Goldberg"—and yes, that's what he said.

This is pretty much all he has. In fairness, he didn't invent the brain chemistry, the chemical torrent, which leads some men, even today, to succumb to such acts of loathing—such acts of self-portrayal.

The pitiful fellow who offered those "jokes" is part of the Fox News Channel's dimwitted duo—the pitiful pair who seem to be pushing the wonders of masculinism for that corporate "cable news" outfit.

The woman who runs that "cable news" messaging enterprise pays him $9 million per year to do this every night. As he does, the women who are paid by the Fox News Channel to serve as his co-hosts or as his panelists stare politely off into air, or in some cases choose to join in.

When Lewis' cover essay appeared, we were disappointed by its failure to cite the pair of "cable news" stars who work this beat at Fox. As of yesterday, Lewis is back with a related report from the world of this gender-based societal backlash.  

Lewis' work has long been superb. Within the boundaries of American journalism, her work is as good as it gets—and then some.

Finally, it was Lewis unbound! Dual headline included, her new report starts as shown:

The Republicans Who Impugn Talarico’s Manhood

Attacks on the Democratic Senate candidate in Texas show the GOP’s narrow, anxious definition of masculinity.

By Helen Lewis

The attacks on James Talarico have not been subtle. In the weeks since the 37-year-old state representative won the Democratic U.S. Senate primary in Texas, Republicans have been describing him as “Low-T Talarico,” “James Talafreako,” and “Six-Gender Jimmy.” On May 28, the White House immigration czar Stephen Miller said on Fox News that it was “brave, courageous, that the Democratic Party would choose Texas, of all places, to nominate their first transgender Senate candidate.”

The Republicans have long marketed themselves as the manlier party, but the anti-Talarico blitzkrieg is both obviously coordinated and unusually overt. The overarching strategy here, as the Democratic presidential hopeful Rahm Emanuel has previously pointed out, is to associate the entire left with being “weak and woke.” Not manly, in other words. Talarico’s aw-shucks niceness and youthful looks are reframed as the result of low testosterone, and his (admittedly mawkish and over-egged) statements of concern for gender-nonconforming children make him a “freak.” Worst of all, according to the Florida Republican Dan Weldon, Talarico looks as though he “couldn’t name a single obscure wide receiver from the early 2000s.” Supporters of the Republican candidate, state Attorney General Ken Paxton, portray Democrats as wusses, cucks, soy boys who don’t follow sports. One commentator mused about whether Talarico wears “frilly underwear.”

So it goes with this continuing backlash. But good grief! Is that a reference to the Fox News Channel, right there in that opening paragraph?

Yes, it actually is! And with that, at long last, the Atlantic has chosen or has dared to join the human race. The magazine has even dared to let Lewis offer this:

Mostly, the attacks on Talarico have taken the form of 99,999 dog whistles implying that he is gay. On Fox News, Jesse Watters laughingly observed that the Democrats had rebuffed rumors that Talarico is vegan by posting photos of him “swallowing large sticks of meat.” He added: “He’s also 37 and not married.” When the New York Post confirmed that Talarico’s girlfriend exists by revealing her identity, the attack line mutated—did you know that she’s vegan? Pretty gay.   

By the way, I recommend watching the clip of Watters and [Stephen] Miller in full, because Miller has the kind of natural comic gifts that usually persuade people to forsake a career in stand-up and become a funeral director instead. Watters underlines the pathos by providing what I can describe only as live-action canned laughter. And yet, Miller must have some sense of humor, because his (vegan) roast of Talarico concluded with the assertion that the people of Texas, “some of the toughest, roughest, strongest men and women” in America, would never vote for “somebody with that much soy to be a U.S. senator, compared to a real conservative, patriotic, God-fearing, and truly beloved statewide figure in Ken Paxton.”

Ken Paxton? Truly beloved? Now, that’s comedy. Ken Paxton is not even truly beloved in Ken Paxton’s own party...

Astounding! The Atlantic has finally let one of its writers describe the type of braindead garbage which crowds the air at the Fox News Channel. For the clip of Watters and Miller to which she refers, Lewis links you here.

The Atlantic has thereby decided to bite the bullet and join the human race! That said, the New York Times still seems to cower in fear. So do the silent stars at MS NOW, from Rachel and Lawrence on down.

Lewis' work has long been superb. That said, our own Blue America, as a group, has never had a sexual politics. Also, our stars seem to be afraid of Fox, and they don't really seem to care. 

Gutfeld and Watters proceed in the knowledge that they can do and say whatever is pleasing. The loathing of women is undisguised, as is the baiting of those who lack the excessive volume of T which can make men so ugly, so stupid.

The Times will not report what they do. So too with our own cable stars!

FRANK: We need to do better, Barney Frank said!

FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 2026

Did Gutfeld get something right? During the last year of his life, Barney Frank was concerned with the possible loss of "our democracy."   

More specifically, and quite constructively, he was concerned with the possibility that members of his own political tribe might be contributing to the danger. For that reason, he wrote the book which will be published later this year, the book which carries this title:

The Hard Path to Unity: Why We Must Reform the Left to Rescue Democracy 

How constructive were Frank's critiques? There will be no way to know until the book appears—and when it does, no one will comment or care. 

But in the final few months of his life, he gave interviews to the New York Times and to the Atlantic. 

The Atlantic's James Kirchick has seen the book. It seems to us that he made an important point as he discussed Frank's views:

Barney Frank’s Second Coming Out

[...]

Many progressives believe their own hearts to be pure but cannot conceive that anyone to their right might have sincere reasons for opposing them on borders, crime, foreign policy, or any other issue. “Many of these zealots,” Frank writes, “are convinced that the source of their abandonment is some form of corruption.” 

So Frank writes, in his book.

Kirchick, a conservative-leaner, may have seemed like a strange choice for this assignment, but Rep. Frank signed on. Meanwhile, who are the "zealots" to whom Frank refers in that one quote? 

We can't tell you that. But it's completely natural for progressives, and for everyone else, to assume that their own motives are pure and that those who disagree simply must be corrupt.  

We human beings are wired that way. It's how we're inclined to react.

In fact, we Blues managed to find a very large number of ways to help President Trump return to the White House. As is natural, w Blues have often had trouble perceiving that fact. That makes it more likely that we the people will never be able to find a way out of the threat to "our democracy"—out of our current extremely dangerous societal mess.  

It's true! Much of the gruesome behavior which emanates from the Fox News Channel is built around legitimate complaints about Democratic Party governance and Blue American issue framing. If we had to compile a list of such triggers, we'd start with the (still unexplained) border policy conducted under President Biden, but then we'd continue from there.

Many complaints voiced on appalling programs like The Five are built upon a legitimate base. That doesn't make the pseudo-journalistic behavior less gruesome, but it helps explain why there's a large audience for the gruesome behavior displayed on such programs—an audience from which the corporate bosses at Fox are apparently happy to profit.  

How gruesome does that behavior get, even as our own tribe's journalistic stars and media orgs agree to look away? Simply put, there's no way to keep up with the ugly behavior, or with the attendant stupidity of the imitation of journalism persistently aired on the channel to which we've referred..

There's no way to keep up with the channel's childish, ugly "masculinism," or with its sick imitations of journalism—its imitations of human life. That brings us back to the questions with which we began this week's reports. 

We posted those questions in Monday's report. Those questions concerned conditions at the Delaney Hall Detention Center, an ICE facility in Newark.

Based on news reports from the previous week, our questions went like this:  

Have detainees at Delaney Hall been served food containing maggots? 

Also:

Last Wednesday, did three congressmen observe this unacceptable state of affairs as they toured the site?  

News reports by CBS News and the Associated Press made it seem that at least one congressman, or possibly three, had actually seen such food being served, but the writing in their news reports was perhaps a bit fuzzy. 

In this Facebook post, the Washington Post seemed to say the same thing, mentioning Rep. Jerry Nadler by name.

That said, how about it? Did the congressmen actually see such food being served? By now, we'd say the answer is tilting toward a possible no, although there's no way to be be sure.

We've seen no one pursue the three congressmen to nail down the question of what they saw at the detention center. Meanwhile, this very Wednesday, the editorial board at the Washington Post seemed to backslid on that question a bit, in the manner shown:

Alarming cruelty reported at Delaney Hall demands accountability

The state of New Jersey filed a lawsuit this week against the operator of a privately run immigration detention center in Newark, claiming that health inspectors were denied full access to the facility. It’s the latest reminder that the federal government’s immigration enforcement system desperately needs greater transparency and accountability.   

The facility, called Delaney Hall, has become a flash point in recent weeks. Reports of unsanitary and inhumane conditions, which have become disturbingly common among detention facilities nationwide, have resulted in violent clashes outside the building between protesters and police. The situation has gotten so bad that Newark Mayor Ras Baraka (D) imposed a curfew around the center, and Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D) deployed state troopers to manage the crowds.  

[...]   

[T]he federal government has an obligation to ensure that detainees in its custody, even if they illegally entered the country, are not subject to cruel conditions. Immigration detention centers are not supposed to be punitive; their purpose is to temporarily house immigrants while courts review their cases.

For weeks, detainees and attorneys advocating for them have accused the Delaney facility of providing poor living conditions and inadequate medical care despite outbreaks of covid and the flu. Some prisoners have joined a hunger strike, alleging that they have been served expired food and even meals containing live worms. Others have said they were subjected to solitary confinement.  

The editorial continues from there—and for starters, good for the board! The editorial board correctly asserts that detainees must not be subjected to cruel conditions—but the board has slid away from the original claim about the three congressmen. 

"Maggots" have become "live worms;" we see no difference there. But the assertions about this matter are now being sourced to statements made by detainees. The notion that congressmen actually observed some such state of affairs have disappeared from this editorial. 

Elsewhere, Blue news orgs simply ignored this allegation, right from the start. No one seems to have asked Rep. Nadler to say what exactly he saw. Could it be that we Blues just plain simply perhaps don't especially care?   

The claim last week was horrendous enough, but behavior at the Fox News Channel was immeasurably worse. It was that behavior which led us to focus on this matter as the week began. 

It began last Thursday with ugly behavior, then slid downhill from there.   

It's as we noted on Monday. "Who cares if there are maggots?" the channel's grisly Greg Gutfeld histrionically asked, on last Thursday's edition of The Five.  

"Who cares if [detainees] don't like the food?" Gutfeld's sidekick, Jesse Watters, soon added. 

At Media Matters, a fuller (though incomplete) bit of transcript was supplied. The inanity continued from the point where this transcript stopped, but—with paragraph breaks added for a modicum of clarity—this is the Media Matters transcript of the bulk of what Gutfeld said on last Thursday's The Five:  

Greg Gutfeld on the federal detention center at Delaney Hall: “Maggots or not, the food is dietitian approved”
Gutfeld: “Who cares if there are maggots?

GREG GUTFELD (CO-HOST): In terms of the complaints, there's no video, medical records, or public reports, but I have to admit Jerry Nadler went there. And you know what he said? The food comes in small portions.

JESSICA TARLOV (CO-HOST): And has maggots in it.

GUTFELD: Yeah, but it's in small portions.

TARLOV: I get you want to call him fat, but there's—

GUTFELD: No. Why would you say that? He has a medical condition, Jessica, my God! He's obese, not fat! 

But the conditions are roughly the same as where they came from. Messy johns, medical delays. But maggots or not, the food is dietitian approved. 

I don't see the maggots. Why aren't they documented? They get 24/7 medical access. But here's the key, and this is the only thing you need to remember:

When the opposition to immigration policy scales up, the complaints spike. They're aggregated, and they are amplified, designed to set the stage for this chaotic mess. But these people, you do not have to fear them, you do not have to listen to them, they created the problem, they have lost the privilege of input. 

You can complain all you want about the maggots. I don't believe you. Because I don't believe any Democrat about immigration. It's just like commenting on Trump's health after enabling Biden's cover-up. I don't have to listen to that anymore. 

You guys blew it. Trump sealed what you broke, the border. Now he's cleaning up the aftermath. You can't stand there and tell us how to clean up the mess. You lost that right.

DANA PERINO (CO-HOST): Jessica, I will go to you. Why does it have to go from—instead of saying, "Fix this problem"—if there are maggots in the food. Like again, I don't know—

GUTFELD: Who cares if there are maggots?  

Videotape is provided at the Media Matters link.

"Who cares if there are maggots?" he thoughtfully interjected. But an array of ugly and stupid comments preceded that question, and Watters hadn't yet had the chance to offer this thought:

"Who cares if they don't like the food?"  

Regarding the food, it's "dietitian approved," Gutfeld had mockingly said. Before that, he had engaged in one of his standard jibes on the theme that Rep. Nadler is just too BLEEPing fat. 

(There's a long, coarse backstory here, built around Gutfeld's endless, brain-damaged ruminations about Nadler's imagined bathroom behaviors. And yes, this is the kind of product the Fox News Channel provides in its primetime "cable news" coverage.)

Gutfeld had also said that "messy johns" are the norm where the detainees come from. And he had voiced the remarkable journalistic theory which he now routinely voices:

Because Democrats opened the border and misstated about President Biden's health, people within his own Red tribe no longer have to listen to any claim any liberal or Democrat makes!

We Blues can complain as much as we like. In a classic prescription for a failed state, Gutfeld persistently instructs Red American viewers that they should no longer listen or care.  

Also, of course, "Maggots or not, the food is dietitian approved!" So went this messaging agent's mocking reaction in the face of the claim about maggots.

The conversation got dumber from there, with Watters joining in. The next day, Watters performed the role of clown to perfection, reading "the whole monthly menu" for the center, desserts and all, as if a pudding is just as sweet if it arrives with live worms in it.   

The rest of the children sat around, laughing and pretending that this behavior made sense. This Monday, Delaney Hall was discussed again, with Watters recalling his reading of the menus: 

WATTERS (6/1/26): They were complaining they didn't have ethnic food. We looked at the menu, it looked like Taco Bell...Instead of talking about health care or high gas prices, they're worrying about what cereal we're feeding some maniac from Honduras! That's the problem with Democrats! 

Few detainees are maniacs. It isn't clear that many or most of the detainees should be detained at all, but this is the way this game is played on this ersatz "news channel."

It went downhill from there. By the end of Monday's segment, Gutfeld was deriding Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) as "a little douche."

"Little Kim—what a little douche," the 61-year-old "bad boy" said. 

Watters jumped in to improve the play. He and Gutfeld took turns deriding Senator Kim as "the real Lil' Kim," a wonderfully entertaining reference to the lady rapper.

Much of what gets said on this show is built upon reasonable complaints. From there, the reaction tends to move in the direction of ugly and the ginormously dumb. 

President Trumnp's bizarre behaviors and lunatic claims will simply never be mentioned.  In this way, the furious Gutfeld and the clowning clown Watters engineer an epistemic silent secession, in which Red Americans are allowed to retain spotless minds about President Trump while hearing endless insults aimed at the douchebags found in the other America.

Meanwhile, we Blues! Our big news orgs report none of this profoundly destructive behavior. The ugly insults aimed at women by Gutfeld's broken brained masculinism go unreported as well. 

Do we Blues sometimes give them the fuel from which this soul-draining conduct is launched? We leave you today with this one thought about the maggots:    

Gutfeld said he didn't believe that there were maggots. As far as we have ever learned from any Blue American news org, it could be that he was right!

Frank said we Blues need to step up our game. As a general matter, we agree with that assessment.

That said, do we Blues possess the skill to see where we may be proceeding in error? As humans, we Blues, like the Reds, aren't necessarily wired that way.

Based on our tribe's widespread self-assurance, we anticipate little improvement until a highly skilled leader appears.

Starting Monday: "When language goes on holiday!" (Reports on the Callais decision. Thoughts on what comes next.)