SATURDAY: The miracle suddenly looks like this!

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2026

Eighth-graders bypass Lourdes: We'd call it one of his weak spots. 

As we noted in Monday's report, Nicholas Kristof has endorsed the claim of that "Mississippi miracle" in a recent column for the New York Times.

(To his credit, he didn't use the term "miracle," nor has he done so in the past. Almost everyone does.)

The miracle involves the miraculous Naep scores produced by that state's (good, decent, deserving) public school kids. As you may know, the Naep is a highly regarded federal program which tests reading and math, every few years, in Grade 4 and Grade 8. 

(For most purposes, there are reasons to skip the Grade 12 scores.). 

The Naep is a highly regarded program. On Tuesday, we focused on this miraculous finding, as cited in Kristof's column:

These Three Red States Are the Best Hope in Schooling

[...]

Black fourth graders in Mississippi are on average better readers than those in Massachusetts, which is often thought to have the best public school system in the country (and one that spends twice as much per pupil).

Say what? Mississippi's black fourth graders outperformed their counterparts in Massachusetts? 

At least on its face, that claim is correct! Whatever the explanation might be, here are the relevant scores from the most recent testing:

Average scores, 2024 Naep 
Black kids, Grade 4 reading

Massachusetts: 202.86
Mississippi: 205.93

If genuine, that may or may not constitute a miracle. But given the circumstances mentioned by Kristof, it looks like a major accomplishment.

(According to a very rough rule of thumb, a gap of 10-11 points on the Naep is often said to correspond, very roughly, to one academic year.)

As if to prove that everyone makes mistakes, we then uncorked a whopper. (As we've mentioned several times, the incessant flooding of the zone has had us feeling overwhelmed. Plus, the Super Bowl!)

As of today, a double groaner has been corrected in Tuesday's report. What we had meant to present can be seen belowMississippi's white fourth graders also came fairly close to matching the kids up north:

Average scores, 2024 Naep
White kids, Grade 4 reading

Massachusetts: 233.21
Mississippi: 230.85

(By the way: When we look at the giant gaps between white and black kids in each of those states, do we really want to claim that anyone's producing a miracle at this point in time?)

At any rate, there you see the fourth grade scores from the most recent Naep. Mississippi's black kids outscored their peers in Massachusetts. Mississippi's white kids came close.

If nothing is "wrong" with those test scores, that result would seem to represent a substantial, surprising accomplishment. That said, adult life doesn't begin after fourth gradeand here are the corresponding scores from that same year for eighth grade students in those two states:

Average scores, 2024 Naep
Black kids, Grade 8 reading

Massachusetts: 252.03
Mississippi: 242.94
Average scores, 2024 Naep
White kids, Grade 8 reading

Massachusetts: 275.88
Mississippi: 263.83

Borrowing from the early Dylan: But oh, what kind of miracle is this, which goes from great to worse?

There you see a puzzling aspect of this alleged miracle. Over the course of quite a few years, Mississippi's fourth graders have been racking up surprising, nearly miraculous test scores. But by the time the state's kids reach Grade 8, the scores continue to look quite a bit like what they were in the past.

Quickly, let's state the obvious:

The fourth graders who performed so well in 2024 may still be performing that well when they reach the eighth grade and are tested in 2028. But Mississippi's well-intention education reforms have been in place for a long time, and this same pattern keeps showing up:

A miracle seems to be present in Grade 4. But there's no sign of any such phenomenon when you look at the scores from Grade 8.

Why might such a pattern obtain? After fifty years of flogging varieties of this horse, we won't waste our time going there today. For today, we'll only ask you this:

If kids are doing well in fourth grade, but have regressed by the time they finish eighth grade, then what good was that early achievementassuming it really existed?

Kristof cited the Grade 4 scores; he didn't cite Grade 8. In the process, he retold a type of story which has been told ever since the 1960s, when we the people began to pretend that we actually care about black kids.

It's the story of the (alleged) public school miracle, allegedly produced by the handful of people who actually care! Versions of this story have floated around at least since 1967, when 36 Children appeared

In the early 1970s, by total coincidence, we stumbled upon one of the ways miraculous test scores will sometimes appear. (Two friends described the outrageous cheating taking place in their high-scoring, low-income schoola school which was endlessly praised in the Baltimore Sun.)

By the early 1980s, we had stumbled into a telephone relationship with a top executive at one of that era's major testing companies. He was the first to tell us how bad this phenomenon can sometimes get. 

(He told us that school districts can pay to have their students' answer sheets scanned for unusual erasure patterns. Three decades later, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution blew the whistle on the "erasure parties" staged within Atlanta's schools, in which teachers gathered to change reams of wrong answers on students' completed answer sheets to the answers which was correct.)

We know of zero reason to assume that any such fraudulent behavior ever took place in Mississippi. As far as we know, no such misconduct is even possible with respect to the Naep, given the way the Naep is administered.

That said, one event after another, through many long years, convinced us that no one should ever accept these miracle claims on their face. Simple story:

Our journalists love to tell these storiesand repeatedly, these stories turn out to be bogus.

We the humans have pleasing stories we simply love to tell! The story of the educational miracle engineered by the handful of people who actually care is one of these treasured tales.

Note to Kristof, whose overall work we marvel at and greatly admire:

Our "education experts" were endlessly asleep at the switch, down through the many long years, as these feel-good stories came and went. So was the New York Times! When the whistle was finally blown on major cheating scandals in Atlanta and (apparently) in D.C., it was the Atlanta paper, and the much-maligned USA Today, which finally did the work.

(When Michelle Rhee was nominated to be chancellor of the D.C. schools, it was obvious that something was crazily wrong with the test score gains she was claiming from her short teaching career. It was obvious that her claims didn't make statistical sensebut so what? The Washington Post agreed to roll over and pretend that nothing was wrong.)

(Also, Philadelphia.)

Yes, Virginia! We were even present, behind the scenes, when Dr. John Cannell unveiled his Lake Wobegon Reports in the late 1980swhen he reported, perhaps a bit inaccurately, that every state in the nation was reporting that their statewide test scores were, in fact, above average! 

That was a wonderfully comical narrative hook, and the nation's journalists briefly took note. After that, our education journalists went back to sleep, snoring loudly alongside our education experts.

(Back in 2006, we demonstrated that the miracle story concerning one Washington area elementary school was in fact horribly wrong. The Washington Post's Jay Mathews, with whom we share the old school system tie and whose work we greatly admire, told the tale right here.)

Full disclosure: There are certain feel-good stories we humans love to tell! We continue to tell those stories, no matter how often such stories turn out to be bogus.

As to the apparent anomalies in Mississippi's scoring patterns, we know of zero reason to think that overt acts of fraud have ever been part of the story. (Repeatwe know of zero reason.) 

That said, the scoring pattern doesn't seem to make sense. Still, the story lives on.

Anthropologists crowd our dreams at night, telling us things like this:

This is who, and this is what, we actually are as a species!

For the record, there's a different possible explanation for those anomalous Mississippi scoring patterns. We don't know if it's right or wrong.

(Then too, we can think of one or two more.)

We're no longer going to bother with such maddening explorations. That's especially true at this point, as the entire American political structure may be crashing to the ground. 

Is something "wrong" with those Grade 4 scores? To this day, we can't answer that question. We can say that Mississippi's eighth grade scores don't seem to be playing along.

Again, we apologize for Tuesday's dispiriting blunder. We've corrected the blunder in Tuesday's report. The flooding of the zone!

Now for the rest of the story: Still in the early 1980s, that high executive told us that he was leaving the testing business. He said that his company was losing market share to a rival testing companyand he said they felt they couldn't compete, because the rival company was allegedly faking its data (its "norms") so as to produce better test scores.

The executive, who is no longer living, went on to a different public career. Just for the record: 

At that time, it was publicly reported that the Iowa Test of Basic Skills was losing substantial market share to the California Achievement Test. At some point, the switch was made here in Baltimore, perhaps because it was widely bruited that urban systems ended up with better scores on the latter test.

We're telling you what the executive said. We don't know if his suspicions were accurate. 


FRIDAY: Inflation was running at three percent!

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2026

On Fox, the friends made it nine: Yesterday afternoon, then again this morning, the Fox News Channel continued to focus heavily on the search for Nancy Guthrie.

In all honesty, there hasn't a huge amount of news to convey about this deeply unfortunate matter. On Fox, by way of contrast, there seems to be plenty of time to kill. 

Has this helped erase the sitting president from the news stream at a time when his numbers seemed to be sinking? We don't know if that has been some part of the channel's motives. 

But as of yesterday afternoon, CNN and Fox had spent the past week staging virtual filibusters on this unfortunate topic. Consider the Fox News Channel's Will Cain Show, which airs each weekday at 4 p.m. Eastern.

Yesterday afternoon, Cain discussed nothing but the Guthrie case from 4 o'clock down to 4:27 p.m. After a commercial break, he devoted three (3) minutes to yesterday's Senate hearing in which, in Cain's basically accurate rendering, "GOP lawmakers were tearing into Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, grilling him on alleged fraud, anti-ICE rhetoric and everything in between."

Cain spent three (3) minutes on that topic, then returned to fruitless, repetitive discussions about the search for Guthrie. The last five minutes of the show were devoted to a conversation with the actress Candace Cameron Bure about her Christian faith. 

As for this morning, the Fox & Friends program devoted at least half its airtime every hour to the Guthrie matter. Finally, during the third and final 8 o'clock hour, Karoline Leavitt showed up.

As we noted yesterday, performers on Fox News Channel shows don't really need help from "human interest" events when they want to tilt the news in the sitting president's favor. Quite routinely, they disappear the topics they don't like and they reinvent the facts about the topics they prefer.

Leavitt was at her best today. After discussing the Guthrie matter, she was asked about the forthcoming monthly inflation report. Inevitably, Leavitt said this:

LEAVITT (2/13/26): Well look, the report will be released in a few minutes, and I can't get ahead of it. But what we do know are the facts. President Trump inherited an economic mess from the Biden administration. Inflation was at a record highnine percent...

"What we do know are the facts," she said. She then proceeded to change them.

Leavitt continued from there, picking and choosing her measure of current inflation. But noas Leavitt surely knows, inflation wasn't running at nine percent when President Biden handed off to President Trump. 

As Leavitt presumably knows, inflation was running at three percent on that fateful occasion.

Inflation was running at three percent. On Fox, that number is always nine. Jones, Earhardt and Kilmeade, good friends all, politely listened to Leavitt's misstatement without attempting to offer correction. Presumably, they all knew that her statement was bogus, but they also knew that it was bogus in the standard Fox News Channel way.

What has happened to Nancy Guthrie? At this point, nobody knows. 

Fox hardly needs to stage filibusters concerning the search for Nancy Guthrie to make the news work out better for Trump. We don't know why they've focused so heavily on this matter since at least last Saturday morning, but has anyone on Fox & Friends ever mentioned that sad visual rendering of the Obamas the president reposted last week? 

We haven't had time to check that out. Based on experience, we can guess what that search would most likely find.

Full disclosure: In this morning's report, inflation was down to 2.5%. That's much better than 9!

PROOF OF LIFE: "Racist," the one observer said!

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2026

The other said something different: We can't exactly say he's wrong. We also can't swear that he's right.

For those of us in Blue America, we may be inclined to love the claim he makes. The accuracy of the claim is frequently, for better or worse, devoutly to be wished. 

We're speaking here of Jamelle Bouie's recent assessment of the sitting president. He gave voice to that assessment in a New York Times newsletter column which started exactly like this:

This Is Just Who Trump Is

What motivates President Trump?

Not what motivates Trumpism, whatever that is. Not what motivates his MAGA supporters. Not what motivates the infrequent and marginal voters who delivered him his victories in 2016 and 2024.

No. What specifically motivates Donald J. Trump? What brought him into national politics? What drives him as a national political figure?

Who in the world is President Trump? It's an outstanding question! Over the course of the past fifteen years, the sitting president has rather plainly turned American political culture on its head. 

Even if his party loses this year's midterm electionthere's still no proof that the GOP willhe will remain in the Oval Office and he'll still be commander in chief. Some things he's done as president have actually made sensebut his doctorate-wielding therapist niece has described him as "the most dangerous man in the world," and we can't exactly say she was wrong in making that assessment.

Bouie was asking an excellent question, and Bouie is very sharp. For our taste, he may sometimes know too much American historybut we say that only because we're looking for voices which can explain our failing society in a helpful way, without leaving too many of our fellow citizens behind.

Bouie is a good, decent person. In the wake of an infamous Truth Social post, he was asking an excellent questionbut we can't really say we exactly agree with where his rumination took him.

In the passage shown below, we're omitting some of Bouie's reasoning process. We'll suggest that you try to read his whole essay, but here's where he ended up:

The best way to understand the president’s motivations is to find him at his most unfiltered, which is to say, on social media, late at night. And Thursday night, Trump posted a video to his Truth Social account that depicted President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama as apes. The clip, which runs for roughly a minute and shows the Obamas at the end, is set to “The Lion Sleeps Tonight.”

I try to avoid superlatives in my writing, but there is simply no question that this is the most flagrant display of presidential racism since Woodrow Wilson screened D.W. Griffith’s “The Birth of a Nation” in the White House in 1915. And for a sense of the racism of Griffith’s film, recall that it both reinvigorated the Ku Klux Klan and gave the organization its modern iconography.

[...]

Let’s walk back to where we started. What motivates Trump? The answer is simple: racism. You might also say ego and raw self-interest, but the two are connected. Racism, among other things, is a kind of chauvinism, a belief in one’s inherent superiority, based on nothing other than a meaningless accident of birth. It’s an ideology that papers over feelings of inadequacy, that tells you that—no matter what you have or have not accomplished in your life—you’re still better than someone, some group.

We apologize for posting, once again, that account of the visual which appeared at the end of that Truth Social post. At any rate, so the Times columnist said.

Centuries of gruesome human suffering are entangled with the imagery which appeared at the end of that post. In his essay, Bouie correctly says that the visual in question "uses an old white supremacist trope to denigrate the Obamas and, by extension, every American who shares their racial background."

Without question, that statement is accurate. But is there a "simple answer" to Bouie's question? And if there is a simple answer, is it the answer Bouie provided? 

Is that "just who Donald Trump is?" Is that a correct simple answer?

Maybe yes, but maybe no. In all honesty, we can't necessarily say that Bouie's assessment is necessarily correct.

Is the president motivated by racism, full and complete total stop? For just the briefest of tribal moments, we think the following ought to be said:

Over here in Blue America, we love directing our bombs against the othersand "racist" and "bigot" are two of the bombs we deliver at moments like this.

Without any question, some such impulse is fully understandable. But does it lead us to assessments which are actually correct? And if we're actually trying to create a more humane world, does it lead us to presentations which are actually helpful?

We're going to say that it probably doesn't. Just for today, let's describe this as A Tale of Two Explanations:

Who or what is the sitting president? It's an important question!

The columnist's explanation is "racist." The niece's explanation is "mentally ill," though that may be an obsolete term.

For ourselves, we'll tell you this:

We know of no reason to assume that the most dangerous man in the world knew that a bit of soul-draining imagery was sitting there at the end of his Truth Social post. He may have known that the visual was there, but we know of no reason to assume that.

He was on one of his frenzied reposting sprees on the evening in question. He had stumbled upon a lunatic post asserting that Campaign 2020 was riggedthat the presidential election was stolen from him that year as part of history's greatest known hoax.

He came upon that braindead post; inevitably, he reposted it. Are we supposed to assume that he read that post all the way to the end? Given the mania with which he presents, why should we think that?

The president's conduct that night was insanebut then again, what else is new? Through whatever process of cultural evolution, we Blues know how to lash out at racism now, but we don't know how to lash out at the kind of insanity which has prevailed in the past five years as President Ahab continues to chase the claim that he won that election.

It's easier to call him a bigot. It's harder to name-call that.

The president's craziness didn't end with that crazy repost that night. The other reports kept coming infor example, about his desire to rename Penn Station and Dulles Airport after himself, to align them with the renamed Kennedy Center.

That was one of quite a few other strange behaviorsbut what did racism have to do with that? Or with the way he tore the East Wing down? Or with the giant ballroom he plans to buildlike the giant arch he's now planning to build, a giant Ozmandias-style monument to his unparalleled self?

The list of this person's disordered behaviors goes on and on and on. Some of this conduct seems to be entangled with matters of race and ethnicity.

A lot of this conduct just isn't.

Is racism the simple answerthe answer which lies at the heart of it all? Bouie also mentions "ego and raw self-interest," and in her book about her uncle, the niece describes the process by which the uncle was raised to be the person who crazily believes that he aced an extremely simple cognitive test in a way no other human has done.

She explains how he ended up being, to use an outmoded term, many varieties of "mentally ill."

Joe Scarborough was trashing the racists and the bigots at the start of the week. For those of us in Blue America, it's easy and pleasing to do that.

On Wednesday, his bosses told him to stay home and rest. We'll only offer this passing thoughthis conduct on Monday and Tuesday was neither helpful nor smart.

Unfortunate name-calling by Candidate Clinton helped President Trump reach the Oval the first time around. He squeaked by in 2024 thanks to some of the dumbest conduct ever put on display by either major party.

Even then, he barely managed to squeeze by (Replacement) Candidate Harris, who had agreed, in the Biden years, to be the one who went out and said the southern border was locked up tight as a drum.

Jamelle Bouie is plenty sharp. On the whole, we humans quite frequently aren't.

That even includes us self-impressed Blues. We love to call the others names. Meanwhile, our journalists agree that we'll never discuss the most important diagnosis in the world.

Did the president know that the visual was there? Maybe yes and maybe no, but we know of no reason to assume that he did.

Meanwhile, we Blues, as brilliant as we are, greased his skid back into the White House all through 2024. He'll remain there for two more years, even if his party loses the mid-term elections:

What might this person do then?

What might this person perhaps do then? There is no possible way to know. This is the tribal pleasure we've chosen, and our unhelpful political conduct isn't going to stop.

We've been searching for proof of life this weekfor proof of intelligent life. Also, for proof of empathy-driven life, but let's not get totally crazy.

We've been looking for proof of intelligent life. New (anthropological) rule:

Our species is skilled at building tall structures. It tends to go downhill from there.

"Racist," the one observer said. The other said something different.

Jamelle Bouie is very sharp. His answer emerges from the horrors of a brutal past, but we think his assessment is too simple and we think it ain't totally helpful.


THURSDAY: At Mediaite, Rumpf and Hall get it right!

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2026

How one nation turns into two: In this morning's report, we referred to a "thought piece" in the New York Times which starts exactly like this:

Why Nancy Guthrie’s Disappearance Is Breaking Through the Noise

It is the crime drama that Americans cannot look away from.

The apparent kidnapping of Nancy Guthrie, the mother of the television personality Savannah Guthrie, has commanded outsize public attention since her disappearance nearly two weeks ago, suffusing the national psyche even amid a torrent of other news.

Networks and news media outlets have covered the twists of the case in day-by-day, sometimes hour-by-hour detail, as Ms. Guthrie’s homestead near Tucson, Ariz., has become a focus of internet sleuths and a televised shrine. 

We agree with one part of that presentation. It's true! Americans haven't been able to look away from this crime drama if they're watching CNN or the Fox News Channel.

For better or worse, those two cable news channels have gone all in on this event since at least last Saturday morning. If Americans get their news from one of those channels, they've been seeing endless, repetitive reporting and speculation pretty much all around the clock.

For the record, CNN has always tended to focus on "human interest" / disaster events. Hurricane, flood, tornado or fire? CNN is inclined to throw the rest of the world away in thrall to such emotionally draining events. A celebrity-connected disappearance may tend to involve a similar type of appeal.

On the other hand, we've been surprised by the round-the-clock coverage of the Nancy Guthrie disappearance at Fox. 

For the record, Fox is more inclined to cover "true crime" than are CNN or MS NOW, even when no celebrity is involved. That said, Savannah Guthrie, the celebrity in question here, hails from the part of the realm Fox dismisses as "fake news." 

We can't help wondering if some Fox viewers are balking at the sympathetic coverage being extended to someone who works inside Silo Blue. But as we've noted, we've also wondered if Fox is using this event as a way to push the sitting president out of the news at a time when prevailing "hard news" stories have been damaging him in significant ways.

(Last Saturday morning, we turned to Fox & Friends Weekend to see what the friends might say about the sitting president's repellent Truth Social reposthis ludicrous, destructive report about the two Obamas. 

(Silly us! Starting at 6 o'clock sharp, the three friends talked about the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie. Indeed, they talked about that disappearance and about virtually nothing else. At a time when the president was taking a beating in the wider discourse, they seemed to have wished his absurd misbehavior away.)

That said, the messengers at Fox are vastly skilled at disappearing any event which is politically harmful for President Trump. Two recent reports at Mediaite have helped demonstrate how that sifting of content works.

For starters, consider this report by Sarah Rumpf. She describes the way Fox personnel disappeared the president's Obama repost on the day it appeared

Fox News Went All Day Without Mentioning Trump’s Obama Ape Video That Even Republicans Criticized

President Donald Trump’s now-deleted post with a video depicting former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as apes sent shockwaves through the political world Friday, dominating the day’s news cycle and even sparking some rarely-seen critiques from Republicans.

But in Rupert Murdoch’s television empire, it was ignored until the sun had set.

[...]

A review of the entire day’s programming on both the Fox News Channel and Fox Business found not one single mention of the story all day long Friday until after 6 pm ET as the weekend kicked off, on Special Report with Bret Baier.

Using Snapstream’s transcript search function, Mediaite looked for mentions of “Obama,” “Truth Social,” “gorilla,” “ape” and “tim scott.” Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) is the only Black GOP Senator and was one of the earliest Republicans to criticize Trump’s post, explicitly calling it “the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House.”

The story was not covered at all, neither to defend nor criticize the president, report on the reactions to the post, or mention it at all, until Bret Baier’s program spent slightly more than two minutes on it.

Last Friday, for wiser or dumber, the re-post went unmentioned all day long on Fox News and Fox Business. In the 6 o'clock hour, it was cited on Special Reportthe Fox News Channel's one straight-ahead "newshour" program.

Special Report plays by more traditional rules. According to Rumpf's research, the repost went unmentioned on every daytime show.

Yesterday, Colby Hall offered a similar report about the way Pam Bondi's congressional hearing was handled by Fox. Especially given the principal topic at issue, the hearing was a fairly tough go for MAGA. 

Here's what happened on Fox:

Fox News Minimized Pam Bondi’s Epstein Hearing Amid Criticism of Trump DOJ’s Handling

Cable news signals its priorities in real time. On Wednesday morning, viewers watching MSNBC heard Jeffrey Epstein’s name more than 300 times in the first three hours of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s House Judiciary Committee hearing, according to reliable (but not perfect) SnapStream transcript data. CNN mentioned him more than 150 times. Fox News mentioned him three.

Fox News was not ignoring the hearing. Chad Pergram interviewed Bondi as she entered the hearing, offered updates, and viewers caught flashes of the sharper exchanges. But the network declined to carry almost all of the proceedings live or give them the kind of sustained, real-time attention that signals an event truly matters. That editorial judgment is worth examining.

For better or worse, Bondi was wished away by Fox. If you watch the Fox News Channel, you'll rarely be asked to hear about things that might tend to undermine your approval of President Trump.

Those are important reports. With regard to Rumpf's methodology, we once conducted similar research concerning an extremely peculiar bit of behavior by President Trumpthe pardon he granted to the Honduran president for his major drug-running conviction. 

We found that, over the course of the week which followed the pardon, it was mentioned briefly one time on Special Reportbut it was never mentioned on a wide range of other Fox News Channel programs.

Due to a technical snafu, our data somehow got lost. For that reason, we never reported that remarkable fact about the way this "cable news" channel allowed viewers to maintain their spotless minds with respect to that otherwise high-profile event.

Here's the bad news: 

Our major Blue American have often behaved this same way. Giant orgs like the New York Times fail to report this dynamic.

This is happening around the clock. In such ways, we've turned into two separate and distinct AmericasAmericas Red and Blue.


PROOF OF LIFE: Is it time to call Jake Tapper home?

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2026

We pretend to listen: This very morning, the evocative translation of the dramatic statement was banging around in our heads. 

It was banging around in there again. We find this highly evocative:

"When I saw all this, and other things as bad, I was disgusted and withdrew from the wickedness of the times."

As we noted a few weeks ago, that statement, in translation, is drawn from Plato's Seventh Letter, which may or may not be authentic. The background goes like this:

In 404 B.C., in the wake of the Athenian surrender in the Peloponnesian War, the Athenian democracy briefly fell. The Thirty, later known as The Thirty Tyrants, were placed in control of the polity.

In this less evocative translation of the epistle which may be authentic, Plato notes that some of these appointed rulers were personal friends of his. At first, he was intrigued by their rise to power, but soon he amended his view of the Thirty Tyrants:

The Seventh Letter

[...]

In quite a short time they made the former government seem by comparison something precious as gold. For among other things, they tried to send a friend of mine, the aged Socrates, whom I should scarcely scruple to describe as the most upright man of that day, with some other persons to carry off one of the citizens by force to execution, in order that, whether he wished it, or not, he might share the guilt of their conduct. 

But he would not obey them, risking all consequences in preference to becoming a partner in their iniquitous deeds. Seeing all these things and others of the same kind on a considerable scale, I disapproved of their proceedings, and withdrew from any connection with the abuses of the time.

We prefer the more evocative rendering of that final statement. But so it went, in the youthful Plato's eye, as the democracy fell.

If history has taught us anythingand almost surely it hasn'tit has taught us that The Thirty stayed in power for only about a year. That said, sometimes there is no tribe that is perfectly wise. With respect to the Athenian democracy, here's what happened next:

(Continuing directly from above)
Not long after that, a revolution terminated the power of The Thirty and the form of government as it then was. And once more, though with more hesitation, I began to be moved by the desire to take part in public and political affairs. 

Well, even in the new government, unsettled as it was, events occurred which one would naturally view with disapproval; and it was not surprising that, in a period of revolution, excessive penalties were inflicted by some persons on political opponents, though those who had returned from exile at that time showed very considerable forbearance. 

But once more it happened that some of those in power brought my friend Socrates, whom I have mentioned, to trial before a court of law, laying a most iniquitous charge against him and one most inappropriate in his case. For it was on a charge of impiety that some of them prosecuted and others condemned and executed the very man who would not participate in the iniquitous arrest of one of the friends of the party then in exile, at the time when they themselves were in exile and misfortune.

After deposing The Thirty, the new government, in a period of revolutionary zeal, had proceeded to condemn and execute "the most upright man of the day."

Putting it a different way:

Sometimes, the very best, as well as the worst, may be "full of passionate intensity." Making it even simpler, sometimesas President Lincoln saidsometimes it may turn out that we did this too.

Regarding that portrait of the fall of Athens, we wouldn't say it's that bad around here today. But we'd say there's a family resemblance to the way our own democracy, such as it has ever been, has been coming undoneis currently falling apart.

Have those of us in Blue America played a role in this fall? We'd have to say that the answer is yes! In our view, Colby Hall correctly identifies some of our Blue American blame in this admirably nuanced piece.

We Blues have played a part in this too! That said, it seems to us, the larger point would have to be this:

As we've noted in the past, we humans weren't built for this line of work! Eventually, empires and sprawling nation states are destined to fall apart. We humans are inclined to array ourselves in tribes. The fall then proceeds from there.

Yesterday, Attorney General Bondi appeared before the Congress again. As it was the last time, so too yesterday:

We've never seen anyone behave the way she's done on these two occasions.

In a recent profile in The Atlantic, Stephanie McCrummen sketches the way Bondiwho was once a Democrat who seemed to be fairly liberalcame to be the way she is. We recall part of this story:

WHAT HAPPENED TO PAM BONDI?

[...]

Florida politics was trending Republican with Jeb Bush’s election as governor [in 1998]. Though no one I spoke with could recall Bondi expressing strong ideological views—if anything, she seemed fairly liberal—it was around this time that she switched her party registration from Democratic to Republican. She became friendly with Sean Hannity. Soon, Fox News was sending black cars to drive her to the studio to talk about sensational cases such as that of Terri Schiavo, the comatose Florida woman who became the center of a national political drama over whether to end life support. Producers would give Bondi a tape of her appearances afterward, or she’d tell friends to record her segments, and they would gather in a living room and rewatch them. “She’d be like, ‘Did I sound stupid the way I said that?’ ” a close friend from that time told me.

[...]

As state attorney general, Bondi was widely praised for her crackdown on opioid pill mills and for her work combatting human trafficking. But more and more, her success hinged on her willingness to be a spokesperson for the party, especially on Fox News. She appeared regularly as a legal commentator on Hannity, Fox & Friends, America Reports, and The Five, where she had a three-day stint as a guest host. “She was an accomplished, well-spoken carrier of the message,” the GOP operative, who worked on Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, told me, recalling Bondi’s role as a Romney surrogate. “Pam was somebody you could put out for almost anything,” this person said. “She was somebody you could put on a Sunday show.”

We remember Bondi's generally fatuous guest spots on Fox. We recall our surprise in 2010 when she was elected attorney general of Floridalargely based, or so it seemed to us, on the prominence she had gained from those fatuous guest spots, in which she discussed those high "human interest" events.

Can you really get elected based on that? we recall wondering.

As for Hannity himself:

Last night, he again devoted the bulk of his program to the ongoing human interest / true crime drama unfolding in Arizona. On CNN, Jake Tapper was still out there in Tucson. Let us say this about that:

CNN has made some extremely good hires in the past decade or so. We were skeptics when they hired Kaitlan Collins in 2017. She had just turned 25, and she had a very thin resumea resume which was largely compiled at Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller!

As it turned out, our skepticism was misplaced. Collins has been a sensational hire; we admire her competence and her character. 

So too with the relatively recent hire of Audie Cornish, who always had a great voice for radio. As it turns out, she has a great voice for cable news too, along with an impressive amount of sanity, erudition and judgment.

Tapper, hired in 2012, was another very good hire. Yesterday, though, a somewhat odd situation obtained:

The democracy was coming apart right there in Washington, D.C. But for reasons which go unexplained, Tapper was still on the ground in Pima County, where he had been sent.

Last evening, Tapper and Hannity each continued with the mystification about the three-hour search of Annie Guthrie's home, followed days later by the search of the woods behind her home. Last night, Hannity and Tapper (and everyone else) continued the strange refusal to address those somewhat puzzling facts in an endless series of interviews in which the world's most obvious question persistently went unasked and was completely unaddressed.

At this site, we don't know what happened to Nancy Guthrie. As would be the case with any sane person, we hope that she'll be found.

This morning, the New York Times has published a classic "thumb-sucker" piece which pretends to explain the public's fascination with this profoundly unfortunate case. In a somewhat familiar fashion, the piece "explains" that fascination without ever demonstrating that any such fascination exists. 

Meanwhile, will Tapper ever be allowed to come home?  The democracy is crashing in D.C., not in Arizona.

With respect to those somewhat puzzling searches: 

On CNN and on Fox, everyonehosts and expert guests alikeagrees that the possible reason for those searches must never be addressed. Hosts keep reporting the fact that those searches have taken place, and everyone then agrees to show no sign of wondering why they have occurred.

Why has law enforcement conducted those searches? Hour after hour, night after night, everyone agrees not to ask!

In our view, it would be easy enough to answer that question in basically anodyne ways:

Law enforcement never rules anyone out! Until this horrible case has been solved, the FBI and the local police will be leaving no stone unturned!

It would be easy enough to say such things. Some experts have even volunteered the fact that family members are always checked out first. 

(With apologies, we've even seen a few guests make a dangerous statement. They've said that 90 percent of such cases involve family members.)

That said, we assume that the specific explanation for this manufactured mystery lies on the public record. Again, we'll cite an opinion piece by Colby Hall. On balance, we disagree with him here:

Ashleigh Banfield’s Nancy Guthrie Reporting Shows How Clickbait Obstructed Justice

A media figure publicly named a family member as a “prime suspect” in the disappearance of an 84-year-old woman. Law enforcement said no suspect existed. The sheriff called the reporting irresponsible and reckless. The damage was already done.

Ashleigh Banfield, a former NewsNation host who remains affiliated with the network as a true crime podcaster, repeatedly identified Nancy Guthrie’s son-in-law as a prime suspect in her disappearance, citing an anonymous law enforcement source. She did so across platforms while authorities were actively searching and publicly saying the opposite. There does exist the possibility that sheriffs are obfuscating a real lead, which would make Banfield’s reporting no less irresponsible if it hinders an ongoing and active investigation.

That sequence captures the core failure of click-driven crime coverage. Speculation outran verification. Narrative displaced restraint. An active investigation was forced to contend with a media storyline it did not create.
And so on from there. On balance, we can't say we agree with that. We certainly don't agree with the fervor with which Hall states his view.

Banfield is highly experienced. She interviewed us at the 2000 Democratic Convention, when she was working for NBC cablefor what was then called MSNBC!

Banfield isn't a dope. Should she have voiced that report?

We suppose you could teach it flat or round. But the current compromise position strikes us as stone-cold braindead:

Hour after hour, pundits refuse to address the world's most obvious question concerning a "true crime" event with respect to which they've gone a million percent all in. They keep reporting the fact of those searches, then keep refusing to discuss why those searches have happened:

Have we been the only ones who have found this conduct maddening? Do other viewers fail to notice the obvious question lurking there==the question which never gets answered or asked?

If so, then we the people simply aren't up to this task. We think of the famous old joke from the Soviet Union, in which a worker says this:
We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.
A wonderfully rueful, wry joke! Is something like that taking place as the Fox News Channel uses this occasion to wipe the sitting president out of the national discussion? As CNN sends Tapper to focus on true crime and human interest, even as the society is falling apart in D.C.?

We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us? For us the people in our crumbling world, is the current arrangement possibly somewhat similar? 

We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us! That was a wonderful Soviet joke. Is our reality more like this?
They pretend to discuss the news, and we pretend to listen?
Tomorrow: Miles to go