Author: Kerby Anderson

Kerby Anderson
Lots of myths surround the millennial generation. We even spend some time on the radio during our millennial roundtable debunking many of them. Perhaps the most significant prevailing myth is that millennials are broke.
Sociologist Jean Twenge takes on “The Myth of the Broke Millennial” in her extensive article in The Atlantic. This isn’t just a myth that others have about this generation. It is a myth they have about themselves. One author complains about their plight in her book, OK Boomers, Let’s Talk: How My Generation Got Left Behind. She says her generation is responding “with desperation and sometimes anger.”
To her surprise, Jean Twenge responds, “Millennials, as a group, are not broke—they are, in fact, thriving economically. That wasn’t true a decade ago, and prosperity within the generation today is not evenly shared. But since the mid-2010s, Millennials on the whole have made a breathtaking financial comeback.”
The great recession of 2008 was hard on American incomes, especially young millennials, who were just entering the job market. But the millennial income rebound has been both broad and steep.
Two groups that have not done as well are men and people with less education. Millennial men have not seen the income increases that millennial women enjoy (in part because of the gap in educational attainment). That points to the other gap: the income gap between millennials with a college degree and those with only a high school diploma.
In one of his commentaries, John Stonestreet explains that the true crisis for millennials isn’t a financial one. It’s a crisis of meaning and purpose. Once again, this is where the gospel provides the answer. The Bible provides a true foundation for meaning and purpose.

Kerby Anderson
The consumer backlash to Bud Light is well known. But while Anheuser-Busch stock drops and Bud Light cans go unsold, other companies have decided to promote transgenderism. Suzanne Bowdey explains that there are four other companies that are willing to go “Full Bud Light” in their support of transgenderism.
The first is Target. A decade ago, the company was going woke before woke was even a word. A decade ago, they introduced their controversial line of “Love is Love” shirts. Six years ago, Target made news with their plans for mixed-gender bathrooms and fitting rooms. More recently they decided to fill its racks with resources aiding young people to reject their biological sex.
Second is Levi Strauss. We have learned more about the philosophy behind America’s oldest jeans company due to Jennifer Sey, who wrote Levi’s Unbuttoned: The Woke Mob Took my Job but Gave Me my Voice. She warns that radicalism runs deep at Levi’s.
Starbucks is a third company. The company has been financing transgender activism. There was their pronoun campaign in 2019 called #WhatsYourName. More recently, the company offered to ship employees’ children out of state if they wanted to “change” their sex.
A fourth company is Sports Illustrated. I wouldn’t recommend anyone pick up any of their swimsuit issues. But if you even glance at one image expecting to see an actual woman at the beach, you will be disappointed. Kim Petras underwent “gender-transition” surgery years ago and is the Sports Illustrated cover model.
This illustrates the mindset of so many in corporate America. They see a backlash to Bud Light, and the CEOs merely decide to double down. They are free to make those choices, but we are also free to decide what we will or will not buy.

Kerby Anderson
The consumer backlash to Bud Light is well known. But while Anheuser-Busch stock drops and Bud Light cans go unsold, other companies have decided to promote transgenderism. Suzanne Bowdey explains that there are four other companies that are willing to go “Full Bud Light” in their support of transgenderism.
The first is Target. A decade ago, the company was going woke before woke was even a word. A decade ago, they introduced their controversial line of “Love is Love” shirts. Six years ago, Target made news with their plans for mixed-gender bathrooms and fitting rooms. More recently they decided to fill its racks with resources aiding young people to reject their biological sex.
Second is Levi Strauss. We have learned more about the philosophy behind America’s oldest jeans company due to Jennifer Sey, who wrote Levi’s Unbuttoned: The Woke Mob Took my Job but Gave Me my Voice. She warns that radicalism runs deep at Levi’s.
Starbucks is a third company. The company has been financing transgender activism. There was their pronoun campaign in 2019 called #WhatsYourName. More recently, the company offered to ship employees’ children out of state if they wanted to “change” their sex.
A fourth company is Sports Illustrated. I wouldn’t recommend anyone pick up any of their swimsuit issues. But if you even glance at one image expecting to see an actual woman at the beach, you will be disappointed. Kim Petras underwent “gender-transition” surgery years ago and is the Sports Illustrated cover model.
This illustrates the mindset of so many in corporate America. They see a backlash to Bud Light, and the CEOs merely decide to double down. They are free to make those choices, but we are also free to decide what we will or will not buy.

Kerby Anderson
Doing a commentary on the Los Angeles Dodgers and the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” is difficult because the story keeps changing. In case you aren’t familiar, the “sisters” are drag queens whose shtick is to dress up as Catholic nuns and then mock every aspect of religion in general and Catholicism in particular.
The story keeps changing because the “sisters” were to receive an award on Pride Night. Then the inevitable reaction came, and the Dodgers canceled the event, and then reinstated the event due to pressure from the Los Angeles LGBT Center and the California Teachers Association. Then a Catholic advocacy group launched a $1 million campaign to promote a boycott of the team.
I do wonder about the Dodger front office that invited, disinvited, and re-invited the “sisters” to Pride Night. How will they now react to the push for a boycott and for “people of goodwill to express their opposition to your celebration of anti-Catholic bigotry and mockery.” Their latest attempt to address this public relations disaster was to schedule a “Christian Faith and Family Day” at Dodger Stadium a month later.
It’s worth mentioning that the Dodgers have had a long and significant connection to their Catholic fans even going back to the time when they were in Brooklyn. The O’Malley family owned the Dodgers for years and were well known for their Catholic convictions. They even sponsored a “Nun’s Day” at Dodger Stadium. That would be actual Catholic nuns, not the fake “sisters” who have spent years ridiculing Christianity and Catholicism.
Major league baseball teams have promoted various fan nights and given out everything from special hotdogs to signed baseballs to bobbleheads of popular players. But bringing in a group that mocks the faith of some of the players and many of the fans has become a public relations disaster.

Kerby Anderson
Doing a commentary on the Los Angeles Dodgers and the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” is difficult because the story keeps changing. In case you aren’t familiar, the “sisters” are drag queens whose shtick is to dress up as Catholic nuns and then mock every aspect of religion in general and Catholicism in particular.
The story keeps changing because the “sisters” were to receive an award on Pride Night. Then the inevitable reaction came, and the Dodgers canceled the event, and then reinstated the event due to pressure from the Los Angeles LGBT Center and the California Teachers Association. Then a Catholic advocacy group launched a $1 million campaign to promote a boycott of the team.
I do wonder about the Dodger front office that invited, disinvited, and re-invited the “sisters” to Pride Night. How will they now react to the push for a boycott and for “people of goodwill to express their opposition to your celebration of anti-Catholic bigotry and mockery.” Their latest attempt to address this public relations disaster was to schedule a “Christian Faith and Family Day” at Dodger Stadium a month later.
It’s worth mentioning that the Dodgers have had a long and significant connection to their Catholic fans even going back to the time when they were in Brooklyn. The O’Malley family owned the Dodgers for years and were well known for their Catholic convictions. They even sponsored a “Nun’s Day” at Dodger Stadium. That would be actual Catholic nuns, not the fake “sisters” who have spent years ridiculing Christianity and Catholicism.
Major league baseball teams have promoted various fan nights and given out everything from special hotdogs to signed baseballs to bobbleheads of popular players. But bringing in a group that mocks the faith of some of the players and many of the fans has become a public relations disaster.

Kerby Anderson
We recently had another case of the major media publicizing book banning that never took place. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since the same media last year told us that the Florida legislature passed a “Don’t Say Gay Bill.” That’s how they described the Florida Parental Rights Education legislation that was supported by a majority of citizens in Florida (both Democrats and Republicans).
The Associated Press, CNN, ABC, NPR, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Politico, Daily Mail, and the Guardian all ran headlines claiming that a school within Miami-Dade County Public Schools “banned” or “blocked” access to a poem read by Amanda Gorman (who spoke at President Biden’s inauguration). Their story was based on an original erroneous story by the Miami Herald.
The true story is that the poem (and a few other resources) were moved from a shelf in the library’s “media center” for grade school kids and put on the shelf for middle school kids. That’s all that was done. One school, one library, moved some books. But that was enough for most of the major media to run with a story about book banning.
Why do we keep getting these fake stories about book banning? They occur for the same reason that we keep getting fake hate crime stories. It is a matter of supply and demand.  For leftists, the demand is greater than the supply of examples of racism or homophobia. That’s why I have written a dozen commentaries over the years of fake hate crimes that were reported in the media long before anyone ever heard of Jussie Smollett.
Have there been attempts to ban books in the past? Of course. Catcher in the Rye, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and To Kill a Mockingbird are just a few examples. But as one commentator put it “Book Banning Isn’t What It Used to Be.”
The next time you read about a book banning, be skeptical.

Kerby Anderson
We recently had another case of the major media publicizing book banning that never took place. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised since the same media last year told us that the Florida legislature passed a “Don’t Say Gay Bill.” That’s how they described the Florida Parental Rights Education legislation that was supported by a majority of citizens in Florida (both Democrats and Republicans).
The Associated Press, CNN, ABC, NPR, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, Politico, Daily Mail, and the Guardian all ran headlines claiming that a school within Miami-Dade County Public Schools “banned” or “blocked” access to a poem read by Amanda Gorman (who spoke at President Biden’s inauguration). Their story was based on an original erroneous story by the Miami Herald.
The true story is that the poem (and a few other resources) were moved from a shelf in the library’s “media center” for grade school kids and put on the shelf for middle school kids. That’s all that was done. One school, one library, moved some books. But that was enough for most of the major media to run with a story about book banning.
Why do we keep getting these fake stories about book banning? They occur for the same reason that we keep getting fake hate crime stories. It is a matter of supply and demand.  For leftists, the demand is greater than the supply of examples of racism or homophobia. That’s why I have written a dozen commentaries over the years of fake hate crimes that were reported in the media long before anyone ever heard of Jussie Smollett.
Have there been attempts to ban books in the past? Of course. Catcher in the Rye, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and To Kill a Mockingbird are just a few examples. But as one commentator put it “Book Banning Isn’t What It Used to Be.”
The next time you read about a book banning, be skeptical.

Kerby Anderson
Is the abortion drug safe? That is a question being debated in federal court pointing back to the decision made by the Food and Drug Administration two decades ago. US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a national injunction on the use of mifepristone. The case then went to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Are the drugs used in a chemical abortion safe? Obviously, they are not safe for the unborn child since the first drug is used to block progesterone and kill the baby, and the second drug causes uterine contractions to expel the dead or dying baby.
But the question before the court is whether the drug is safe for the mother. This is no small issue since the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than half (54%) of all abortions are done using these drugs in a chemical abortion.
If you have followed the debate surrounding the abortion drug, you have likely heard that it is safer than Tylenol. The FDA reports that there have been just 28 deaths from the abortion drug. By contrast, about 150 Americans died each year from Tylenol (usually because of an overdose).
Dr. Randall O’Bannon (director of Education and Research for National Right to Life) puts these numbers in context. Yes, there are 150 Tylenol deaths, but Americans take 25 billion doses of Tylenol each year. There have only been 5.6 million chemical abortions since FDA approval.
Once he ran the numbers, he concluded that your risk of dying from the abortion drug is about 833 times higher than your risk of dying from Tylenol. And I might mention that the risk of a woman facing a complication and having to go to the emergency room is quite high.
Doesn’t look like the abortion drug is as safe as we have been led to believe.

Kerby Anderson
Is the abortion drug safe? That is a question being debated in federal court pointing back to the decision made by the Food and Drug Administration two decades ago. US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a national injunction on the use of mifepristone. The case then went to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Are the drugs used in a chemical abortion safe? Obviously, they are not safe for the unborn child since the first drug is used to block progesterone and kill the baby, and the second drug causes uterine contractions to expel the dead or dying baby.
But the question before the court is whether the drug is safe for the mother. This is no small issue since the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than half (54%) of all abortions are done using these drugs in a chemical abortion.
If you have followed the debate surrounding the abortion drug, you have likely heard that it is safer than Tylenol. The FDA reports that there have been just 28 deaths from the abortion drug. By contrast, about 150 Americans died each year from Tylenol (usually because of an overdose).
Dr. Randall O’Bannon (director of Education and Research for National Right to Life) puts these numbers in context. Yes, there are 150 Tylenol deaths, but Americans take 25 billion doses of Tylenol each year. There have only been 5.6 million chemical abortions since FDA approval.
Once he ran the numbers, he concluded that your risk of dying from the abortion drug is about 833 times higher than your risk of dying from Tylenol. And I might mention that the risk of a woman facing a complication and having to go to the emergency room is quite high.
Doesn’t look like the abortion drug is as safe as we have been led to believe.

Kerby Anderson
Theft in stores and businesses has increased significantly. This includes everything from shoplifting to smash-and-grab to organized retail crime. The stores may initially pay the price, but they pass on the cost to us as customers in the form of higher prices to cover their losses. The local community also pays a price when stores close because of higher crime rates.
The CEO of Target Corp. has put a number on what is called “inventory shrinkage,” which is mostly theft from stores. Their cost this year was $500 million. When you lose a half billion dollars to theft, you must start making tough decisions. That is why Target (along with many other companies) have started closing stores in high-crime areas.
The Wall Street Journal editors make an important point. Leftists in some of these cities complain about the loss of these stores that create what is called a “commercial desert.” They blame the companies, when they should be complaining about the progressive policies of the politicians in these cities that have allowed crime to skyrocket. The editors remind us that “the first duty of government is to provide for public safety.”
And it is worth mentioning that these losses aren’t just from individual acts of shoplifting. Stores face a growing threat from organized retail crime. “Gangs plan their raids on retail stores, warehouses and trucks or rail hubs.” They aren’t stealing for personal consumption but to sell stolen goods for a profit over the Internet.
In this next election, voters must replace leftist district attorneys with candidates who will enforce the law. This runaway theft affects all of us and creates a culture of disorder and a culture of disdain for the law.

Kerby Anderson
Theft in stores and businesses has increased significantly. This includes everything from shoplifting to smash-and-grab to organized retail crime. The stores may initially pay the price, but they pass on the cost to us as customers in the form of higher prices to cover their losses. The local community also pays a price when stores close because of higher crime rates.
The CEO of Target Corp. has put a number on what is called “inventory shrinkage,” which is mostly theft from stores. Their cost this year was $500 million. When you lose a half billion dollars to theft, you must start making tough decisions. That is why Target (along with many other companies) have started closing stores in high-crime areas.
The Wall Street Journal editors make an important point. Leftists in some of these cities complain about the loss of these stores that create what is called a “commercial desert.” They blame the companies, when they should be complaining about the progressive policies of the politicians in these cities that have allowed crime to skyrocket. The editors remind us that “the first duty of government is to provide for public safety.”
And it is worth mentioning that these losses aren’t just from individual acts of shoplifting. Stores face a growing threat from organized retail crime. “Gangs plan their raids on retail stores, warehouses and trucks or rail hubs.” They aren’t stealing for personal consumption but to sell stolen goods for a profit over the Internet.
In this next election, voters must replace leftist district attorneys with candidates who will enforce the law. This runaway theft affects all of us and creates a culture of disorder and a culture of disdain for the law.

Kerby Anderson
Mark Lewis has a good question for anyone who seems unconcerned about the influx of millions of migrants who have arrived illegally. He asks, “What Are All These Illegals Going to Do?” He is talking about approximately 30 million who are here and will never be sent back to their country of origin.
Now that they are here, what will they do? He cites four possibilities. First, they can pick crops. Many are already doing that and have been doing that for years. They shouldn’t be here, but they are here now even though they may be taking jobs from other Americans.
Second, they could take other menial jobs, but those may not pay very well and so they may end up on welfare or homeless or even involved in crime. Most of the people here illegally don’t have too many skills or much education. Robots and automation are eliminating many of the jobs that used to exist for Americans or foreigners with few job skills.
The last two categories should disturb all of us. He acknowledges that “some illegals will sell drugs.” That shouldn’t be a surprise since some of the migrants crossing our border have connections to the drug cartels. Even if they don’t have those connections, the lure of quick profits from the drug trade will entice many into the drug trade.
Finally, he says the millions here illegally are a revolution waiting to happen. “The illegals are going to discover that Joe Biden’s America is not what it was advertised to be.  Most of them will exist in squalor and deep poverty, with no easy avenue of escape.”
This is an important question you should ask your family, friends, and coworkers. You should especially ask the candidates who will soon be asking for your vote and financial support. What are these illegals going to do? The few possible answers should concern all of us.

Kerby Anderson
Mark Lewis has a good question for anyone who seems unconcerned about the influx of millions of migrants who have arrived illegally. He asks, “What Are All These Illegals Going to Do?” He is talking about approximately 30 million who are here and will never be sent back to their country of origin.
Now that they are here, what will they do? He cites four possibilities. First, they can pick crops. Many are already doing that and have been doing that for years. They shouldn’t be here, but they are here now even though they may be taking jobs from other Americans.
Second, they could take other menial jobs, but those may not pay very well and so they may end up on welfare or homeless or even involved in crime. Most of the people here illegally don’t have too many skills or much education. Robots and automation are eliminating many of the jobs that used to exist for Americans or foreigners with few job skills.
The last two categories should disturb all of us. He acknowledges that “some illegals will sell drugs.” That shouldn’t be a surprise since some of the migrants crossing our border have connections to the drug cartels. Even if they don’t have those connections, the lure of quick profits from the drug trade will entice many into the drug trade.
Finally, he says the millions here illegally are a revolution waiting to happen. “The illegals are going to discover that Joe Biden’s America is not what it was advertised to be.  Most of them will exist in squalor and deep poverty, with no easy avenue of escape.”
This is an important question you should ask your family, friends, and coworkers. You should especially ask the candidates who will soon be asking for your vote and financial support. What are these illegals going to do? The few possible answers should concern all of us.

Kerby Anderson
Depression is the US has reached record levels. According to the latest Gallup poll, “The percentage of US adults who report having been diagnosed with depression at some point in their lifetime has reached 29%, nearly 10 percentage points higher than in 2015.” This is a troubling statistic, especially at a time when the country is enjoying a level of prosperity.
Treatment for depression has also increased. “The percentage of Americans who currently have or are being treated for depression has also increased, to 17.8%, up about seven points over the same period.”
Those who were polled were asked, “Has a doctor or nurse ever told you that you have depression?” and “Do you currently have or are you currently being treated for depression?” The answers to both of those questions became part of the ongoing Gallup National Health and Well-Being Index.
It is also disturbing to discover which demographic groups showed the greatest increase in depression. More than one-third of women (36.7%) report having been diagnosed with depression at some point in their lifetime. Women (23.8%) and adults aged 18 to 29 (24.6%) also have the highest rates of current depression or treatment for depression.
Lifetime depression rates are also climbing among Black and Hispanic adults. In fact, these rates have now surpassed those of White respondents. In the past, White adults usually had marginally higher rates of both lifetime and current depression.
The reasons for rising depression are many: social isolation, loneliness, and substance abuse. Christians might add loss of meaning and rejection of the supernatural as other key factors. That is why I recommend that pastors and Bible teachers address the issue of depression and explain the medical, social, and spiritual factors to their congregation. This is an important issue the church cannot ignore.

Kerby Anderson
Depression is the US has reached record levels. According to the latest Gallup poll, “The percentage of US adults who report having been diagnosed with depression at some point in their lifetime has reached 29%, nearly 10 percentage points higher than in 2015.” This is a troubling statistic, especially at a time when the country is enjoying a level of prosperity.
Treatment for depression has also increased. “The percentage of Americans who currently have or are being treated for depression has also increased, to 17.8%, up about seven points over the same period.”
Those who were polled were asked, “Has a doctor or nurse ever told you that you have depression?” and “Do you currently have or are you currently being treated for depression?” The answers to both of those questions became part of the ongoing Gallup National Health and Well-Being Index.
It is also disturbing to discover which demographic groups showed the greatest increase in depression. More than one-third of women (36.7%) report having been diagnosed with depression at some point in their lifetime. Women (23.8%) and adults aged 18 to 29 (24.6%) also have the highest rates of current depression or treatment for depression.
Lifetime depression rates are also climbing among Black and Hispanic adults. In fact, these rates have now surpassed those of White respondents. In the past, White adults usually had marginally higher rates of both lifetime and current depression.
The reasons for rising depression are many: social isolation, loneliness, and substance abuse. Christians might add loss of meaning and rejection of the supernatural as other key factors. That is why I recommend that pastors and Bible teachers address the issue of depression and explain the medical, social, and spiritual factors to their congregation. This is an important issue the church cannot ignore.

Kerby Anderson
Today is Memorial Day. For many Americans, it is merely a day off. For others, it marks the start of summer. But hopefully for many of you, it is a day to honor those who fought for our freedom and especially for those who paid the ultimate sacrifice.
Sure we can enjoy our picnics and go for a walk or go for a swim. But we should take some time to put up a flag, make a banner, and perhaps participate in a parade honoring our military.
Certainly those in the military feel more loved than the vets who returned from the Vietnam War. But it wouldn’t hurt to thank those who have served our country and to make them feel appreciated. We will never be able to repay them enough for their service.
What else can we do? If you visit a few websites, you will find all sorts of suggestions. Here are a few to consider. Participate in a “National Moment of Remembrance” at 3 PM today. Pause, listen to taps, and reflect. I was in London’s Heathrow airport on Veterans’ Day. When time came to stop and reflect, the airport was absolutely quiet for a minute or so. I was impressed. We can learn something from the British and their reverence for their war dead.
You might encourage your friends, neighbors, and family to visit cemeteries and perhaps even place flags on the graves. I have been to military cemeteries in Hawaii and the Philippines and have seen what is done there. We need to do the same back home.
Those of you who live near the nation’s capital might visit one of the memorials for the Vietnam Veterans, the World War II Veterans, or the Korean War Veterans.
I will let you consider what you might do to make this day special. The point is to make this day special. Too often we come to think about it as nothing more than a Monday holiday or the kick-off for summer. It should mean so much more for us.

Kerby Anderson
One way to predict what our government is going to do in the future is to look at what other governments are doing in the present. Look at Argentina. The official annual inflation rate is 104%, though the actual inflation rate may be even higher. The government of Argentina has now banned operations that allow bank clients to purchase cryptocurrencies. This announcement came just days after two large institutions announced they would let clients buy bitcoin.
This looks like an attempt to “close the exits” because of a fear that citizens would be looking for ways to preserve what little wealth they have. I cannot blame the citizens for wanting to find ways to prevent the money they were able to set aside each year from losing more than half of its value every year. You would want your savings in the US dollar or bitcoin rather than in the Argentine peso. And I understand why the government is trying to prevent a flight to safer investments.
We have seen the same reaction to possible capital flight in China. The government has instituted capital controls that restrict domestic households from investing abroad, and foreign investors are restricted from accessing financial markets. Closing the financial exits keeps funds within China’s borders.
We also see the possibility in Europe. Christine Lagarde is the president of the European Central Bank. She has called for regulation of bitcoin. In fact, she believes that the regulation “has to be applied and agreed upon … at a global level because if there is an escape that escape will be used.” Again, governments want to “close the exits.”
At the same time, governments are exploring the development of central bank digital currencies. These CBDCs will provide government leaders with more control over the economy and provide them with the possibility of more control over us. That’s why they need to close the exits.

Kerby Anderson
Two months ago, I talked about the push toward central bank digital currencies in several countries, including our own. Earlier this month, John Stossel sat down with Governor Ron DeSantis. One of the topics was the US government’s plan for a central bank digital currency.
The governor makes it very clear what he thinks about a CBDC. He warns, “Sometimes government does things that may appear to be benevolent but really are kind of like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” Instead, he says, “This is a wolf coming as a wolf.”
The Biden administration says a CBDC will “protect consumers, investors … and the environment.” The governor responded that the last statement is a “tell.” The government, he argues, would impose certain criteria. “You’re filling up too much (with gas). Wait a minute — climate change. You can’t be doing that! You bought another firearm?”
Lest you think that would never happen, let me remind you about what happened in Canada to the truckers protesting the vaccine rules. The government blocked their bank accounts. That would be even easier with a CBDC.
Ron DeSantis also questions the legality of a CBDC. “The Federal Reserve has come out and said, we would only do it after consulting with the legislative and executive branches. Ideally, we’d get specific congressional authorization.” The governor responded that this isn’t just ideal, it is constitutionally required.
This debate will end up in Congress. Senator Elizabeth Warren argues that “Legitimate digital public money could help drive out bogus digital private money.” Senator Ted Cruz has already introduced legislation to prohibit the Federal Reserve from developing a central bank digital currency.
It’s time for debate to begin in Congress on the future of digital currency.

Kerby Anderson
The Biden administration is taking aim at nearly every appliance in your home. Three months ago, I talked about the gas stove controversy. But that is just one example of how the proposed Energy Department standards will affect your home. The administration has proposed or finalized new standards for ovens, microwaves, refrigerators, and laundry machines. This is in addition to other rules that will affect furnaces, air conditioners, and lightbulbs.
The latest set of rules will apply to dishwashers. The editors of the Wall Street Journal refer to these as “The Federal Dirty Dish Rule.” The regulations are an attempt to make dishwashers more efficient in terms of energy and water. New appliances must cut energy usage by 30 percent and reduce water use from 5 gallons to 3.2 gallons.
A little history is in order. Back in the Obama administration, dishwasher regulations raised the average price of a machine nearly $100. But trying to make dishwashers more energy and water efficient didn’t make them more efficient at cleaning glasses, dishes, and utensils. One consumer complained that it’s “ridiculous that dishwashers I had years ago worked better than the high-tech ones today.”
Slowing dishwashing times is also a complaint. To meet higher efficiency standards, the machines recirculate water in longer cycles. A typical run time can be two or three hours. Once the cycle is over, many owners may decide to run the dishwasher again. That seems to undermine the administration’s goal of energy and water conservation.
According to the US Energy Information Administration, nearly 20 percent of American households own a dishwasher that is never used. I think it is time for the government to rethink their “dirty dish rule.”

Kerby Anderson
Wokeness can be found in just about every academic discipline including the recent revelations of woke science. If there is anything more dangerous, it is “woke medicine.” The attack on meritocracy is well documented in Heather Mac Donald’s book, When Race Trumps Merit.
As important as the book is, the danger is driven home by Ann Coulter’s column, “No Biggie, Just the End of Civilization.” Many institutions have dropped their standards, but she decided to focus on the impact on medicine. For example, “the American Medical Association, the American Association of Medical Colleges and the American Association of Pediatrics have all agreed that medicine is racist.” You can find lots of articles in science journals and medical journals talking about racism.
The solution is to lower standards or change standards for medical school. Heather Mac Donald writes “the average score for white applicants on the Medical College Admission Test was in the 71st percentile … The average score for black applicants was in the 35th percentile – a full standard deviation below the average white score.”
Therefore, we shouldn’t be surprised that “medical schools responded by dropping the MCAT for black and Hispanic students.” One medical school offered these students admission based on their “strong appreciation of human rights and social justice.”
One medical institute announced it would spend $2 billion. Was it to find a cure for brain cancer? Parkinson’s disease? Heart disease? No, the $2 billion was set aside to promote “diversity and inclusion in science.”
I think you would agree with me that when it comes to various professions like medicine, I want doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals selected for their expertise not for their skin color.