Friends On The Other Side

Spending time with little kids, I'm slowly becoming aware of recent Disney works. Like this one - The Princess and the Frog (2009). Here's "Friends on the Other Side."

Bad Grandpa

Last week, I worked at the Montessori school as a Substitute Instructional Assistant (IA). (I used to be called a Substitute Teaching Assistant (TA) last semester, but somehow, as sometimes happens in bureaucratic institutions, the acronym changed over the summer.) At first, I was supposed to shuttle back and forth between classrooms as various IAs were withdrawn for training, but it seemed that no one needed me wherever I went. So, I ended up in a back room preparing baskets of whiteboards, markers, and notebooks for some obscure training purpose. Whatever they needed. 

But then, they assigned me to watch the TK and regular kindergartners at recess. Ah, this will be fun! A new batch of the littles. I started supervising the kids at play. Then things took an odd turn. Some of the kindergartners seemed to recognize me. Presumably they were TK kindergartners in the spring. They remembered having fun shouting "Boo!" at me and watching my mock horror. So, several girls started shouting "Boo!" at me. Several other kids joined in, picked up handfuls of wood chips and threw them at me. Then a little boy shouted "Bad Grandpa!" and started pummeling my midsection with his fists in the relentless manner of a Rock-Em, Sock-Em robot. Within a minute we were having our own mini-riot in this corner of the playground. I'm sure the other IAs were rolling their eyes in embarrassment. As any neophyte IA can tell you, it's important to maintain authority by keeping a certain distance from the littles. 

I started defusing the situation by converting the kid's punches into "elevator rides." The other kids began playing in a more-normal, friendly fashion. Several of the kids told me their names. Sometimes, when addressing kids, I use a salutation: Mr. or Miss. I think of it as being more formal than necessary - a kind of word play. I've done this sort of thing ever since I was in high school, but apparently I caused some distress here. An unhappy girl objected to this usage. Referring to her friend, she said, "Her name is not Miss Shawna! It's Shawna!" (*) 

(It was later pointed out to me that, at the local Montessori schools, teachers are addressed using Mr. or Miss, then their first name. So, I was addressing the little kids in the same way as they would address teachers. And they weren't teachers. So, once again, I was breaking the rules. Well, that's Bad Grandpa for you!) 

Kindergarten recess ended and I was assigned to watch older kids. Even there, I was out of practice and out of my depth. I failed to challenge a group of girls walking the perimeter of the playground. I was aware that it was against the rules to linger at the playground's fence, but apparently even walking next to the fence is against the rules, because there are things there that are out of the school's ability to control - barking dogs, inscrutable neighbors, and the like. I watched other kids in boisterous play, and didn't intercede, because it was just within what I considered tolerable conduct, and suffered as younger IAs came over and interfered. I know!  I know! I saw the conduct.  It's just that Bad Grandpa seems to be made of sterner stuff than today's younger school staff. Oh well, provided I see and hear it, and can recall, I'll eventually learn the newfangled ways too. 

(*) Name changed to protect the innocent.

Robots as Security Guards

@sfstandard Humanoid robots with weapons? Sounds totally chill and not at all like the plot of several sci-fi movies. Read the full story at the link in our bio 👀 🎥: @soph_makes_jokes ♬ original sound - The San Francisco Standard

The Future Is Upon Us

"All Witches, Please Raise Your Hand"

Facebook post:

One of my friends told me about a powerful lesson in her daughter's school class recently. They're learning about the Salem Witch Trials, and their teacher told them they were going to play a game.

"I'm going to come around and whisper to each of you whether you're a witch or a regular person. Your goal is to build the largest group possible that does NOT have a witch in it. At the end, any group found to include a witch gets a failing grade."

The teens dove into grilling each other. One fairly large group formed, but most of the students broke into small, exclusive groups, turning away anyone they thought gave off even a hint of guilt.

"Okay," the teacher said. "You've got your groups. Time to find out which ones fail. All witches, please raise your hands."

No one raised a hand.

The kids were confused and told the teacher he'd messed up the game. "Did I? Was anyone in Salem an actual witch? Or did everyone just believe what they'd been told?"

And that is how you teach kids how easy it is to divide a community.

Shunning, scapegoating and dividing destroys far more than they protect. There's plenty of it going around.

Do not allow the ruling elite to divide and destroy us. We must remain united against those who would do so..

Unknown Credit:

I Don't Understand Southern Arizona Anymore

Gingers.

@oddumn #gingers #dontchokegingers #arizona #tucson #comedy ♬ original sound - Oddumn

I’ll Take “Windmills” Please

Punch The Bully

Another rant on Facebook:

“Your grandmother was wrong. So was your kindergarten teacher. Turns out, when faced with a bully, ignoring them and 'taking the high road' isn’t just ineffective; it’s psychologically counterproductive.

Governor Gavin Newsom figured this out. While Democrats spent years wringing their hands about 'norms' and 'dignity,' Newsom did something radical: he started fighting fire with fire. He’s trolling Trump with memes, calling his officials 'fascist cucks,' and posting TikToks that mock the president with Nickelback songs. The pearl-clutchers are horrified. The psychologists? They’re fascinated.

Research on bullying reveals an uncomfortable truth that contradicts decades of feel-good advice. Studies of children aged 11–12 found that those who 'returned hostility with hostility appeared to be the most mature.' Boys who stood up to bullies were 'judged more socially competent by their teachers,' while girls who fought back were 'more popular and more admired by teachers and peers'.

This isn’t some fringe study. It’s part of a growing body of evidence that challenging bullies directly, rather than hoping adults will intervene, actually works. The kids who fought back didn’t just stop getting bullied; they thrived socially and emotionally.

To understand why Newsom’s strategy works, you need to decode Trump’s psychological arsenal. Trump didn’t stumble into power; he weaponized specific cognitive biases. Research shows 'people intuitively think that, if you speak confidently, you know what you’re talking about.' Trump’s 'language is lower in analytic thinking, and higher in confidence, than almost any previous American president'.

Trump’s strategy uses 'emotionally charged, anti-establishment crisis narrative' that 'puts his audience in a loss frame with nothing to lose'. When people feel everything is at stake, they’ll accept more extreme responses. Trump constantly uses this 'powerful political tool that involves identifying out-groups who pose a threat to the in-group.' This 'causes in-group members to band more tightly together and become more loyal to their leader'. These aren’t accidents. They’re the psychological equivalent of precision weapons.

Here’s where it gets interesting. Newsom isn’t just standing up to Trump; he’s using Trump’s exact playbook against him. His TikTok followers jumped from just over 500,000 in March to 1.8 million. Why? Because he’s speaking the same psychological language that made Trump effective.

When Border Patrol agents showed up at Newsom’s redistricting rally, he immediately posted: 'Donald Trump has sent armed agents to our rally. We will not be intimidated'. That’s not defensive politics; that’s offensive reframing using Trump’s own crisis-narrative technique.

The psychological term is 'mirroring': adopting your opponent’s communication patterns to disrupt their advantage. Bullies rely on power imbalances. When their victims start using their own tactics, it creates cognitive dissonance and levels the playing field.

But here’s Newsom’s brilliant psychological hack: he’s using the same tactics while maintaining moral superiority. His spokesperson explicitly distinguishes their approach: 'While the Trump administration uses these tactics to demean and belittle the powerless, Gavin Newsom is using them to stand up to the powerful and call out the authoritarian methods of the current White House occupant'.

This is psychologically crucial. Research shows that social context determines whether behavior is seen as justified or aggressive. David vs. Goliath gets cheered; Goliath vs. David gets booed. Newsom has positioned himself as the David using Goliath’s own weapons.

Traditional Democratic messaging fails because it assumes politics is rational. It’s not. People rely upon 'images of reality that are built from what they see, hear and read through their networks' rather than first-hand experience.

People often say 'I’ll believe it when I see it,' but from a cognitive psychology perspective it would be more accurate to say that we 'see what we already believe.'

When Democrats respond to Trump’s attacks with policy papers and fact-checks, they’re bringing a calculator to a knife fight. The human brain doesn’t process information rationally; it processes it emotionally, then justifies those emotions with logic.

Newsom understands this. When Trump attacks California’s fire response, Newsom doesn’t release a 12-page white paper on forest management. He posts a video calling Trump 'a weak little man' and goes viral.

Newsom’s aggressive pushback feels more authentic than measured political responses. People trust fighters more than diplomats when they feel under attack.

This strategy isn’t without dangers. Critics note 'it’s difficult to discern the differences between Trump’s demands on states and Newsom’s on cities and counties'. There’s a risk of normalizing toxic political behavior.

But here’s the epistemological problem: what if 'normal' political behavior is structurally inadequate for dealing with authoritarian threats? What if the choice isn’t between 'dignity' and 'tactics,' but between effective resistance and elegant defeat?

From a purely psychological perspective, Newsom is getting more right than his critics realize. Research on anti-bullying interventions shows that having 'social referents' deliver anti-conflict messages is more effective than traditional top-down approaches.

Newsom isn’t just trolling for attention; he’s using scientifically validated psychological principles to challenge authoritarian behavior. He’s discovered that sometimes the most effective way to protect democratic norms isn’t to model them perfectly, but to prevent their opponents from trampling them completely.

Your grandmother meant well. But when dealing with bullies, psychology beats politeness every time."

~ Chris Armitage

Then Gracefully Fund Whatever California Deems Suitable

A rant on Facebook:

Oh, so NOW you care about federal funding? That’s cute.

Let’s talk about California….the state everyone loves to roast but can’t live without. 

While folks in red states rage about “liberal elites” and “big government,” California quietly cuts the check that keeps their towns running. 

Fact:

▪️California pays over $80 billion more in federal taxes than it gets back. That’s not generosity, that’s subsidizing dysfunction. Meanwhile:

▪️Kentucky: Gets $3.35 for every $1 paid.

▪️Mississippi: Basically double dips on federal aid.

▪️West Virginia, Alabama, Arkansas: Inhaling federal cash like it’s oxygen.

These are the same states screaming about handouts and socialism.

You hate big government?  

Cool.

Give the money back.

But no…..

▪️red states cash the checks, build roads, fund hospitals, subsidize farmers, then hop on Facebook to lecture California about “freedom.”

▪️It’s like borrowing your neighbor’s WiFi and calling them lazy.

Now Trump wants to punish California’s universities, because students protested.

And Gavin Newsom fires back with, “Maybe we stop sending our taxes to D.C.”

And honestly?

Do it.

Pull the plug.

Let’s see who survives.

Because if California stopped sending money:

▪️Red states would collapse in a month.

▪️Farm subsidies? Gone. 9▪️Disaster relief? Sorry.

▪️Highway funding? Walk.

▪️Medicaid expansion? Never existed.

Defund the freeloaders.

▪️Let’s see who really believes in capitalism.

▪️You don’t get to scream “personal responsibility” while living off someone else’s wallet.

You’re not self-made.

You’re California-made.

And rent’s due. 

▪️Post by Maria Hernandez via Sheila Cotton-Taylor and Karin Wells

Address

On summer afternoons at the Ballet Studio in Rancho Cordova, the sunlight reflecting off automobiles in the parking lot casts a slanted shadow of the address on the dropped ceiling.

Kompromat

Most conspiracy theories aren't very useful, but this one might have legs. People have speculated for years that Putin must have Kompromat on Trump, and have generally focused on the so-called "pee tapes". The recent revelation that Jeffrey Epstein used primarily Russian banks to finance his trafficking suggests that Putin has access to Kompromat not just on Trump, but many more people besides. Very handy!:

If Russian banks processed those transactions, one can assume that they have corresponding bank account info on all the related parties to those transactions. Given his very close relationship with Epstein and his obvious propensity to abuse women, Trump’s own account info may be in there. But, perhaps of even greater interest would be learning of all the others doing ‘business’ with Epstein. 

If that information exists at all, Putin would have it, it would certainly be big-time Kompromat. Just threatening to expose it, even without actually having it, would have similar effect because it would be so plausible. This is true both for what Putin might have on Trump and, probably just as bad for Trump, what Putin may have on many of Trump’s political, business and international associates.