Thursday, March 12, 2026

Andy Borowitz


The Borowitz Report borowitzreport@substack.com 
Unsubscribe

4:15 AM (11 hours ago)
to me
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a move that many called long overdue, on Thursday God formally notified House Speaker Mike Johnson that he was going to Hell.

In a rare public statement, the Almighty said that Johnson's support of Donald Trump's war in Iran was the "last straw" that sealed the Speaker's eternal damnation.

"What do you do with someone who claims to be a Christian and supports killing civilians?" God asked. "You send his ass to Hell, that's what."

Confronted by reporters in a Capitol corridor, Johnson said he was "disappointed" by the Heavenly Father's decision, but added, "I serve a higher power: Donald Trump."




--
****
Juan Matute
RBR
CCRC


Email Problem

I have had a report that my incoming email to you is being flagged as dangerous and suspicious.   If you are receiving something like this, please let me know.


--
****
Juan Matute
RBR
CCRC


Something to Know - 12 March

Quotation:
- "We will never have true civilization until we have learned to recognize the rights of others."

Now, we can get on to Professor Richardson.   Today's newsletter details the lack of planning regarding Trump's war.   Apparently he felt that raining bombs, crushing infrastructure, killing schoolgirls, and body bags of Americans killed would be enough to get whatever he wanted.   We don't know what he wants or how long he is going to wage "his war".  What we do now is that the price of oil is skyrocketing.   This has caused the projections that the cost of everything related to oil production will cost much more, thus upsetting the global economy, not just the price of a gallon of gas.  Did Trump's war machine consider that closing the Strait of Hormuz would have this effect?   The Trump War machine's reaction is to tell oil tanker captains to hunker down, show some guts  and plow through the land mines.   Brave words from a guy who succumbed to a fake bone spur deferment to avoid military duty.   Now, it appears Iran is willing to wade this all out, and use the weapon of global public pressure and indignation to bring down Trump.   Trump is doing all of this because he is panicked by the looming threat of the Trump-Epstein files being revealed.   How sick can we get?

Heather Cox Richardson from Letters from an American heathercoxrichardson@substack.com 

Mar 11, 2026, 10:24 PM (9 hours ago)
to me
Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

In a brief call with Barak Ravid of Axios today, President Donald J. Trump said "The war is going great. We are way ahead of the timetable. We have done more damage than we thought possible, even in the original six-week period." He added that the war against Iran will end "soon" because there's "practically nothing left to target." "Little this and that... Any time I want it to end, it will end," he said.

In fact, according to Patrick Wintour of The Guardian, Iranian officials have rejected two messages from Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff calling for a ceasefire. Wintour writes that Iran's leaders "sense it is not losing the war and the US president is at the minimum feeling the political pressure." Iranian officials intend to make the economic, political, and military costs of the war so high that Trump will not attack Iran again.

For his part, Trump appears to be panicking over yesterday's news that Iran is laying mines in the Strait of Hormuz, through which tankers transport about 20% of the world's oil through a two-mile-wide (3.2 km) shipping channel. (Twenty percent of the world's oil is about 20 million barrels, and a barrel is a unit of measure equal to 42 U.S. gallons or 159 liters.) Threats from Iran have bottled up oil in the Persian Gulf, and suppliers are shutting down operations because their storage facilities are full. The average price of gasoline in the U.S. has jumped nearly 60 cents a gallon since Trump launched attacks against Iran.

As Morgan Phillips of Fox News notes, naval mines are cheap, as little as a few thousand dollars, and can incapacitate or sink a $2 billion U.S. destroyer. They can be deployed by small vessels like hard-to-spot fishing craft at night.

The U.S. destroyed sixteen inactive Iranian mine-laying ships yesterday; today three merchant ships sustained minor damage after being struck in or near the strait. Today Trump claimed the U.S. has hit "28 mine ships as of this moment," prompting Chris Cameron of the New York Times to note that "[t]he president sometimes exaggerates or is imprecise when giving figures."

A spokesperson for Iran's military command, Ebrahim Zolfaqari, said: "Get ready for oil to be $200 a barrel, because the oil price depends on regional security, which you have destabilised." Today Iran struck oil storage facilities in Oman and Bahrain.

While a few Iranian ships are traversing the strait, they are the only ones. Retired French vice admiral Pascal Ausseur told the Associated Press: "In today's context, sending warships or civilian vessels into the Strait of Hormuz would be suicidal," adding that a ceasefire with Iran "would move the situation from suicidal to dangerous." At that point, escorts of oil vessels by military ships could begin.

Today Trump told Leonardo Feldman of Newsweek that the project of reopening the Hormuz Strait is "working out very well, and I think you are going to see that." Trump has said prices will "drop very rapidly when this is over," but oil industry analysts say reopening production could take at least a month even if Trump could declare the war over immediately, and there is no indication Iran would agree to an instant ceasefire.

Aarian Marshall of Wired reports that half of the ships that usually travel through the Strait of Hormuz carry oil, but the other half carry raw materials that are made into fertilizer, plastics, precision instruments, machinery, electrical parts, and electronic components, all of which could jump in price.

Jon Gambrell of the Associated Press suggested that the war with Iran boils down to a single question: "Who can take the pain the longest?" Iran is being hammered with air strikes by both Israel and the U.S. Those strikes now include Israeli strikes on targets in Lebanon Israel says are connected to Iran-backed Hezbollah militants, killing more than 600 people and turning as many as 800,000 into refugees. For the regime, Gambrell notes, victory means staying in power and outlasting the bombing.

It is unclear what victory looks like for the U.S. The administration has offered a range of justifications for its war without suggesting what an endgame looks like. David Brown of the Wall Street Journal reported today that the U.S. and Israel appear to disagree about how long the war should last, with Israeli officials wanting to continue the war by decimating Iran's oil industry and targeting top Iranian officials.

The pain for the U.S. is already becoming clear. Yesterday, after Reuters reporter Phil Stewart reported that as many as 150 U.S. troops had been wounded so far in the Iran conflict, the Pentagon publicly revised its estimate of fewer than a dozen U.S. service members wounded upward to about 140. The wounds include brain trauma, shrapnel wounds, and burns. Seven service members have died.

Lawmakers and their aides expressed frustration that the Pentagon had not announced the casualty numbers without prodding. "Just own it and be transparent," a congressional aide told Alex Horton of the Washington Post. "You owe it to the service members."

Bora Erden and Leanne Abraham of the New York Times reported today that at least seventeen U.S. military sites and installations across the region, including air defense systems, have been struck since the war began. Iran has also struck diplomatic sites, including U.S. embassies in Kuwait City, Kuwait, and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S. consulate in Dubai.

The eye-watering cost of the conflict is also hitting home. Officials from the Pentagon told members of Congress this week that the military used up $5.6 billion worth of munitions in the first two days of the war, a much higher burn rate than the administration had previously disclosed. Lawmakers are concerned that Trump's Iran attack, along with his strikes on Nigeria, Somalia, Iraq, Venezuela, the small boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, and the Houthis in Yemen, is cutting into U.S. readiness for unexpected conflicts.

Lawmakers are also unhappy about the administration's expected upcoming request for more money to fight the war. Catie Edmondson of the New York Times reported that Pentagon officials told lawmakers yesterday the first six days of the war had cost more than $11.3 billion, not including the buildup of personnel and military hardware for the initial strikes.

Today Julian E. Barnes, Eric Schmitt, Tyler Pager, Malachy Browne, and Helene Cooper of the New York Times reported that, according to a preliminary report by military investigators, the U.S. is responsible for the February 28 strike on the Shajarah Tayyebeh girls elementary school that Iranian officials say killed at least 175 people, most of them children. The school building had been part of an adjacent Iranian military base years ago, and it appears the U.S. used outdated information in their targeting of the building.

As the journalists wrote, "Striking a school full of children is sure to be recorded as one of the most devastating single military errors in recent decades."

On Saturday, when asked about the possibility the U.S. was responsible for the strike, Trump answered: "No. In my opinion and based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran…. We think it was done by Iran. Because they're very inaccurate, as you know, with their munitions. They have no accuracy whatsoever. It was done by Iran."

On Monday, when a reporter noted that it was likely a Tomahawk missile that hit the school and asked if the U.S. would accept responsibility, Trump responded that "the Tomahawk…is sold and used by other countries," and suggested that Iran "also has some Tomahawks."

On Tuesday, a reporter asked why Trump said Iran had Tomahawks when only three other U.S. allies and the U.S. have them. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt answered: "The president has a right to share his opinions with the American public, but he has said he'll accept the conclusion of that investigation, and frankly, we're not going to be harassed by the New York Times, who's been putting out a lot of articles on this making claims that have just not been verified by the Department of War, to quickly wrap up this investigation because the New York Times is calling on us to do so."

Today a reporter confronted Trump, saying: "A new report says that the military investigation has found that the United States struck the school in Iran. As commander-in-chief, do you take responsibility for that?"

Trump answered: "I don't know about it."

Tonight, Iranian boats full of explosives hit two tankers carrying Iraqi fuel oil and set them ablaze about 30 miles (48 kilometers) off the Iraqi coast. According to Iraqi state media, Iraqi oil ports have "completely stopped operations." Jon Gambrell of the Associated Press reported that one of the key measures of oil prices, Brent crude, jumped above $100 a barrel.



--

****
Juan Matute
RBR
CCRC


Wednesday, March 11, 2026

Something to Know - 11 March

Today's quotation:
"The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people."
- Karl Marx

Today's Music:



Looking for more peaceful and relevant issues, we can discuss the presence of renewable energy.   European countries are rapidly shifting toward renewable energy, with over 49% of EU electricity generated from renewables by late 2025.   Sweden (66.4%), Finland (50.8%), and Denmark (44.9%) lead in total consumption, driven by hydro, wind, and bioenergy. The EU aims for 42.5%–45% renewable energy by 2030, with wind and solar dominating growth.   Most European nations benefit more from developing renewables than relying on sources like Russia, given its detrimental political system.   Spain is currently positioned to declare its own sovereign independence from alliances that foster dependence on fossil fuels.   As a dime-store conspiracy theorist, I would say that Trump would love to see European countries fully dependent on Russia for energy so that he and Putin would have a hegemonic lever in world affairs.  Without dependence on Russian energy, Moscow would have little to bargain with in an open economy.    In any event, Spain is an example of energy independence.   While wind farms have undesirable characteristics, wind is much cleaner than fossil fuels (oil and coal).   To put the differences in perspective, if you were having a large barbecue with many large cuts of meat in a closed building, would you rather cook with electricity or charcoal?   I doubt if you would want to pull your Weber barbecue into the kitchen and slow cook for several hours; you and your guests would probably die from the harmful pollution and gases.    The same holds true for a city or small community.

European countries are rapidly shifting toward renewable energy, with over 49% of EU electricity generated from renewables by late 2025.   Sweden (66.4%), Finland (50.8%), and Denmark (44.9%) lead in total consumption, driven by hydro, wind, and bioenergy. The EU aims for 42.5%–45% renewable energy by 2030, with wind and solar dominating growth.

THE ATLANTIC MAGAZINE

Spain's Wind-Farm Bargain

Renewable-energy projects can boost the economy of a rural town—if the community has a say in development.

Wind turbines in the Spanish countryside near Higueruela
Cristina Arias / Cover / Getty
March 10, 2026, 1:46 PM ET
Wind turbines in the Spanish countryside near Higueruela
Listen1.0x

Go looking for wind farms in Spain, and you might quickly end up in Castilla–La Mancha, a region southeast of Madrid. This is the place where Don Quixote, Miquel de Cervantes's delusional Man of La Mancha, attacked small wooden windmills he perceived as fierce giants and where today giant wind turbines have become an embedded part of the landscape.

There, I met Mayor Isabel Martínez Arnedo, who has run the town of Higueruela since 2019. The region's distinctive wind whipped her dark curls as she stepped out of her car. "Look!" she said in Spanish. "Windmills, windmills, windmills." They were lined up along a ridge at the edge of the small rural town, blades spinning high atop pale-blue towers. A verdant valley lay below, and beyond that, another ridge was crowned with more turbines. When the town's wind farms were first built, more than 25 years ago, "this was seen as futuristic," she told me. She was just 23 years old then, and it was the largest wind farm in Europe, the second largest in the world. Since that time, she said, she has come to believe that renewable-energy projects can save a dying town, as long as it has a guiding role in their implementation.

In the United States, views on renewable-energy projects are fraught. Adoption has been exponential; so has resistance. Last year, President Trump signed a bill that gutted support for projects, and he holds a particular animus toward wind power. Efforts to shut down renewable-energy projects are under way in every state except Alaska. Communities object to renewables for a variety of reasons, researchers from MIT found—including concerns about public and environmental health, diminished property values, and lack of public participation—and that opposition can prioritize such values even over possible economic gain.

In the past six years, by contrast, Spain has doubled its wind and solar capacity and reduced its dependence on gas power dramatically. Renewables account for about 16 percent of the energy mix in the U.S., whereas more than half of Spain's energy now comes from them as it races toward the goal of climate neutrality by 2050. Spain's economy is booming, and many consider lower energy costs a contributing factor. Though I found pockets of resistance to the shift, most people I spoke with during three months of reporting across the country recognized Spain's role in contributing to the fight against climate change.

If the global shift to more clean energy is irreversible, as many economic and technological indicators suggest, then American rollbacks seem destined to cause more problems than they solve. At the same time, renewable development can radically alter landscapes, as in India, where I'd reported on how one of the world's largest solar farms took up 13,000 acres, surrounding five small villages that remain like stranded islands. Was there a way to develop renewables that worked better for the communities in which they're located? Perhaps Higueruela, as an early wind-energy adopter, could offer a lesson.


When the wind farm arrived, the municipality of Higueruela was dying. Young people left to study and find work and never returned. In 1960, the town had about 3,500 citizens. By 2000, there were just over 1,000. This "great emptying" is widespread in rural parts of Spain, as it is in rural America. If the wind park was futuristic, it also helped the town imagine a future in which young people would not leave, Martínez Arnedo told me.


Opportunity often depends on money, and the windfall from wind energy delivered it. Taxes on the renewable-energy companies and leasing fees transformed Higueruela's economics, Martínez Arnedo said: Of its annual budget, roughly 40 percent now comes directly from the presence of wind energy. A few locals do work for Iberdrola, the company that manages the wind farms, or have started businesses that directly relate to the industry, such as a turbine-oil-changing business that now works regionally. But most of the jobs grew out of the broader ecosystem stimulated by the presence of renewables, the mayor said.

Over 20 years, using its boosted revenue, the town built a library and a youth center; the elementary school added sports, music, English, and dancing. The town now operates a bus that carries secondary schoolchildren to a larger town 22 kilometers away, and a free bus to Albacete, a small city 50 kilometers away, so access to higher education is possible without having to move away. For adults, community offerings include Pilates and painting. Higueruela offers support to help seniors stay in their homes, and when they can't, they can move to the El Jardín Senior Center on the town square, which opened in 2006 and employs 100 locals, many of them women who might struggle to find employment in more industrial, male-dominated sectors. Although electricity grids are too complicated to pass along free or discounted power to locals, the town now provides up to 2,000 euros to install rooftop solar and improve home insulation to bring energy bills down. Without the wind farms, the town would not be able to have all of these services and facilities, the mayor told me.

Each of these offerings also translates into jobs, and traditional agriculture has continued unabated beneath the wind turbines. Though the town's population is not rising, it is sustaining itself. Young people who stayed are now having babies. "We have a group of children," the mayor told me, of her students at the elementary school, where she teaches. "We call them Generation Wind."

Higueruela is not unique. Cláudia Serra-Sala, an economist at the University of Girona, collected budget data from 1994 to 2022 to see how Spanish wind farms change municipal finances and found, on average, a 45 percent increase in revenue per capita. The funds buoyed towns and served as a positive feedback loop of development, the way bringing a railroad to town once did.

Wind energy has its critics in Spain. In the lowlands of Higueruela, I met Lucas del las Heras and Pablo Jutglá Monedon, avid birders who live in the area, although not Higueruela itself, and are members of the conservation cooperative Dendros. As we watched European red-rumped swallows and marsh harriers swoop in front of us, they argued that wind farms are a land grab that are wrecking vistas and harming biodiversity. Best practices—including community input during initial planning and avoiding biodiverse hot spots such as Natura 2000 areas, a European network of valuable habitats—are not always required, or followed. The Ukraine war deepened Spain's aggressive push toward renewables and energy independence, and the men from Dendros and others I spoke with felt that environmental protections were being left by the wayside.

These complaints all have truth to them. Electricity can seem like a bit of a magic trick, but every watt of energy comes from somewhere. That ridge where I stood with the mayor was far from pristine—we walked amid Moorish ruins that lay in the turbines' shadow—but without the wind generators, Higueruela's vista would have maintained a timeless bucolic aura.

At the same time, the fossil-fuel-production system has costs, too, not least the grave environmental and health impacts on communities, which differ substantively from the impacts of a solar or wind farm. A 2023 World Resources Institute report, for instance, found that nearly half of people living in U.S. communities historically based on oil, coal, and gas economies were in areas identified as disadvantaged, plagued by air pollution, poverty, and health problems.xThe current scale of fossil-fuel burning is also disrupting entire Earth-system functions, which in turn drives fuel demand (as people try to stay warm or cool) and exacerbates the kind of extreme weather that can destroy communities and transform ecosystems. Spain is already experiencing heat waves and the whiplash of drought and flood. Outside Sevilla, the town of Carmona, in Andalusia, is a place so picturesque that it's being considered as a UNESCO World Heritage site, yet it is embracing solar farms. "If you do not put in renewable energy, it is true, there is the most beautiful field," Carmona's mayor, Juan Avila, told me. "But why do you need the most beautiful field if later it does not rain?"

Still, even willing towns have their limits. A few years ago, Iberdrola, the energy company, proposed a hybrid project in Higueruela, adding solar to the wind-energy mix. It wanted to use "the most fertile lands of Higueruela," Martínez Arnedo told me. "We said no." Instead, the town and Iberdrola are exploring the possibility of replacing the 243 existing turbines with just 63 much larger ones, and still generate the same amount of power.

The possibility of local benefits from renewables is not confined to Spain. While reporting on renewables years ago in Texas, I learned that Sweetwater—another town that adopted wind energy early and eagerly (and with Republican support)—had increased its tax base fivefold and channeled the money into civic improvements. But that was before energy production in the United States became so politicized. Martínez Arnedo told me that, for a town to benefit from renewable development, "in that mediation between the companies that want to eat the municipalities and the municipalities themselves, you have to look for a balance." Many Americans seem unwilling to even consider trying to find that. Change always has a cost, but any place facing the same type of downturn Higueruela experienced also has to contend with the risk of maintaining the status quo and consider whether that's even possible. A place like this one could easily end up with no wind farms, but soon enough it may not have rain and eventually no town, either.

About the Author

Meera Subramanian is a freelance journalist who writes about home, in the personal and planetary sense, in a time of climate crisis. Her work has appeared in publications such as NatureThe New York Times, and Orion, where she is a contributing editor. She is the co-author of A Better World Is Possible: Global Youth Confront the Climate Crisis, and author of A River Runs Again: India's Natural World in Crisis.



--

****
Juan Matute
RBR
CCRC