Puerto Rico and Compassion

Editor's note: Thanks for sticking with me. I was at my sister-in-law's wedding last week, so I couldn't write. And it's been a bit hard to want to write about topics that are ripe for discussion than just lead to anger. Thanks for your patience. 

Let's talk about Puerto Rico for a little bit. I noted three weeks ago on my Facebook profile that Puerto Rico would be roughly the 30th largest state based on population if it were a state. It puts them behind Oklahoma and Connecticut and ahead of Iowa and Utah.

But what I didn't say was that the population for Puerto Rico is a bit hard to pin down right now. Most estimates are between 3.3 and 3.5 million people, but that's down from nearly 4 million a few years ago. Years of economic turmoil and overbearing U.S. regulations have hurt Puerto Rico, and many people have fled the island territory for the U.S. mainland. Some of those problems could have been solved if they were a state, but the U.S. does not seem to desire that. An estimated 500,000 people from Puerto Rico are now living on the mainland — if they moved back, Puerto Rico would be roughly the size of Oregon or Oklahoma in population. As far as area goes, Puerto Rico is roughly the size of Connecticut — one of the smallest states.

But the truth is the island territory is in trouble, and our President has not been helpful. He's picked an unnecessary fight with the mayor of San Juan, the capital of Puerto Rico, who had been begging for help. And today, in three short tweets, he seemed to blame Puerto Rico for problems that already existed and imply that he'd pull FEMA, the military and first responders from the island. He seemed to brag that Puerto Rico "only" had 16 deaths, even though that number was incredibly preliminary and has already risen to 43. Add to that the terrible video of him seemingly using paper towels as free-throw practice (and having to be told not to do the same with canned chicken), and it seems as if Trump doesn't care.

It's a sharp contrast with the President's response in Texas and Florida. In case it appears I'm not being clear here, let me be explicit: The President did a good job in Texas and Florida. It's an easy bar to clear, but he's not meeting it in Puerto Rico. On the contrary, vice president Mike Pence is saying and doing the right things there. He said last week that "We will be here for the long haul." It's sad that our own president is failing to meet an easy test that's being met by his own vice president.

Maybe comparison — and the quick turnaround with Texas and Florida — is part of the problem. This interesting chart by CNN (scroll down) shows that when Irma hit Florida, 60 percent of the customers lost power. However, within 7 days, it was almost entirely restored. Puerto Rico lost power to 100 percent  of its customers to Maria, and no power at all was restored for eight days. Even now, nearly a month after Maria, Puerto Rico still has 83 percent of its customers without power. Cell phone service is only now restored to 22 percent of sites. There is some positive news: Nearly 90 percent of supermarkets are open and nearly 80 percent of gas stations, too. Roughly 60 percent of banks are back open. But then another statistic hits hard: 63 percent of Puerto Ricans do not have drinkable water. Nearly 2 out of every 3 people! And we're a month after Maria!

Since Connecticut is a good comparison to Puerto Rico both on population and size, can you imagine if all of Connecticut were without power for 8 days, still only had 17 percent power a month later, and only 2/3 of the state had drinkable water. That's what we're dealing with in Puerto Rico! It's just as much part of the USA as Connecticut, and yet the President is too busy being critical to be helpful.

Years from now — perhaps decades —we will likely not remember the details of Trump's battles on Twitter with Sen. Bob Corker or late night talk show hosts or (predicting here) Santa Claus. But I hope that we will remember that when it came to Puerto Rico, President Trump lacked even the most basic of compassion for well more than a month.

Chiefs

What's been surprising about the Chiefs' 5-0 start is something I haven't heard a lot of people discuss: this has been the hard part of the schedule. The Chiefs' schedule is very, very front-loaded. The Patriots, the Steelers, the Eagles, the Redskins, the Cowboys and the Broncos are all playoff-caliber teams, and they're all before the Chiefs' bye week in week 10. Then things get a lot easier.

After the bye week, the Chiefs play the (now) 0-5 Giants, the Bills and struggling Jets, then face three floundering teams in Kansas City: the Raiders, Chargers and Dolphins. The season finishes with a trip to Denver, probably the only tough game on paper from the last seven games of the season. Let's be super conservative here and say the Chiefs only go 5-1 against the Giants-Dolphins teams. Let's even say the Chiefs lose in the last game at Denver. That would put the Chiefs at 10-2 barring the next four games — usually guaranteed a playoff spot. But if we're not conservative, let's say the Chiefs sweep those six terrible teams to be 11-1, which would mean we're talking playoff seeding rather than just making the playoffs.

So the next four games will go a long way to determining playoff seeding, and they're not easy games. First is the Chiefs' bug-a-boo in the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Steelers are coming off a terrible performance against the Jaguars and haven't looked great. If the Steelers are going to bounce back, this would be a great time to show their spine. Then the Chiefs have a quick turnaround to the West Coast to play the Raiders. Derek Carr probably won't be back for that game and the Raiders aren't doing well without him (they also have the 31st-ranked defense). Then the Chiefs have an extra few days to prepare for the Broncos in Arrowhead on Monday Night Football. Then the Chiefs go at Dallas to round out the pre-bye week schedule. The Cowboys quietly have one of the worst defenses in the league, currently ranked 29th out of 32. Each of those four games are winnable, though, especially since the Chiefs have already beaten the 2nd, 5th and 6th ranked teams in the league.

What worries me is the increasing number of injuries, which may hurt the Chiefs in the next four weeks. 2/5 of our starting offensive line is injured, and you could make a decent argument for 3/5. Starting wide receiver Chris Conley is out for the year. Travis Kelce has a concussion. And that's just the offense, and I didn't even mention Spencer Ware's injury (since Kareem Hunt is amazing). As for the defense, Eric Berry being out for the year was a serious hit. Justin Houston has calf spasms and hasn't practiced much. Dee Ford has missed a few games. There's good news though: some players will come back. When Mitch Morse and Laurent Duvernay-Tardif come back, the offense should be even more dynamic. The defense is the team's weak point, and keeping Justin Houston on the field is important. Without someone pressuring the QB, the secondary without Eric Berry will be picked apart. But Steven Nelson, arguably our 2nd or 3rd best CB, might be back soon, too.

In short: hold on for the next four weeks, Chiefs. Then it gets a lot easier.

Summary Judgments

This was a thoughtful piece by pillar of journalism Dan Rather.  •  •  •  The U.S. withdrew from UNESCO under the Trump administration. UNESCO is the United Nations cultural organization (it's how you get UNESCO World Heritage sites, etc.). The arguments for pulling out seem fairly weak and only diminishes the U.S.'s ability to negotiate or to effectuate the reform they claim to want. Along with the decision to pull out of the Paris Accords, it makes me feel like the Trump Administration just doesn't want to be in the Room When It Happens (Hamilton reference!)  •  •  •  I haven't run since Sept. 23. I feel very fat right now.  •  •  •   OK. Sweet moment with Evie last night. We're kind of trying to get her to give up her pacifiers, which are usually the only thing that calms her down. We've already limited them to her room and long trips (>3 hours in the car). Last night, I told her that pacifiers are for babies, and since she's not a baby anymore — she's a big girl — she should give her pacifiers up to someone who needs them. She took the one out of her mouth and gave it to me then walked over to the cubbie where her other one was, took it out and brought it to me, too. My heart broke for how sweet she was being. Of course, we had a little rough bedtime, but she made it. We'll see if it sticks.