Tuesday, January 28, 2020

The Voice of The Swamp speaks. People comment.

I was a progressive Democrat, by birth and upbringing, until about 40 years ago, when, after discovering that an article of that faith, that only "ignorant rednecks" were conservative, was false, it became possible for me to examine leftism critically. It didn't take much of that for me to decide to leave the Democrats, register Republican, and vote for Ronald Reagan. I have not had reason to doubt the wisdom of that decision, since.

But being Republican didn't incline me to vote for Trump. I decided, literally on election day, to vote for Trump, affirmatively, not just as the strongest protest against corrupt Hillary (a decision I had taken only ten days before), because of Hillary's "basket of deplorables" statement. Because, having been a Republican among progressive Democrats for about 36 years, I _knew_ what that meant. It meant their way, or the highway (and "driving is a privilege, not a right").

Some others, lacking my somewhat unusual circumstances, may also lack my insight, which, even with Hillary's help, really didn't come until more recently than 2016, that even after 36 years as a Republican, the progressive assumptions of my upbringing, especially emphasis on a rigid conformity to "nonconformist" style, and to a "free speech" style which never says the "wrong" thing, still warped my assessment of Trump's qualifications. That, in this, at least, I had been a snob.

These guys, I hope, will bring that, eh, insight to more people.

The essence of Voice of Swamp, excerpted.

Sunday, January 26, 2020

Has MSN News forgotten how to journalism?

It's as if their reputation for journalistic integrity has rabies, so they have to go out to the corn crib and shoot it.

A tragic scene, to be sure.

The more tragic in the case where their reputation caught the rabies from them.

CNN and MSNBC Ignore President Trump’s March for Life Speech, Air Adam Schiff Instead

Sunday, January 12, 2020

RIP Roger Scruton

"The modern world gives proof at every point that it is far easier to destroy institutions than to create them. Nevertheless, few people seem to understand this truth."

Thursday, January 09, 2020

MIT cares about our privacy?

I won't dispute the utility of all the technical measures described, but, I don't assume that scholarly articles about privacy indicate real interest, on the part of the academy, in defending it, or, liberty. Where were they, 30 years ago, and more, around the time Al Gore "took the initiative in creating the internet" when the direction, and the cause (the ideological assumptions of people who voted for Al Gore and the like) was obvious to me, and I said so, but no one would hear it? The scholarly articles out of the academy of that day were shouting anyone like me down, with the praises of a "connected world" to come.
Except RMS, or course, who achieved a modicum of fame criticizing the monster he was, apparently, helping smooth the path for.
I know, I'm only a technician. Who listens to technicians? I will suggest that the reader may profit by considering the possibility that the cause of my lack of welcome in the places where scholarship is manufactured, and cause of that scholarship commending, and "creating", the "future" it has, are related, and, that there could be more like me, also unwelcome. Perhaps many more. Perhaps enough for a technical infrastructure more compatible with liberty under law, which might have been, but wasn't.
Those who know about us have power over us. Obfuscation may be our best digital weapon.

Tuesday, January 07, 2020

General Salami reminds me a little of a Saddam Hussein spokesman, letting the world believe they had WMD, apparently, wrongly supposing that would protect Hussein's tyranny from US action (perhaps it does, when Democrats are in charge of the US).
Evidently, the Bush administration felt it necessary to make sure that Iraq did not have that capability, among other things. Being the Bush administration, they did that in the nicest possible way (which actually made sure), but also a way more expensive to us (in blood and treasure) I think, than other options.
I did not complain, for various reasons, one being that I saw my authority over how the country was run, except under really extraordinary circumstances, as having ended (until the next election) with my vote for Bush.
Because I also see my authority over how Trump runs the country as having ended with my vote for him, until the next election, and for other reasons, I don't expect I would complain if the Administration, having seen how things are working out for us after the nice, perhaps even noble, but expensive Bush plan, and the not obviously nice, or noble (one might even describe it as pusillanimous), but also expensive, especially for the victims of ISIS, et al., Obama reversal of the Bush plan, were to choose an option for dealing with Iranian threats which the Administration has reason to hope will be less expensive, in blood and treasure, for the US, though not as nice for those on the, eh, business end as the Bush plan was. Even Administration actions which are not nice to the extent of "hard, firm, regrettable" are unlikely to elicit an objection from me, I think.

Salami speaks!