What's new since September 2017?

Yeah, it’s been a long time since I posted. I’ve been sooooo busy. . . .

Naw. That’s a lie. Not that I haven’t been busy, but that being busy is the reason I haven’t posted. Don’t you hate it when people don’t return your call as they promised and the first thing they say when they finally get around to it is, “I’m sorry, I’ve been sooooo busy!”

Yeah? Go screw yourself. You brush me off and then have the nerve to basically say, “I’ve been so busy with important things that I didn’t have time to waste on a low-priority item like you.”

You’ve been busy, have you? Did you ever take the trash out during that time? It would have taken much less to time call me than it does to take out the trash. So, I rank below trash to you? Thanks. I repeat, go screw yourself. How about just saying, “I’m sorry”? How about that?

So, I haven’t posted here because it just wasn’t that important to me. I took out the trash. I read books. I binge-watched mediocre seasons of two or three Netflix original series (not including F is for Family because that was definitely worth it).

You know what? I started this damn blog. I don’t have to post here. I’ll post here when I am good and ready.

Wow, another sidetracking rant. No wonder I don’t have the time to post here. However, I started this blog for a good reason, which escapes me now, so I am going to start one more time, and I swear by my faded Cincinnati Reds t-shit I won’t stop. If that doesn’t make sense check out my Daily Blog and Bluster page for today. It’ll help.

A lot of interesting stuff going on in the news, even aside from our Commandeerer in Chief (laughter). Get it? Two letter “e”s, not one, as in commandeer, verb, to take possession of something - President Trump has taken possession of the news cycle day in and day out.

We’ll get to that tomorrow.

And yes, I did do that annoying thing where people take verbs and make nouns out of them and think it’s creative or witty. Commandeer, commandeerer.

Later.

Russia's secret weapon: Facebook!

Holy smokes, Russia has infiltrated the United States in a diabolical, covert operation that makes Mission Impossible seem amateurish. They, are you ready for this, bought ads on Facebook. Yeah. But the theory is these ads contained subliminal messages that hypnotized voters into voting for Donald Trump. Not only that, they hypnotized voters into voting the same people back into Congress time and again, even though most Americans are totally dissatisfied with Congress. That is some ass-kickin' brainwashing right there.

Well, not exactly.

Facebook announced yesterday, September 21, that ads it sold to "Russian linked" accounts will be handed over to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees for review. It will take some time before any findings are released. First, these ads will have to be scrutinized to determine their connection with the US presidential election. Hopefully these committees will refer it to the appropriate federal law enforcement agencies, or one of these agencies will subpoena the ads if it becomes necessary.

Just how much did ads influence the election? Nobody knows. Since no one knows, it seems logical that Democrats should not overstate the significance of these ads and Republicans should not understate their significance. But when has politics been logical?

And why are people shocked? What did they think would happen to social media? Did they think it would magically remain free from manipulation by criminal, corporate, and political interests? What area of life has?

And why all the anger against Facebook for its lack of transparency? When people sign up they basically sign away their right to privacy so they can post countless pictures and selfies to prove to other people that they are happy, successful, and living the dream! Facebook is the ultimate exponential expression of self-absorption. People would donate organs to sign up.

And all this criticism toward Mark Zuckerburg? Hell, he's a success story, in my opinion. This kid ran with a semi-stolen idea because he had the vision to turn into into something others did not, and marketed it into billions. That's fucking brilliant. His statue should be the next to be erected on the National Mall in Washington - maybe him taking a selfie in front to the Lincoln memorial. Better yet, a statue of Lincoln taking a selfie in front of a statue of Mark Zuckerberg! I think most of the criticism of Mark Zuckerberg is because all the jocks, popular kids, and bullies from high school can't stand it to see a nerd become successful. 

But back to the ads.

First, it is no secret that, beginning in 1999 or 2000, elements of the Russian government have used web brigades to influence social media opinion within Russia, and that they eventually expanded internationally.

There is no concrete evidence that these adds significantly influenced the 2016 presidential election as of yet, though there is some evidence that attempts were made. Unfortunately, it seems the election of President Trump was a particularly American phenomenon, homegrown right here in the USA. That one is on us.

However, it is important that the US government and American people are informed about the extent of Russia’s attempts, regardless of which candidate they favored. President Trump likes to talk about US sovereignty, and attempts by a foreign power to influence US elections are a clear infringement upon US sovereignty. Let’s see if he handles it that way. Let’s see if Congress has the fortitude to handle it that way instead of making it a purely partisan political fight.

Meanwhile, if you want to sign a petition to put a statue of Mark Zuckerberg on the National Mall. . . .

Trump UN speech: I was right to have been nervous

Yesterday I expressed my nervousness about President Trump addressing the UN, saying "I feel like I am going to the prom tomorrow with the horror movie character Carrie. Things can go bad really fast."

I was right to be nervous.

When the President of the United States, while addressing the UN, responds to a threat by saying he will totally destroy another nation, not use necessary force to defend itself and its allies, but totally destroy another nation, anything else you discuss about his speech is like saying, "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?”

Words are important, and though his followers and even some of the US press may give President Trump a pass when he uses ridicoulously exaggerated language and superfluous hyperbole, on the world stage it is inappropriate and dangerous. Using such language is dangerous if taken literally. It is dangerous if not taken literally because specific intentions are not expressed. It is dangerous if such threats are made and it is impossible to follow through in the real world, the world the President fails to comprehend or acknowledge.

You cannot talk about international cooperation, sovereignty, and making the UN better and then threaten to unilaterally totally destroy another nation. It does not work.

This was a show of weakness, not strength. It was thoughtless and lazy. The United States is powerful enough, technically advanced enough, and I hope civilized enough to defend itself from North Korea without having to totally destroy it.