Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog

Vinny Gambini: The D.A.’s got to build a case. Building a case is like building a house. Each piece of evidence is just another building block. He wants to make a brick bunker of a building. He wants to use serious, solid-looking bricks, like, like these, right?

Bill: Right.

Vinny Gambini: Let me show you something. [ holds up a playing card] He’s going to show you the bricks. He’ll show you they got straight sides. He’ll show you how they got the right shape. He’ll show them to you in a very special way, so that they appear to have everything a brick should have. But there’s one thing he’s not gonna show you. [turns the card, so that its edge is toward Billy] When you look at the bricks from the right angle, they’re as thin as this playing card. His whole case is an illusion, a magic trick. It has to be an illusion, ’cause you’re innocent. Nobody – I mean nobody – pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini, especially this one.

My Cousin Vinny 1992

Before I left to work a couple of days ago I noticed that the left was jumping all over MLB’s bragging about 1.3 Billion minutes of streaming over their first three weeks in order to counter the idea that their political moves are costing viewrs.

The moment I saw them pushing 1.3 billion MINUTES all I could think of was Sir Arnold telling Sir Humphrey how to make a 43% pay raise sound like 6%

1.3 billion minutes sounds like a lot to people who don’t know math because the real question isn’t how many minutes are being streamed, it’s how many people are streaming the games?

If that number was one that sounded good MLB would have led with it. That they did not suggest it’s a problematic number. Since the general public don’t know their math that might not be a problem but alas for MLB longtime baseball fans are used to dealing with stats and numbers because baseball helped teach us. So if we want to find out: How many fans are watching? we can figure that out from what they told us.

Let’s start with those 1,300,000,000 Billion minutes. How many games does that represent? Well a baseball game these days runs about 3 1/2 hours. that’s 210 minutes. add on pregame and postgame and we’re talking say 250 minutes per game. so let’s divide those 1,300,000,000 minutes by 250

1,300,000,000 / 250 = 5,200.000

That sounds like a lot of game but we’re we’re talking during the 1st three weeks of games. As I live in Red Sox Country let’s take the Red Sox as an example. During those first three weeks the Red Sox played 16 games with two games postponed due to rain or threatening conditions so let’s divide that 5,200,000 games viewed by 16

5.200,000 / 16 = 325,000

But let’s remember that the Redsox are only one team. There are 32 teams in MLB and all of those teams are playing. so that means if we want to find out how many people are actually watching these game we have to divide by 16 since 32 teams means 16 games.

325,000 / 16 = 20,312

So from these number we can infer that MLB games are drawing 20,312 fan per game online and remember we based this on the Redsox who had 11% of their games postponed and remember that figure is the number of minutes of MLB TV, that doesn’t count shows about baseball rather than simply games which means that the number of fans per game is likely lower, maybe MUCH lower.

And let’s not forget that MLB.TV isn’t confined to America, so what does that tell us?

It tells us that based on the numbers that they are bragging on with this entire country of over 330,000,000 plus other countries that have access to the MLB to steam they are averaging AT BEST 20,312 fans streaming games so far.

To put that in perspective, one of the worst drawing TV shows on TV is Batwoman from the CW network and their worst ratings draw of this season was 435,000 viewers. That means that based on their own streaming numbers that they are bragging on MLB an organization that has existed for over 120 years with a storied history and franchise in cities all over the country when offering games on their streaming service is being outdrawn by one of the least popular CW shows by a factor of 20.

Of course that doesn’t really produce the headline they were looking for does it, and perhaps they figured people would fall for it but as a fellow Italian once said nobody I mean NOBODY pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini

Don Surber: Don’t mess with Lawrence Welk:

Welk was a hard-working, intelligent man who ran a music and real estate empire with a fourth-grade education.

In his obituary, The Sun said, “In 1956, ABC-TV broadcast Mr. Welk from coast to coast, and for the ensuing 16 years the Welk show missed only one week — in the aftermath of the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963.

“ABC finally dropped the show in 1971, deciding that Mr. Welk’s audience was too old to attract commercial sponsors looking for a more youthful and affluent market. His sponsors at the time reflected Mr. Welk’s demographics: Geritol and Sominex.

“Mr. Welk responded by syndicating his own show, which ultimately was picked up by more than 250 stations around the country — more, even, than had aired his show on ABC.

“The program did not miss a week of air time until weekly production ended in 1982.”

A guy like Welk is a great Danger to the left because he demonstrate the ability to make it not only without a public education but was able to bypass the networks because he through hard work created something that the people wanted.

---

Pirates Cove talks about the efforts to make it harder for law abiding citizens to defend themselves in Oregon:

opponents say forcing people to keep guns locked up could waste precious moments if they need to defend themselves against armed intruders.

Jim Mischel, of Sheridan, Oregon, described how his wife woke up when he was away one night in 1981. She heard a noise, went to investigate and saw that a man had broken into their home.

She returned to the bedroom and tried to get to a pistol that was in a locked gun box in the nightstand.

“She was unable to get the box unlocked and the pistol out before he got into the bedroom and threatened her with his gun,” Mischel said. “She has never recovered.”

Criminals will know this. They will know that lots of people will comply (why do Dem voters even have guns in places like Portland? Aren’t they anti-gun? Or just anti-gun for Other People?). Law abiding citizens will have a choice: lock the guns up making them almost worthless for home defense, or be a criminal by making sure they are handy. I wonder how much influence the gun storage industry has on this, and other similar, bills.

People unable to defend themselves from armed Democrat Voters thugs is a feature not a bug to those in Oregon.

---

At Gateway Pundit a point I’ve often made is repeated:

Senator Gray responded to a similar question from Spicer after Spicer said, “you’ll recount the ballots and you’ll get the same number”:

We have a lot of concerned voters who don’t trust the system, so the whole purpose of this verifying to the voters that this system was accurate.   And of course, it is the legislature’s responsibility to deal with election laws.  So if there are any problems, we need to change some statutes and adjust to make sure what we are doing is appropriate.”

Fann then shared this:

Unfortunately and what is interesting is from the get-go it has been nothing but certifying election integrity.  But the fact that we have been pushed back.  They have sued us.  They are threatening to sue us again.  Maricopa County supervisors have done everything in their power to prevent us from doing this and now I’m beginning to wonder why would they not want to prove that their election system works, that it’s perfect.  I don’t understand why we are getting threatened, sued and threatened, when all we want to do is election integrity here.”

People who know their election is above board and honest and want to convince those in doubt should be happy to have an audit confirm it.

People who have stolen an election do not.

---

Granite Grok notes how sunlight is the best way to change a pols mind particularly on a local level:

The big news was released at the beginning of the meeting. Chairman Ross McLeod announced the Selectmen had decided it was more appropriate to forego their non-public (secret) meeting and choose their forensic analyst in public view at next Monday’s meeting.

That decision was triggered by a considerable amount of public input and addressed concerns that the process should be transparent to reflect legislative intent.

The massive number of emails that were received by Town Hall represented the enormous displeasure of the public.

If you can’t stop the audit of the ballots the next best thing is to play game with the selection process. Thanks to the public these games are over and the first stone of the wall of silence might now come down.

---

Finally Motus AD’s post on the small risings in the woke land of expensive education ends with an interesting note:

Perhaps the most telling aspect of this little morality play being acted out in real time is the fact that neither the New York Times (America’s Newpaper of Record) [SIC] nor The Washington Post (Democracy Dies In Darkness) have covered either story. Nor have they covered any other stories concerning the ideological takeover of the schools…or media. When you’re part of the cabal you decide all the news that’s fit to print.

Personally I think the more people know about what is happening in the school systems the more likely people will cheer them remaining closed.

Who is more likely to invent a false narrative and spend weeks selling it to the public: A group of people who won an election fair and square who are not afraid of scrutiny of their honest election victory OR a group of people who stole an election from the voters of a nation who are desperate to keep scrutiny away from what has been done and discredit those who call them out?

or as I’ve been saying for a while

I’ll believe those who say that claim that election 2020 was stolen are simply a conspiracy theory when those who loudly claim that such claims are a conspiracy theory stop acting like conspirators with something to hide.