Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Define Your Terms

Posted: October 3, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized

During the presidential debate on Tuesday, moderator Chris Wallace asked President Trump to “condemn white supremacy.” Trump wasn’t precise enough in his answer for the Democrats and media, and so story after story went on about Trump’s supposed refusal to “condemn white supremacy.”

Wallace’s question exemplifies the Left’s trick of changing the meaning of language to suit their preferred outcomes and ideology.

If you look at a typical dictionary definition of the phrase, “white supremacy, you get:

“The belief that white people constitute a superior race and should therefore dominate society, typically to the exclusion or detriment of other racial and ethnic groups, in particular black or Jewish people.”

I suspect if you ask the average American, this is their concept of “white suprem

Poor fools.

For the Left, such a definition is just the beginning. Sure, you include such a concept, but then you expand and broaden the definition until it lets you justify whatever action you wish.

So, the Anti-Defamation League adds that white supremacy includes the “belief that white people have their own ‘culture’ that is superior to other cultures.”

Do white people not have their own culture?  To the extent any subgroup of people with something in common have a culture, it seems odd to exclude white people. There is no doubt Europe, at least, was predominantly made up of white people until rather recently. Were white societies so inclusive, they could not be called “white?” Or are they so inclusive now, they aren’t “white?”

But the real twists come with what the academic Left considers “white supremacy.”

The academic Left is beholden to Critical Race Theory, which, as UCLA law professor Cheryl Harris explained in the Nation, focuses “on the way that race is baked into the current political, economic, and social system so that racial subordination is reproduced through normal operations.” So, according to Critical Race Theory, the normal operations of society – presumably here, American society – is racist, because it results in racial subordination. There is no human agency here, simply the “system.”

University of Tennessee College of Law Professor Emeritus Frances Ansley, as quoted by Critical Race Theorist David Gillborn, states that white supremacy is, “a political, economic and cultural system in which whites overwhelmingly control power and material resources, conscious and unconscious ideas of white superiority and entitlement are widespread, and relations of white dominance and non-white subordination are daily reenacted across a broad array of institutions and social settings.”

So now, white supremacy can mean the KKK stringing up “strange fruit” on “Southern trees,” but it also can mean, you know, the entire American society. All the same thing.

And then, after twisting the meaning of the term, the Left then goes ahead and changes the dictionary definition, just to cover its tracks.

So what exactly do you mean, Mr. Wallace? Are you asking Trump to condemn all of American society?

If so, I can understand Trump’s seeming hesitance to do so.

Just before the debate I noted that when Matt Drudge puts up his: Who won tonight’s Debate post as he always does it will be the first time in a while that many conservatives visit his site.

Did I say “always”? Don Surber corrects me:

I did not have to watch the debate to know who won. The media did it for me. I did not go by what they said. I went by what they did.


First up was Matt Drudge. He did not run one of his who-won-the-debate polls. That is telling. Oh sure, there are plenty of instant polls that say President Donald Trump won, but when it comes to getting a debate right, the Drudge Report is far more accurate than the usual Trump-lost polls.

The surest sign that Donald Trump won the debate is the rush to change the rules. And the surest sign that whoever now owns the Drudge report is more interested in an agenda than clicks is when running a click based business turning down millions of easy clicks


It looks like a bigger winner than Donald Trump in the Debate might be Kyle Rittenhouse:

I particularly like this follow up tweet:

Given that as Joe Biden said he IS the democrat party I wonder if they will be a party to this suit.

What is it about the left that makes them determined to enrich conservative teenagers?


Speaking of business and click apparently the Huffington Post isn’t producing anywhere near enough to make money.

“This thing loses so much money,” a digital media executive with knowledge of the financials said. “It’s such a mess, I wouldn’t touch it with a 10-foot pole. I don’t think there’s any way you can make money.”

People briefed on the talks said Verizon, headed by CEO Hans Vestberg, appears to be seeking to offload HuffPost to a buyer willing to take a knife to the site’s high operating expenses — a potentially daunting process that would require going head-to-head with the site’s union and enacting “massive layoffs,” sources said. 

While HuffPost brings in between $45 million to $50 million a year in revenue, its annual expenses are between $60 million and $70 million, two sources said. And with advertising slammed by the pandemic, it will likely bring in $40 million this year, the sources said. 

I don’t claim that DaTechGuyblog.com is better or more influential than the Huffington Post and frankly it isn’t what it used to be in terms of traffic (what is this “Instalanche” of which you speak?) but we’re apparently better at business because we don’t lose millions, in fact off the top of my head I can’t remember the last time I took a loss in the 12 years I’ve done it.

Anyways I want Arianna Huffington to give me stock advice. She sure proved she knows when to sell.


One of the things about tolerating riots and rioters in order to help win an election is that there are consequences to your actions to wit:

Boeing to move all 787 Dreamliner production to South Carolina

Shift would end output of that jetliner in Seattle area as demand for planes plummets amid pandemic

Via Don Surber who points out

You can have CHAZ or jobs. You cannot have both.

This type of thing will continue until the voters in Washington in general and Seattle in particular decide to change it.


Finally when I got home from work I found out that the President and 1st Lady have tested positive for Covid.

The president being older would be considered at risk but given his personal stamina and the fact that he has the best medical care in the world I’d say the odds are in his favor unless someone treating him decided to give him a micky of some sort.

It was not too many years ago that the very suggestion of such a thing would have been unthinkable but given what we’ve seen from the left in reactions to this news and frankly from some in the medical profession I’d not put it past them.

The internet is full of conflicting information about what would happen if there is no clear winner by inauguration day in this upcoming presidential election.  This scenario is highly likely because of the absolute chaos that will be caused by so many states adopting mail in ballots because of the Coronavirus pandemic.  To find the truth about what would happen I decided to check the most original source material I could find on the subject, the United States Constitution.  

The Twelfth Amendment governs exactly what would happen if there is no clear winner of the presidential election.   I knew it would end up in the House of Representatives and I dreaded that because, as we all know, the Democrats control the House.  After reading the amendment and doing some research I was greatly relieved.  Here is the appropriate clause of the amendment.

The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each State having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the States, and a majority of all the States shall be necessary to a choice.

I tried to use Google to find out the breakdown of the House of Representatives by party and state.  Google as usual failed to provide search results for a clear and concise search request.  Thankfully I found the information in this Breitbart article Pollak: How Pelosi’s House of Representatives Could Re-elect Trump.  As you can see it was great news for us lovers of liberty.

While there are 435 representatives, there will only be 50 votes. And a current tally of representatives in each state shows that there are more Republican-majority delegations than Democrat-majority delegations. Republicans control 26 delegations; Democrats dominate 22; Pennsylvania is tied and Democrats have a 7-6 Michigan plurality.

I was concerned about the Democrats derailing the entire election, which should result in a Trump victory, by not Showing up when the election is handed off to the House.  To prevent that from happening there would need to be more than thirty four States that have at least one Republican Representatives who would show up.  There are only seven or eight states that have no Republicans so we are safe. 

The Breitbart article gives the exact timing of when the election would be handed off to the House of Representatives if there is no victor.

It seems almost certain that neither party will accept a close result in the presidential election on November 3. And given the likely delays due to vote-by-mail, recounts, and legal challenges, it is possible neither President Donald Trump nor former Vice President Joe Biden will have an Electoral College majority by December 14, when the Electors cast their votes.

The Twenieth Amendment governs exactly what would happen if the House of Representatives could not come up with a winner by Inauguration Day.

 If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice-President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice-President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice-President shall have qualified.

As you can see, whichever party wins the House in the November election would appoint a temporary president until the election mess is finally sorted out.  It is a tremendous incentive to do our best to make sure the Republicans take back the House.

Because I was working last night I only got to hear about 25 min of the debate on the radio before coming home and watching the whole thing.

I did a twitter thread (accidentally in several parts during the night on my impressions of that 25 min then livetweeted my thoughts as I watched the debate making sure I didn’t see any social media so I could judge on what I saw.

I did it on twitter because I figured nobody would read a liveblog that’s three hours late. The full thread is here but here are the main points.

  1. The biggest question going into the debate was if Biden could function. He clearly could which means that his position on the ticket is secure, and that debate is over. That’s the good news for him, the bad news is that if either during the next debates or during interviews he slips back into “slo Joe” mode the question is going to be what happened? Did he just rise to the occasion as an Ezzard Charles in round 14 vs Marciano or was he drugged up for the debate.
  2. There was a big difference between watching the Debate and listening to it. Biden’s voice was pretty good and his comeback, while factually BS were not bad, but his appearance was terrible, particularly his eyes which jumped out at you. He also had a habit of looking down while the president was speaking which, while it might have been to consult or take notes made it look like he was out on his feet, sort of like an android being shut off to conserve power. I submit and suggest that if you were watching you could not help but notice that.
  3. All of that being said I really liked the back and forth and when they would go back and forth he usually held his own. I think that while Trump was and is superior in those things it’s the type of thing that brought him to life the most.
  4. After the debate I saw a lot of hitting of Chris Wallace but it seemed to me that while he did favor Biden slightly he clearly asked good questions and tough questions to both candidate and as stated he did allow them to free for all a bit which were in my opinion the best (and most entertaining) parts of the show.
  5. Yeah he was harder on Trump, at some points a lot harder, but the media’s always hard on Trump, so I judged him on that scale. The fact that he was also hard on Biden is the difference to me.
  6. As for President Trump he was, pretty much himself. I think he had a good debate and several huge hits. The Hunter Biden stuff was strong (Biden’s attempt to pivot to his other son was smart as was admitting the drug problem there). The democrat cities there was a big hit, but his best thing was the 47 year theme. I only heard it once on the radio not knowing that it was a reoccurring piece for him. That left a mark.
  7. The: “I’ve done more in 47 months that you have in 47 years” was the line of the night for him. That being said I think he passed up several open shots where he could have touted his actual record of accomplishments and instead used those moments to hit Biden. Particularly on the exchange about race. I’m also shocked that when he had the chance he didn’t bring up his peace deals. It was almost the Maricano / LaStrazza fight where he was punishing him rather than knocking him out.
  8. My final judgement. I think Trump won both on the radio or watching but on the radio he might have won (based on a twelve rounder) 118-110 but on TV he won 118-105 but either way it was clearly a 12 round decision not a knockout, although Andrew Sullivan (who endorsed Biden this week) may disagree

Update: Cue classic SNL