Archive for the ‘Uncomfortable Truths’ Category

If you were one of those folks on twitter who followed me you would have noticed that I had a habit of not blocking trolls, or idiots, or people who swore at me, practically the only way to get blocked by me was to be an obvious bot (identical tweets to many people usually with either no icon or a picture of a pretty girl often named something like joe3882472100) or to tweet images of pornography. Even those who insulted the church instead of being blocked would go on my Perpetual Twitter Novena list so I could pray for them.

The reason for this is simple. If the left was making a stupid or weak argument in my opinion the best thing is for people to see it and then to laugh at them. For example. A few hours before I was locked out I had the following exchange with such a person:

the response to this was a rather foolish one on our leftist friends part

You see once someone states you have put out “demonstrable lies” the logical thing is to say: OK Demonstrate them. He didn’t take it very well.

Now if I had just blocked such a fellow I would not have been able to illustrate to those who follow me and him that said statement about “demonstrable lies” was blowing smoke. Instead I was able to illustrate to my followers and his that he was full of it.

And that brings us once again to twitter locking me out.

You see if people are saying something stupid, or outrageous it’s simple enough to counter such folk because such arguments are generally over the top and given the number of people on twitter there is no shortage of bright people on the other side who could do so.

BUT if people are saying things or making observations that are factual and or credible, something that the average person can understand or even something that might make you think, like the link I sent out that got me locked, then you risk a discussion that can be lost.

Now if you are a person who wants facts and truth that’s not necessarily a bad thing. After all if my opinion is wrong or “demonstratively false” I’d like to know it because I believe in truth and fact.

BUT if you are a person trying to advance a false or a weak proposition such as:

Donald Trump had a historic performance among non-white voters and outperformed his previous vote share even in blue cities EXCEPT in four cities in four swing state where Joe Biden not only outperformed Trump but out preformed Barack Obama enough to swing said states.”

Then the last thing you want is anyone advancing factual or credible arguments against it, particularly arguments that are easy for people to understand.

Or to put it simply, if our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook thought that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as the sun rises in the east they would point at such posts and simply laugh or provide evidence that could easily or credibly counter assertions to the contrary.

But

If our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook think that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as Jeffery Epstein killed himself then they will go all out to prevent evidence or arguments which support that fact.

The question isn’t if President Trump’s team has evidence of vote fraud. He does and plenty. The question is can he provide the courts with enough such evidence that will cause the courts to prescribe remedies to counter Joe Biden’s #Magicballots . You don’t know and neither do I. This is likely going to go to the Supreme Court.

But the Hollywood / media / academic / big tech left are fighting a different fight. The standard of evidence convince the avg person is MUCH lower than the standard to convince a court and right now the circumstantial evidence is more that sufficient to convince any citizen whose religion is not politics that the fix is in.

That’s the dirty little (Not So) secret here. They’re not censoring stuff because we’re making incredible arguments or points, they’re censoring us because we’re making credible arguments and points that the average person can understand.

In other words they’re still scared because they know it’s not legit.

A few years ago I was a Cubmaster for my son’s Cub Scout Pack. As the Cubmaster, I controlled our schedule of events, including what big events we held once a month at our Pack Meetings. One month my Den Leaders (adult leaders for Scout groups at different ages) agreed to the theme of “Emergency Preparation.” We divided the Scouts into stations. At one station, the Scouts learned basic first aid from one of the parents that was a nurse. At another, an energetic Den Leader taught the Scouts how to build a stretcher, and the Scouts raced with their Den Leaders in their makeshift stretcher. But the best station, by far, was the fire fighting. We had a legitimate fire fighter chief as a Den Leader, and he brought out a fire fighting propane tank and fire extinguishers, and taught our Scouts how to properly put out fires.

It was awesome, and let me tell you, the Scouts putting out real propane-fueled fires was the talk of the small town for almost two weeks, beating out even the common subjects of Minecraft and Pokemon-Go. I still have the coolest night-time photos of 7 year old boys putting out propane fires with a fire extinguisher.

Not everyone was impressed. That same night the church we were borrowing had choir practice, and the older church ladies had to park twenty feet farther than their normal parking spot because of our setup. The next day, I got word that the church was not happy and was sending a nasty email to our council. Thinking quickly, I posted the most awesome pictures of those events on Facebook and tagged the church in the post. It went viral, with almost 3000 views in a town that only had 5000 people, many of them members of the same church. I reaped my success, with no email to council and a mild rebuke to me from the church, which I settled with an apology and promise to do better in the future.

Our Scouting program that year did all sorts of awesome stuff, and the Scouts couldn’t keep quiet with their friends. Yet the nasty comments from the church ladies still bothered me. Later I realized that some people just never wanted change. It didn’t matter that Scouts were learning skills, or that the church got a positive nod because of their support. Nope, the fact that someone had to park a mere twenty feet away meant the whole thing was rubbish.

We’re seeing that with government. When we decide to move EUCOM headquarters out of Germany and into Poland, instead of discussion about keeping Russia at bay, we hear about the economic impact to regions in Germany. When we continue to have shipyard issues and can’t build or fix the majority of Navy ships on time or within budget, we don’t ask “Who should be fired,” but instead just suck up the cost and move on. Government is happy to repeat the past, no matter how out of date it is, because its the easy button approach.

But as time and technology march on, government wants to do more of the same. We want to use the same crappy setup for acquiring weapons that continues to not work. While Amazon has been drone delivering for years, we’re just now figuring out that’s a good idea. And if you’ve ever logged into a Navy personnel website, it looks like a 5 year old built it.

If you haven’t already, you’re going to vote on Tuesday. You’ll pick from a variety of candidates, and not just in the Presidential election. I implore you to look at their actual voting records and accomplishments. Plenty of people from all parties are all talk and no action. They are content to ride the government wave of mediocrity, never being held to account for so much money and time spent with so little to show for it. If you want more of the same, more ineffective government that you pay so much for, then voting for these people is easy.

If you instead want effective use of your tax dollars, vote differently. Government isn’t inherently evil, but it can be inclined into a passive nature that turns a blind eye to scandal, fraud and abuse. Voting in people that challenge this nature and demand government be better is what brings real change. These people are often the quiet leaders, spending the hours reading the fine print and rewriting it to make more sense. They aren’t always eloquent, but they are effective.

If you want effective government, you vote for these people. They aren’t the ones whining about walking the extra twenty feet.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

It was during the 2008 election that I realized I couldn’t bring myself to vote for John McCain for President. Earlier that year VADM Mike Rogers visited my command and my wife and I had a chance to meet him at a social event. The man was very well spoken and shared quite a few good sea stories while demonstrating a sharp intellect. Friends of mine that had worked for him had previously vouched for him as a hard working, honest person. So when he was nominated to become the NSA director, I had to watch his nomination.

To my horror, Senator John McCain interviewed VADM Rogers and treated him like dirt. Not only did he constantly interrupt him, but he belittled his experience and used the interview to score political points against others. The previous members, mostly Democrats, had asked hard but fair questions and acted decently. That incident caused me to look further into Senator McCain’s record, which wasn’t impressive.

Since I couldn’t bring myself to vote for him, I decided to check out the Libertarian candidate, Bob Barr. He held a rally at Christopher Newport University, so I went to see him. After his speech, he mingled in the crowd to shake hands. I mentioned to him I was in the Navy, and he recalled his time in Panama when he worked for the CIA. Since I had his ear, I had to ask him about his appearance in the “Borat” film.

Rolling his eyes, he told me his entertaining story. “Borat” showed up with sufficiently forged papers that made him look relatively official. The audio you hear in the movie is dubbed, because during the actual interview, “Borat” spoke in a low voice so that Barr couldn’t hear all the words. Once Barr realized it was a setup, he promptly stopped the interview.

Barr’s appearance in “Borat” wasn’t big news, so I didn’t have much reason to doubt his claim. At the time, it was an entertaining story, and I took away the lesson that Hollywood will gladly lie to you to make a movie. Flash forward, and here we are again, this time with a new “Borat” movie that claims to have Rudy Giuliani undressing with an underage girl. Sure, its possible, but given how “Borat” movies are filmed, I’ve got my doubts.

So count me out for the new “Borat” film. I can’t see it in theaters anyway, and I’m sure I can find something else useful to do.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

All the news that fits we print

Posted: October 20, 2020 by chrisharper in Uncomfortable Truths
Tags:

By Christopher Harper

After nearly 50 years as a journalist and journalism educator, I can no longer stomach the mainstream media, which have become apologists and censors.

After the New York Post published an account that linked the younger Biden’s influence-peddling to his father, almost every major “news”organization ignored the startling revelations.

In the old days, when the media actually pursued news, every outlet would have been chasing the story to confirm what the Post had reported.

After ignoring the revelations on Hunter’s computer, the media posited some of the ridiculous claims that the Russians were engaged in a disinformation campaign.

It didn’t matter that the nation’s intelligence chief dismissed those claims. Instead, “news” organizations contacted their paid consultants to confirm, without any direct knowledge, that Russia had done Donald Trump’s bidding.

However, suppose you look at the facts. In that case, the link between Hunter’s questionable activities and his father’s position, the case against Joe Biden is far stronger than anything the Democrats have thrown against Trump.

In this era of the media, however, that doesn’t count because news organizations have been propagandists for Biden.

In one of the most pathetic examples, the Washington Post’s David Ignatius portrays Hunter as a victim rather than a perp. “This is smoke without a fire. Hunter Biden erred. His father has said so quietly but clearly. He should get on with the business of trying to put the country back together after Trump’s ruinous presidency,” Ignatius wrote.

When these “news” organizations tried to cover up the story, Facebook and Twitter went to work to censor it.

The Post’s Twitter account was shut down. Facebook stopped the sharing of the story. 

Glenn Reynolds, the founder of Instapundit, was surprised when USA Today rejected his weekly column.

Fortunately, he published it on his website in which he takes the “news” organizations and the tech giants to task. See https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/

“Had Facebook and Twitter approached this story neutrally, as they would have a decade ago, it would probably already be old news to a degree… Hunter’s pay-for-play efforts were already well known, if not in such detail — but instead, the story is still hot. More importantly, their heavy-handed action has brought home just how much power they wield and how crudely they’re willing to wield it. They shouldn’t be surprised at the consequences,” Reynolds wrote. “And while this heavy-handed censorship effort failed, there’s no reason to assume that other such efforts won’t work in the future. Not many stories are as hard to squash as a major newspaper’s front-page expose during a presidential election.”

I took one step to express my dissatisfaction. I canceled my subscriptions to the New York Times and the Washington Post. I am no longer convinced that these organizations are interested in telling the truth. 

Their standards of “all the news that’s fit to print” for the Times and “democracy dies in darkness” for the Post seem hollow these days.