RT @LibertyLockPod: Conservatives are gonna advocate for red flag laws on Trans people
The state will then use those laws to only go after… Da Time: 17 hours ago
@FilmLadd Given that both people and algorithms written before Musk took over are still present I don't find that weird at all Da Time: 17 hours ago
My mistake. I’m bumping this up so that people will see the correction. And thanks, Dean Caron!
We’ve seen how the MSM will at best make “errors” and then quietly issue a correction or stealth edit a piece. Glenn Reynolds shows how to do a correction properly:
Earlier yesterday he put up a piece on how the ABA is allowing law schools to use the GRE vs the LSAT for admission and suggested this was a way to dodge the standards to get students. He got feedback from Paul Caron noting his implication was incorrect:
ERROR-CORRECTION UPDATE: I’m wrong above — this has already been taken account of. Paul Caron writes: “Your comment isn’t right — U.S. News takes GRE scores into account.” Here’s how:
Median Law School Admission Test and Graduate Record Examination scores (0.1125; previously 0.125): These are the combined median scores on the LSAT and GRE quantitative, verbal and analytical writing exams of all 2020 full- and part-time entrants to the J.D. program. Reported scores for each of the four exams, when applicable, were converted to 0-100 percentile scales. The LSAT and GRE percentile scales were weighted by the proportions of test-takers submitting each exam. For example, if 85% of exams submitted were LSATs and 15% submitted were GREs, the LSAT percentile would be multiplied by 0.85 and the average percentile of the three GRE exams by 0.15 before summing the two values. This means GRE scores were never converted to LSAT scores or vice versa. There were 60 law schools – 31% of the total ranked – that reported both the LSAT and GRE scores of their 2020 entering classes to U.S. News.
Not only did he get the correction up fast but he bumped the original piece to make sure people saw the correction.
That’s how you maintain a reputation as a credible source the MSM could take a lesson here if they were actually interested in something other than pushing an agenda.
Of course if the MSM had Reynolds standards people might still trust them.
I’m old enough to remember when Instapundit was called the NYT of bloggers but Glenn took that down as that comparison was not favorable. Perhaps if they emulated his methods of corrections someone might call them the Instapundit of newspapers.
This year, rather than sitting on the sidelines, I decided to volunteer to help on a local conservative’s campaign. This particular candidate had a small campaign going, running against someone that hadn’t been challenged in two election cycles. I’m two months into helping him, and I’ve both knocked on quite a few doors to campaign and hosted a small fundraiser at my house.
What I’ve experienced in just this small amount of time has really surprised me.
When I started going door to door with a survey and some candidate literature, I expected to get yelled at. Given everything we hear on the news, walking around and campaigning for a conservative candidate seems like a quick way to get attacked by some nut-job left-wing whacko. But that hasn’t been my experience. Most people are pretty decent. A few have actually invited me into their homes. Nobody has swore at me, or told me I was trying to put people in chains, or anything else awful.
The second surprise is that most people I polled aren’t registered to vote. In fact, most people weren’t really following the election at all. Maybe its a Virginia-politics thing, since the governor elections are off-cycle from federal elections. When asked who people would vote for, most answered as “unsure.” Now, that might be because I’m polling them in person, and among their friends they have stronger beliefs. But I thought it was telling that there were so many people seemingly out of the loop of an election that directly affects them.
Hosting a fundraiser was a surprise disappointment. Despite having a really good candidate, I found that most conservatives are lazy. My church is significantly more traditional, yet nobody, repeat, nobody (save one family that is a close friend to mine) from my church showed up, despite our pastor encouraging it. Getting other conservatives to show up was incredibly difficult. Keep in mind this wasn’t a “300 dollar a plate” event. We had pulled pork, macaroni and steamed vegetables. More importantly, people had plenty of time to interact with the candidate and speak to him personally about what concerned them. You couldn’t find an easier way to interact with a potential politician, yet it felt like a Joe Biden press conference. Personally, it was really disappointing, and it makes me think that most conservatives are an awful lot of talk without any action.
I highly encourage people to get involved now with your local party. Talk to your city about becoming an election official, since you have to do some training and get registered. Volunteer to go door to door now, because its far less scary than you might imagine. Check that your friends are registered to vote, and not just in the federal elections. And for crying out loud, be willing to donate to candidates that have your values, especially the local candidates that control things like school boards, redistricting and local tax rates, and who are far closer to your concerns than your federal representative. Because if you don’t, the other side is going to out-compete you, and we’ll get more years of the same stupid policies.
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. Please take a minute to stop by Amazon and buy my book, “To Build A House,” available on Kindle or in paperback.
Capt Jake Cutter:Monsewer, you haven’t got the sense of a jack rabbit. Letting hot horses drink. Keep ’em away from the water till they’ve cooled out. Don’t you know anything about horses?
Paul Regret: I know enough about horses. When I want one I call a groom. When I’m done, I call a groom to take him and the groom says “Yes, sir, Mr Regret.” That’s all I wanna know about horses.
The Comancheros 1961
Wednesday I was reading an excerpt of William Jennings Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” speech when he was the Democrat nominee for President in 1896 when my grandfather (Dad’s Dad) was a 16 year teen in Sicily. The speech concerned the big issue of the daysound, money a Gold standard vs Bi-metalism that is a gold AND silver standard.
The speech is of course famous for his big finish:
If they dare to come out in the open field and defend the gold standard as a good thing, we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world. Having behind us the commercial interests and the laboring interests and all the toiling masses, we shall answer their demands for a gold standard by saying to them, you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.
Now in an age unlike today where everyone knew basic scripture this was a big deal, but today a good half of the country wouldn’t have any idea what he was talking about and the whole issue of “sound money” in a age when we print it on whims (something that would have shocked both parties in his age) is even more comical. Of course given today’s educational system the very idea that an American High School Student let alone a college student who have even heard of Bryan, a man who any student pre-1962 would have known, is an iffy proposition at best.
But there is an earlier line from that speech that jumped out at me that gets almost no play today that I want to touch on. (emphasis mine)
You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard. I tell you that the great cities rest upon these broad and fertile prairies.Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic. But destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.
“There was no reason to leave before,” said a born-and-bred Upper West Side mom, who asked for anonymity. “Now, I’m done. I can leave tomorrow and never look back. If I never came back to this block, that would be fine.”
The six-months-pregnant mother of a toddler daughter just put her apartment of a decade near the Lucerne up for sale.
“I have definitely seen more crime, drugs and harassment in one week than in my whole experience growing up here,” she said. “I don’t want to see a child get hurt or raped, before they realize maybe it was a mistake to put [hundreds of] drug addicts and sex offenders near schools in the most dense residential population in the city.”
They’ve literally killed the cities. This is going to be the most transformative shift in 100 years.
This means we get to see if Bryan prediction of cities springing up again is right. In fact NYC is in many ways a shadow of its former self as suggested by this amazing video of a fellow touring the now comparatively empty sites:
There is no doubt that either NYC will correct this situation or other cites will rise because these people are going to live somewhere but Stacy McCain asks the key question concerning all these folks now fleeing for the safety of their families :
Thousands of families are now fleeing New York City, but the question must be asked: Who elected Bill De Blasio as mayor?
Probably a lot of those Upper West Side moms voted for De Blasio, because it was the trendy “progressive” thing to do at the time. Didn’t it occur to any of them to wonder what the consequences might be?
Nope they’ve been raised in Evan Sayet’s safe Kindergarten of Eden and they have no more idea how the real world works then Paul Regret knew how to water a horse. Their live has been so safe and comfortable that they had no idea how to deal when the reality of their voting record came knocking at their door.
So now they are fleeing and at least one Governor of a nearby state says come on down but does not include the required warning that I’ll helpfully add
but just remind them that if they vote in the way that turned their states into pits NH will become one.
So come on in but don’t bring your voting record with you
The other thing that might happen is that the migrants from high tax states might bring their political attitudes with them, moving to new, low-tax states for the economic opportunity but then supporting the same policies that ruined the states they left. This seems quite plausible, alas, and I’ve heard Coloradans lament that the flow of Californians to their state involved a lot of people doing just that. (I suppose that migrants from lower-benefits states to higher-benefits states might support change the other way, but people who live on the dole seem to have pretty similar voting patterns regardless of location, which is why the dole is so popular with certain politicians).
Surprise surprise Colorado went from purple to practically blue & Denver is becoming a pit.
If I were one of those conservative billionaires (hello, Koch brothers! hi, Sheldon Adelson!) who are always donating tens of millions to support Republican candidates, I think I might try spending some of the money on something more useful: A sort of welcome wagon for blue state migrants to red states. Something that would explain to them why the place they’re moving to is doing better than the place they left, and suggesting that they might not want to vote for the same policies that are driving their old home states into bankruptcy.
Of course that will be their kids problem to figure out where to flee to if their parents turn their new homes into a pit. Let’s hope those parents love their kids enough to keep this from happening.
fyi I’ll be talking about this piece at 3 PM EST on the DaTechguy off DaRadio Livestream podcast
There’s a whole army of patriotic Davids out there across this great country ready to stand up and to speak out in defense of liberty, and these Davids aren’t afraid to tell Goliath “don’t tread on me.”
That’s just one line (Sissy has more here) but consider.
That is the second time in under a month in a major presentation that she quotedGlenn Reynolds (the other was the blood libel line from his WSJ piece).
Can we assume that Sarah Palin reads Glenn Reynolds? (Some enterprising radio host should have him on his show.)
Glenn Reynolds draws between 250,000 and 500,000 hits a day and gets 30-60 posts up per day EVERY DAY. If Sarah Palin is quoting him them perhaps a wise reporter would get to know him, or a smart producer would have him on the air.
Prospective candidates, particularly if they are courting supporters, routinely sit through dinners and mingle with guests. But in her case, Ms. Palin entered the room only for her speech and left immediately after.
Actually Palin stayed and took photos with attendees as was announced at the start of the speech. If they can’t get that detail right when they were supposedly there why would I expect them to follow-up on this kind of story.
You know there is a reason why Instapundit took down the “NYT of bloggers” comment from his site. The times should work for the day when they can be called the “instapundit of newspapers”.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 