Russia, Russia, Russia

Fans of the old show The Brady Bunch will get that reference.

I found a good list of questions to ask about the "Russian Influence on the 2016 Election" story - emphasis on the word STORY.

To me, # 5 is the most critical:

5. Precisely what meddling occurred? Somebody meeting with a Russian does not constitute proof of anything. rather, this is the classic witch-hunt accusation of the McCarthyite "Red Scare" of the 1950s--guilt by association: you were seen conversing with a Communist, thus you must also be a Communist--or at a minimum, you are tainted by association and thus under a cloud of suspicion that can never be cleared because no accusation of guilt in a court of law is ever made.

Guilt by association is insidious because it can't be cleared in court. Those accused of guilt by association are not innocent until proven guilty--they are guilty until proven innocent, a proof that can never satisfy the accusers.

A precisely defined chain of verifiable actions is required to prove meddling beyond reasonable doubt. So date, all the accusations have failed to meet this most fundamental standard of evidence of wrong-doing.

If Republicans/Conservatives are still being accused of 'McCarthyism' for any pointing out that someone is verifiably Socialist/Communist, then why are the Democrats/Progressives/Liberals/Leftists using that smear tactic to associate the Trump administration with the Russians?

If McCarthyism is the Ultimate Bad Thing, why are THEY doing it?

Share

How Progressives Mis-Understand The Working Class

I started thinking about that misunderstanding while reading this post.

Now, if you only watch ONE online video, make it THIS ONE. I promise, you won't be disappointed.

The David Brooks article about the cultural divide between working class and upper class people really struck a chord with many, particularly those that, like I did, shifted between classes during my life.

Read Rod Dreher's take on the controversy, and take the time to read the comments.

Share

Posted on Facebook First

Should have put it here first:

Just watched the HRC acceptance speech. She hit all the right notes.
But, she doesn't sing.
Her delivery is flat - she is too monotone (yes, that DOES count). She has several gestures that grate - that nodding her head like a bobblehead, her pinched hand pointing, that - Oh, yeah, smile! - thing. She has been coached, so it's all smooth enough, but she does not sound authentic. She sounds as though she is remembering to tick off specific points - mention grandkids, thank other Democrats, put in some reference to Trump - and contrast it with my position.
Sorry, she just didn't soar.
The positives: she didn't stumble her words, she paced herself appropriately - not too fast, left time for audience responses, pleasant facial features (no pulled down mouth - ages a woman HUGELY), no big surprises (the leadership hates when you go off-topic), she didn't dig a hole that she'll have to fill later.

Share