March, 2017 archive
The Next Big Thing 0
Via Bob Cesca.
“Next on the Auction Block . . . You!” 0
The Republican Party strips your browsing habits nekkid. El Reg comments on the recent bill to allow your ISP to sell you to the highest bidder (emphasis added):
Your ISP already knows quite a lot about you: your name and address, quite possibly your age, and a host of other personally identifiable information such as your social security number. That’s on the customer information side. On the service side, they know which websites you visit, when, and how often.
That information can be used to build a very detailed picture of who you are: what your political and sexual leanings are; whether you have kids; when you are at home; whether you have any medical conditions; and so on – a thousand different data points that, if they have sufficient value to companies willing to pay for them, will soon be traded without your knowledge.
There may be a bright side. Perhaps someone will leak Congresscritters’ browsing histories.
Heh 0
Juanita Jean notes that Presidents have ad “czars” (that’s a term invented by the press for special advisors) all the way back to Reagan and asks the question:
Why is it that Donald Trump doesn’t have a Czar?
I dunno. Maybe he is gonna have comrades instead.
Still in Search of That Elusive Buck 0
Daniel Ruth considers Donald Trump’s reaction the the failure of Paul Ryan’s “they laughing call it a health care” bill. A snippet:
Despite all the finger-pointing and Trump’s efforts to blame the United Nations, the Brownies, the Peace Corps, Saturday Night Live and Ted Cruz’s father for the failure of the Think of Dead as Just a Chronic Condition Act, the measure was supported by only 17 percent of the public. And that was probably the membership at the Mar-a-Lago Golf Club.
Meanwhile, TPM reports that Republicans are considering trying again, apparently because being against the Affordable Care Act seems to be all they know how to do.
Afterthought:
We have traded the “rule of law” for the “rule of flaw.”
Rights for Me but Not for You 0
In The Roanoke Times, Virginia Tech history professor Peter Wallenstein explains how Southern states favor of “states’ rights” except when they are not.
High Nunes (Updated) 0
Keith Olbermann rants about Russia and the Trumplings. The delivery is vintage Olbermann, the facts are what they are.
Addendum, Later That Same Day:
Field has a timeline.
“An Armed Society Is a Polite Society” 0
Children search for politeness.
Investigators say the teenager showed his younger cousin a 12-gauge shotgun that was inside a vehicle. The shotgun was placed against a tire before the teen reached back into the vehicle looking for another gun.
According to the sheriff’s office, the shotgun fell to the ground, discharging one round.
The family now has one less member sitting at the table.
Billions for Bullets 0
At the Boston Review, takes a look at arguments for increasing defense spending not just wanting, but spectacularly specious. He makes some points that are commonly absent from the discussion and deserve consideration. Here’s a snippet:
A larger flaw in McCain’s argument, however, is that, by historical standards, not much is actually burning. And, more importantly, the United States does not need to go looking for fires to extinguish. The world remains far more peaceful by various measures than at almost any other point, and the United States still enjoys a privileged position: militarily powerful and distant from trouble. U.S. enemies are historically few and weak; U.S. defense spending is more than double what Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea collectively spend on their militaries; and U.S. forces remain vastly superior. North Korea and Iran are troublesome, but incapable of posing much direct threat to their neighbors, let alone the United States, especially considering nuclear deterrence. Russia threatens its neighbors, but with an oil-dependent economy now about the size of Italy’s, it poses little danger to more economically stable nations further west.
A Picture Is Worth, the Art of the Con Dept. 0
Dick Polman comments on the notion that you can “run the government like a business”:
I marveled at this naivete for two reasons: Trump was a terrible role model, having been bailed out of six bankruptcies by a dwindling number of indulgent investors; and there’s no historical record of any businessman successfully running America as a business.
The sole career businessman ever elected to the presidency was mining magnate Herbert Hoover. He was touted in 1928 as a problem-solver who’d bring his engineering skills to the public sector. You know what happened next. The stock market crashed, and as the Great Depression deepened, Hoover made things worse because he couldn’t communicate, cajole, compromise, or inspire. He fatally lacked the political skills required of a president.
More Polman at the link.
Image via PoliticalProf.