2022 archive
Misty Water-Colored Memories 0
The writer of a letter to the editor remembers a different time.
Geeking Out 0
VirtualBox VM of Windows 8 on Ubuntu MATE under the Fluxbox window manager. The wallpaper is from my collection.
Fundamentals of Fundamentalism 0
At Psychology Today Blogs, Araya Baker explores religious fundamentalism, which he refers to as a “political-religious” movement, as distinct from a purely religious one. He notes that
I commend his piece to your attention, particularly for the list of characteristics that he suggests is common to fundamentalist movements, whether they be Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist.
Courting Disaster 0
Dr. Kenneth Krell is concerned that the current Supreme Court, packed with Trumpettes by Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell, poses a clear and present danger to physical health of the populace.
The Common Denominator 0
At The Roanoke Times, Sociologist Theodore Fuller points out that guns are the problem.
(snip)
We have not always had this distorted interpretation of the Second Amendment. The idea that the Second Amendment means that any Tom, Dick, or Harry has a Constitutional right to purchase any weapon, no matter how deadly, has been sold to the American people by the NRA. And the NRA did not always have this interpretation. They started selling this idea in the 1970s.
To put it bluntly, that’s when the NRA morphed from being primarily a safety organization for hunters to being the marketing agency for merchants of death.
Follow the link for the rest.
Devolution 0
At the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Tony Norman marvels at the Republican Party’s journey from the party of Lincoln to the party of stinkin’.
Coup, Me? 0
Thom discusses Republicans’ seditious actions. He quotes from a speech by George Washington:
Cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust domination.
It’s All about the Algorithm 0
“Social” media isn’t.
Aside:
As I have said before, the landscape of the internet has changed drastically since the Communications Decency Act was passed almost three decades ago. I agree with Dan Romer in the article at the link. “Social” media outfits that manipulate content so as to attract “eyeballs” and increase “engagement” are not impartial platforms for their users’ statements, unlike, for example, my most excellent hosting provider, which provides me a platform, but does not manipulate my content in any way.
Section 230 of that act sorely needs updating to reflect the reality of today’s internet.
Suffer the Children 0
At the Idaho State Journal, Chris Huston, in a longer article about how, in the fuss over abortion, men are somehow in no way held responsible for their role in unwanted pregnancies, expresses his befuddlement.
All the News that Fits Meets
Still Rising Again after All These Years
0
