Daily Archives: November 1, 2017


Tech Executives Are Contrite About Election Meddling, but Make Few Promises on Capitol Hill

I found coverage of the Senate hearings in The New York Times article Tech Executives Are Contrite About Election Meddling, but Make Few Promises on Capitol Hill.

WASHINGTON — Executives from Facebook, Google and Twitter appeared on Capitol Hill for the first time on Tuesday to publicly acknowledge their role in Russia’s influence on the presidential campaign, but offered little more than promises to do better. Their reluctance frustrated lawmakers who sought stronger evidence that American elections will be protected from foreign powers.
.
.
.
Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, the chairman of the crime and terrorism subcommittee that held the hearing, said the risk went beyond Russia to other American adversaries. Talking to reporters afterward, he alluded to potential regulation of political advertising online.

“It’s Russia today; it could be Iran and North Korea tomorrow,” Mr. Graham said. “What we need to do is sit down and find ways to bring some of the controls we have on over-the-air broadcast to social media to protect the consumer.”

We are being set up for having our First Amendment rights being restricted by the government. What Lindsay Graham left out is his desire to put limits on what Americans can say about American politics and society.

Just to remind you about what the First Amendment says.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Restricting these rights is more dangerous than restricting our Second Amendment rights.


The Democratic Civil War Is Getting Nasty, Even if No One Is Paying Attention

The New Yorker has the article The Democratic Civil War Is Getting Nasty, Even if No One Is Paying Attention.

It has interesting information about the dissenters against the way Hillary Clinton ran her 2016 campaign. However, I will focus my comments on two excerpts from the article.

Should they give up on the white voters who went for Trump in 2016 even though many had been reliably Democratic in the past?

I think it would be more important to go after the Obama voters who didn’t even vote in 2016. There are probably far more of those than Democrats who voted for Trump. People are so hung up on the two-party paradigm, that they can’t come to grips with the idea that there are huge numbers of people who just do not want to vote for the candidates put up by the two major parties. Voters didn’t go for the Green Party either. They went to the “Why Bother” party.

Senator Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, could appeal to this fervent new activist base, and conceivably win the nomination in 2020.

They still don’t get it, do they? Warren is my Senator, but after what she did in the 2016 election, I am ready to dump her. She lost all credibility by trying to sell us Hillary Clinton as the ideal candidate when she knew that Clinton favored Wall Street which Warren got elected to oppose.