Category Archives: Blogs' Archive

Facebook has become very important in my life, and the lives of millions of other people.  To some extent, it’s where the great debates of our time are debated.  Which makes it like the people’s government of the information society of the future, still in it’s infant stage.  Which makes it a real problem, because it is a private corporation and not answerable to the people at all.
There is an ad which recurs on my page, despite the fact that I hit ‘hide ad’ every time it appears, and then ‘report ad’ and then I get a range of boxes to click and then I hit ‘done’ and a box pops up to say ‘you won’t see that ad again’ and then I see the ad again.
I’ve reported it twice already this morning, and I’ve been online less than a half hour.
The ad, some might say, is not that bad.  It doesn’t seem to be abusive to women or children or animals, and it doesn’t promote violence.  It’s political.  It shows a Swedish Flag and says something like “Glorious Historical Day as Sweden Ditches Euro.”  So, you might be confused and think this is just a news story from a partisan, anti-Euro source but, no, it’s a paid ad.
(My views on the Euro are mixed.  On the one hand, I wish the Czech Republic had it.  I love the IDEA of a united Europe, and I love the ease of travel, and the Euro would make it even easier.  On the other, I understand that prices go up anywhere it’s introduced.  But prices go up anyway.  That’s just the direction prices always go, so I don’t think it would be cataclysmic.  Also, if the UK had been on the Euro, Brexit would have been a lot more difficult.)
But this blog is not about my views on the Euro.  It’s about Facebook’s ad reporting policy.  I started blocking the ad whenever I saw it a week or two ago.  At first I just hit ‘hide ad’ and then ‘done.’  Then I started going to ‘report ad’ and clicking on the box that says ‘spam.’  But it still appears, so now I’m clicking on the box that says ‘False News’ because Sweden is not ‘ditching’ the Euro. Sweden, like the Czech Republic, was never on the Euro.
Still, it appears.  There is no reason at all to believe anybody looks at, or acts on, these reports.  What they need is a box where it says “Why do you object to this ad?” and then a space to write in an explanation.
That then needs to be read by an actual human being (Mark Zuckerberg’s got the money.  He could hire a few actual human beings for this purpose), and responded to.

It would not be a difficult system to implement, at all.

It is becoming more and more evident that the DNC is more intent on fighting off progressives than in winning elections against Republicans.  One of the chief reasons for that is Nancy Pelosi.  She is old and tired, out of her depth and flailing.  She is lost in a world she does not understand.
In a revenge tweet after they’d refused more funding for border prisons, she referred to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and other House progressives as she wrote “All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world, but they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got.”
Ocasion Cortez tweeted back:  “That public “whatever” is called public sentiment.  And wielding the power to shift it is how we actually achieve meaningful change in this country.”  So, in two  short sentences, the House rookie confronted a congressman’s daughter who was born before the bombing of Pearl Harbor and has been in politics since forever, and explained to her what politics is supposed to be about.  Quite correctly.
From this, we learn two important political lessons.  First, avoid using the word “whatever.”  It reminded me of Donald Trump’s tweet about “blood coming out of her whatever.”  It’s a vague word, and it allows your opponent to define it, at which point you almost automatically lost the argument.
Second, never get into a twitter fight with Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.

One aspect of Facebook (and probably other social media platforms, too, I don’t know, I spend most of my time on Facebook) is that everybody seems to have much more beautiful and interesting lives than I do.  Somebody (on Facebook) once explained it to me, though.  “When you compare others lives to your own on Facebook, you are comparing their greatest hits album with your blooper reel.”
And that’s all true, but the fact is I don’t mind all that much.  A lot of people post pictures of their beautiful homes, and the view from their front porch, and I think that’s lovely.  Many people live in beautiful places, and it’s good to be proud of where you live.  Even more people post pictures of their beautiful vacations, and that’s great.  Sometimes it’s just them having drinks at a cafe, and that’s O.K. if you know them, but sometimes it’s pictures of beautiful beaches, or breathtaking mountains, or majestic mosques, monuments or cathedrals.  You see quaint village street scenes, old fashioned buildings, and marvels of modern architecture.
You could almost start to think the whole world looks like that and the amazing thing is, the whole world could look like that.  We’ve obviously already made a start, as there as exotic and lovely locations all around the world.
All we need to do is dramatically fix up the parts in between them and we’ll have that  utopian paradise that right wingers (who are living in hell) like to laugh about.

I’m certain I’ve written the same blog I’m about to write, or a version of it, once or twice before, probably going back to 2015.
But, it is clear and it is true that when people want to argue with me about  Bernie, or when people post stuff criticizing Bernie, it’s always the same arguments and they are super lame arguments, which have nothing at all to do with whether or not you like his policies.
70% of Americans, roughly, like his policies, when they are presented for polling each one individually.
He’s too old, some people say.  Well, he is up there, no denying.  It would have been nice if he’d been elected in 2016, when he was 3 years younger than he is now, but it doesn’t matter.  He’s in fantastic health.  He shoots hoops and plays baseball with kids, he marches in several parades a day and runs makes more public appearances than anybody.  He is the model of what a 77 year old man should look like, a shining example to us all.  They should be asking him questions about what he eats and how he stays so fit, and other than that not commenting on his age.
“I just don’t like the way he talks,” they say, “always wagging his fingers.”  Well, that is one way of making a point.  It’s a bit more dignified than Beto O’Rourke jumping up onto tables and flapping his arms like a chicken.  “He’s too argumentative,” they say.  Well, this is an election and he is a politician seeking office.  He’s actually expected to be argumentative.  This is not a negative thing at all.
“He won’t be able to get any of the stuff he promised passed.”  Well, that’s true of any candidate.  All a candidate can do is state their policies, let us know what they’ll try for, and then they have to deal with congress.  Bernie’s pretty good at dealing with congress, (the amendment king) and even back when he was mayor of Burlington he had a rep for working with people of opposing viewpoints to get things done.
Socialism.  This is a strange one.  Ask them if they are against public education, or a public police force, or the interstate highway system.  These are all examples of Democratic Socialism.  What’s super weird is that he gets attacked by some to the left of him, saying he shouldn’t say Democratic Socialism when he’s really more of a Social Democrat.
Really.  People say that.

During his 4th of July speech, Donald Trump said “In June of 1775, the Continental Congress created a unified Army out of the Revolutionary Forces encamped around Boston and New York, and named after the great George Washington, commander in chief. The Continental Army suffered a bitter winter of Valley Forge, found glory across the waters of the Delaware and seized victory from Cornwallis of Yorktown.

“Our Army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rocket’s red glare it had nothing but victory. And when dawn came, their star-spangled banner waved defiant.”

Such a glorious turbulent inkbath of words deserves a closer look.  In 1775, the Continental Congress created a unified Army out of the Revolutionary Forces encamped around Boston and New York, and named after the great George Washington, commander in chief.  They called it the great George Washington, commander in chief army.  The Continental Army (wait a minute – that’s not the great George Washington commander in chief army – they changed their name!  (anyway, moving on) suffered a bitter winter of (sic) Valley Forge, found glory across the waters of the Delaware and seized victory from Cornwallis of (sic again) Yorktown.  Actually, although he sort of glossed over the 5 years between the crossing of the Delaware and the victory at Yorktown, this part is not historically inaccurate.  Now we go to crazy town.  I’ll just print the whole thing again: “Our Army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rocket’s red glare it had nothing but victory. And when dawn came, their star-spangled banner waved defiant.”
Honestly, I think reporters from now on should restrict their questions to things like “What war was the battle of Fort McHenry in?,” or “What century were airplanes invented,” or “What’s a rampart?”  Because he would not know.