Journalism (Part One)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"With freedom comes responsibilities."  -Eleanor Roosevelt

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

When I was a callowyute several thousand days ago when the Black&White ages were drawing to a close, the world, and how it worked, was presented to me in a black and white fashion by the Sisters of Mercy at my Catholic grade school.

It occurs to me, although it was probably a coinkydink, that the good sisters dressed in black and white.

I was recently reading an allegedly straight news story that was an editorial wearing a clever disguise. It reminded me of what I was taught journalists do for a living.

As objectively as possible, they try to discover the who, what, when, where and why of a given news story so that we all might know what's going on in the world and conduct ourselves accordingly. Let's label this professional journalism.

A noble calling, yes?

Of course, this was a black and white and simplified version of reality -- grade school. At some point down the road, it was revealed that this version of journalism, the one that strives for objective truth, was a relatively recent upgrade.

For example, the phrase yellow journalism, and its meaning, was at least cursorily discussed. Remember the Maine! The hell with Spain! I was not taught that The hell with Spain! was the second half of the famous slogan. I offer this fun fact as a public service, in case you were also unaware.

Wikipedia: "Yellow journalism and the yellow press are American terms for journalism and associated newspapers that present little or no legitimate well-researched news while instead using eye-catching headlines for increased sales."


The two versions of journalism presented above are logical opposites, black and white. Another version, let's call it traditional journalism -- proudly, frankly, openly, and unashamedly partisan -- was the norm in America till the early 1900s.

Now that I'm a sexy senior citizen I realize that no H. sapien is capable of pure objectivity. Also, that truth is provisional and subject to modification.

However, when objectivity is called for objectivity is worth striving for. Truth that stands up to objectivity, reason, open debate and an open mind is good enough, close enough, and absolutely necessary if we're to survive and thrive.

Please check your postmodern nihilism at the door.


At the moment, my Dear Stickies, journalism is a mess. What do you get when you combine professional journalism, yellow journalism, traditional journalism, infotainment, propaganda, public relations, etceterations, and the internet?

Purple journalism.

Purple journalism: a form of journalism combining multiple elements. The purpose varies depending on the source. Most common motivating factors are profit, fame, and ideology.

Journalism, like everything and everyone else, is subject to the high-velocity disruption that is a hallmark of the age I'm living in. I wonder if you will take high-velocity disruption for granted and regard me as quaint?

At the moment, we're treading water in the Dizzinformation Ocean, including those young enough to take this for granted. Any given trusted, go-to source for news (brand name or otherwise...) may be currently featuring a story that's been tainted by professional trolls whose job it is to do so.

While everyone's aware of the blurred and ever-shifting lines between the components of purple journalism mentioned above and...

Nope, don't think so, not everyone. Not even close...
No way, Poppa.
Non-non-non. I don't think so either. 

I've just been the victim of a collective interruption by Dana, Iggy, and Marie-Louise -- in that order. Fine, point taken. The question is, what, if anything, can/should we do about it?


Assuming you prefer living in a country with free speech and a free press (my personal preference) your options are limited if you wish to avoid stepping on other people's right to run their mouths.

Another of those black and white notions imparted to me by Sister Mary McGillicuddy and her... well, sisters, was that with rights come responsibilities. Same coin, different sides.

One of the primary responsibilities that comes with any given right is acknowledging that the other kids on the playground have the same rights as you do and that you're gonna have to find a way to share the swings. I may have mentioned this ten or twenty times before.

How To Get a Clue & Maintain Your Bliss

Select a limited, cross-section of information sources that you can comfortably keep track of and ignore the rest.

Make sure that at least one of them pisses you off and that at least one of them is a bit over your head.

Fire up your cynicism, skepticism, experience, and knowledge.

Never forget we've evolved (or were created) to be tribal and that confirmation bias never sleeps.

Maintain (try to anyway) an open heart and an open mind.


When I become king I'm going to require that all news media of a certain size or larger (metrics to be determined) must declare that they are partisan, in what way, and provide a simple, short, clear statement explaining their approach to the news.

If they're about lurid pictures/video, lurid stories, and making as much money as possible that's fine -- as long as they acknowledge it. Easy peasy, right? Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 

May You Live In Interesting Times (No. 4)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution..."                                                                           Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 85  

Dear (eventual) Stickies & Great-Grandstickies,

As you (and my gentlereaders) may have noticed, I mostly confine my political musings to making fun of politics, politicians, and/or bureauons that work for the gummits or The Gummit.

[For the record: I'm not an anarchist of any stripe; I acknowledge the need for government and the fact that not all bureaucrats, in fact, probably/hopefully, are not bureauons.]

However, the current kerfuffle over the Donald's impending choice of the next Supreme concerns me enough to activate my preachy/opinionated side. You've been warned.


When I was a callowyute I was taught that The Gummit (which at the time was called the federal government) consisted of three coequal branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

I was told that this was a feature, not a bug, and that divvying up the power provided us with a system of "checks and balances" to ensure maximum freedom, minimum government.

Congress, our freely chosen representatives, would create the Rules&Regs and decide how the dough was spent.

The president and the minions of the Executive branch would enforce the Rules&Regs, spend the dough, and take care of the day to day stuff.

The Judicial branch would determine if the Rules&Regs had been violated, and if so, administer the appropriate penalty. Penalties for a given offense are spelled out ahead of time, you can't make 'em up as you go.

Sounded/sounds good to me.


The system above is based on a set of ground rules called the Constitution of the United States of America. It not only spells out how the federal government is to be structured it spells out what the three branches are permitted to do. Any powers not granted -- are not granted.

And of course, the fundamental rights of all Citizens of the Republic are spelled out as well.

The Supreme Court, made up of nine judges that are appointed for life (tenure on steroids) so they're beholden to no one, has the final say on ground rules disputes.


Still sounds good to me. But, why are the kids on the left side of the playground freaking out over the fact a Supreme Court judge has just resigned and the Donald, who hangs out on the right side of the playground (well, sorta/kinda), per the rules, gets to choose a new judge?

Well, at least nominate one, he or she has to be approved by the Senate. The United States Senate, wherein every state of the republic has two duly elected representatives -- no matter how large, or small, or rich, or poor, or powerful, or weak a given state happens to be.

Which also sounds good to me, in fact downright clever... and fair. So why...

[Aw c'mon! Everybody knows that! Trump can, and will, nominate a conservative. This'll mean the court's got five conservative judges and four liberal ones.]

Exactly, Dana, and that's my point. 

[Huh?]



Liberals, particularly the ones that call themselves progressives, believe that if you don't like what the Constitution says about something, you can just put an updated spin on it and do what you want -- as long as you're on the side of the angels. 

The end justifies the means as long as you mean well. What could possibly go wrong?

It's hard to change the ground rules, on purpose, and that's as it should be. In order to keep a democracy from devolving into a mobocracy or a tyranny, it's necessary to make it hard for a well-meaning (or malevolent) majority to change the ground rules to avoid the law of unintended consequences. 

This protects a given minority from a given majority, and a given majority from itself.



Our good friends on the left are freaking out because, as usual, they're determined to pass whatever laws they deem necessary to save us from ourselves. If they have to do it by end-running the Constitution and Congress by legislating from the bench, so be it. 

But without a majority of the Supremes on their side, or at least someone like our soon to be retired Justice Kennedy to act as a swing vote, this is much more difficult.

After all, when you're trying to save the world who has time to wait for Congress to pass the appropriate laws, much less change the Constitution? If you need to bypass the democratic process to save our democracy, as long as you're certain you're right, a lefty's gotta do what a lefty's gotta do.

If they don't draw a red line, the next thing you know important matters that need to be decided on, but that aren't mentioned in the Constitution, will be left up to the individual states. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 










  

A Conspiracy Theory

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my (eventual) grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who don't, yet) -- the Stickies -- to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

WARNING! This column is recommended for Sexy Senior Citizens age 50 and above who prefer perusing the web via a decent-sized screen. The reading of this column by grups and callowyutes may result in psychological/emotional/etceteralogical triggering.

                                                 Glossary  

                                  Just Who IS This Guy?

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars 

Dana -- A Gentlereader
Iggy -- A Sticky (GT*)

Marie-Louise -- My Muse (GT*)

*Currently Grand Touring 

Free market: "... a system which imposes upon enterprise a discipline under which the managers chafe and which each endeavors to escape."
                                                                                 -Friedrich Hayek

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies (& Gentlereaders),

Capitalism and free market are terms that often should not be sharing the same sentence (or the same dictionary definition) – depending on how ya define your terms.

Merriam-Webster says that capitalism is: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market (my emphasis).

In other words, at least in theory, people compete for your hard-earned money by offering you the best combination of product, price, and service for something you want/need/are willing to pay for.

Dr. Deirdre McCloskey ("Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, English, and Communication" University of Illinois at Chicago) has gone to a great deal of trouble to document the fact that capitalism, starting roughly 200 years ago, is responsible for our age of unprecedented prosperity.

The operative word is the previous sentence is unprecedented. The planet Earth hasn't previously experienced anything like it. Go a-googling if you don't believe me. Here's a taste. The U.S. weight loss market -- that is, just the U.S. --was worth $66,000,000,000 in 2017.

However, Dr. McCloskey likes to substitute the awkward phrase trade tested betterment for the word capitalism due to the frequent bad press capitalism receives from fat reporters/various and sundry ungrateful Citizens of the Republic. However...

Big, No, HUGE But

They have a point, BUT, they're still missing the point, as are their philosophical enemies.

I recently stumbled on an essay published by a website called Bleeding Heart Libertarians, ("Free Markets and Social Justice") titled The Conflation Trap by Roderick Long. 

BHL, consisting mostly of academics writing for academics, is not exactly poolside reading material. However, since I'm a wild-eyed libertarian with a bleeding heart and conservative impulses, I occasionally wade through a posting or two although I frequently find myself in over my head.

While not exactly light reading, the essay in question explains how/why the terms capitalism and free-market aren't always playing on the same team.


Conflation trap refers to the fact that conservative and libertarian free-marketeers often "tend to conflate the results of crony corporatism with those of free markets."

And...

"...where the right-wing version...treats the virtues of free markets as reason to defend the fruits of corporatism, the left wing...treats the objectionable fruits of corporatism as reason to condemn free markets (my emphasisses).

In other words...

Big ass companies, although they often produce shtuff we want and need,  often take advantage of their sheer size to tilt the playing field by...

Rent-seeking, "a company lobbies the government for loan subsidies, grants or tariff protection" (Investopedia). And/or regulatory capture, "...a regulatory agency...advances the commercial or political concerns of...groups that dominate the industry...it is charged with regulating.

[There are many more tactics in their bags o' tricks, the two above are just my personal faves.]

That is, they use their size to cheat. That's not free-market capitalism, which is why conservatives and libertarians should condemn such behavior regardless of whether or not we wind up with cool stuff.

Left-wingers often do condemn this sort of thing (unless the firm in question is politically favored by the Depublicrats or they have a personal stake...) -- and then blame/condemn the free market. I repeat, this is not free-market capitalism.

Conspiracy Theory

Lubbock, Texas. Spring, 1985.

Bob L.: "It's all a con, man."
Me: "It's a freakin' conspiracy, what it is."

O.K., this is the conspiracy part of our literary extravaganza. Like most alleged conspiracies, it's more of a self-reinforcing cosmic coinkydink than an active conspiracy.

That is to say, no secret meetings were/are held at the snack bar of a flea market in Lubbock, Texas -- the one where Ronbo had her purse swiped? It's just gummit employees and employees of The Gummit and politicians and chafing managers (see Hayek quote above) pursuing their own rational self-interest.

The bottom line is a system in which...

The Depublicrats (D.) and bureauons tend to blame the "free" market whenever Giantco Inc. gets caught with its thumb on the scale. Vote for us/we need more gummit, and The Gummit, and Rules&Regs.

The Republicrats (R), allegedly conservatives and/or libertarians, are often prepared to ignore Giantco Inc. getting caught with its thumb on the scale, reinforcing the left's view of the "free" market.

They call for smaller/limited gummit -- and then vote for the corn cartel, the sugar cartel, the cable cartel, etceterel. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the poster children of too big to fail. Bloated and unaccountable defense spending, subsidized this, subsidized that, etceterized, ad nauseam, ad infinitum, ad absurdum.


Mr. Long points out...

[Note: approaching a very cool and perceptive observation.]

...that Big Gummit v. Giganto Inc. is comparable to the church v. the state in the middle ages. They need (and use) each other to survive and thrive while each plots and schemes to gain the upper hand.

Depublicans v. Republicrats? In any given election in which we choose a favorite son/daughter to be a (theoretically temporary) part of The Gummit, better than 90% of incumbents will be reelected. Can't be our fault... I'll bet it's the Pooteen (i.e., Russians) and his evil henchmen! Hmmm...

The Gummit, the pols, the bureauons -- and Giantco -- conspire against the Citizens of the Republic merely by being themselves and doing what they do. Without federal term limits -- we're screwed. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day. 
Please scroll down to react, comment, share, donate, or shop at Amazon

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains. Just click here or on the Patreon button at the top or bottom of my website.

If you do your Amazon shopping by clicking on an Amazon link above or below Amazon will toss a few cents in my direction every time you buy something. 

Your friendly neighborhood crank is not crazy about social media (I am a crank after all) but if you must, you can like me/follow me on Facebook. I post an announcement when I have a new column available as well as news articles/opinion pieces that reflect where I'm coming from or that I wish to call attention to.

©2019 Mark Mehlmauer As long as you agree to supply my name and URL (Creative Commons license at the top and bottom of my website) you may republish this anywhere that you please. Light editing that doesn't alter the content is acceptable. You don't have to include any of the folderol before the greeting or after the closing (Have an OK day) except for the title. 

Dictators: Things I Think About (No. 3)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"History has proved that dictators can't last forever."  -Lee Hyeon-seo


Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

I have a tab on my website, labeled, somewhat childishly I admit, Dick Taters. There isn't much there, there. I haven't done much with it. In my defense, it's relatively new and I'm somewhat preoccupied with other projects just now.

However, my fascination with dictators remains strong. Recently, Li'l Rocket Man (LRM) has been in the news because of his sit down with the Donald. Our dealmaker in chief doesn't appear to have accomplished much beyond agreeing to keep talking.

Of course, talking trumps war. Stay tuned, he'll resolve the trade thing. As for the immigration thing... I dunno.


Big But
From an entertainment standpoint, the meeting was a whooge success...

A Li'l Rocket Man/the Donald Reality Show Special!

Staring...

The Donald 

Li'l Rocket Man 

 <and special guest star >

Dennis Rodman!

<and featuring>

guys in matching suits that run alongside Li'l Rocket Man's limo!

Clearly, the guys in matching suits that run along alongside Li'l Rocket Man's limo need a better name. The Rockettes comes immediately to mind but since Radio City probably has at least one lawyer on retainer... On the other hand, a legal battle could generate a bunch of free publicity if once the papers were served the N.K. Rockettes held a press conference and gracefully backed down.

They could pitch themselves as just a hardworking bunch of young fellas trying to make it in showbiz before they (and assorted loved ones) starve to death, or get executed when LRM is having a bad day.


Speaking of Special!s is that still a thing? When I was a kid it seemed as though there was at least one _______ Special! a week on one or more of the four TV stations my family had access to via a tinfoil enhanced, rabbit ear antenna system.         

I'm so old...
How old are you!

The name most likely to be inserted in the blank above is Bob Hope; we only had one TV; a mom and a dad; tossing an F-bomb was considered going nuclear.


Anyways... Li'l Rocket Man is a third generation bloodthirsty tyrant, which makes him a king and a dictator if you think about it. I'm talkin' about a good old-fashioned, all-powerful, because God said so sort of king. Not just a wimpy, parasitic, ribbon cutting modern sort of king.

Of course, being a communist, at least on paper, he can't invoke God or that divine right bonkercockie.

Wait a minute... given that Sports has replaced religion as the opiate of the masses does that explain the Li'l Rocket Man/Dennis Rodman relationship? Could it be that LRM is shrewdly planning to make Rodman a god, thus reviving the time-tested, traditional church/state/starving peasants meme?

All rise for his royal chubbiness and the multi-tatted, plentifully pierced, omnipotent bouncer of balls!


I, being me, got to wondering. Given that LRM is a third generation enslaver, how common is a hereditary dictatorship?

I'm not talking kings whose evil deads tend to be at least somewhat moderated by their countries military -- google the phrase "countries of the middle east" -- because they want access to Western markets, money, power, and arms sales.

I'm talking LRM level monsters who are kept in power by a military/police force that is as evil as they are. Tyrants who prefer to ally with the likes of Russia or China, both of whom have long and storied traditions of viewing the populace as highly expendable meat puppets.

I went a-googling and found a great article published by the Guardian back in 2010. As I suspected (guessed), hereditary dictatorship is rare. I mean, it seems obvious that your average evil despot has a better than average chance of being murdered.

Also, ya gotta figure their death is like as not to trigger a clutch of wannabe evil despots to go to the mattresses till the (gun)smoke clears and a new national bully emerges.

The writer, Julian Borger, states that the last time a three-generation tyranny occurred was in Paraguay in the mid-1800s. More recently, the bloodthirsty Somoza family ran Nicaragua from 1936 to 1979, but the three jefes only spanned two generations.


What have we learned Dorothies? Dictators, like all bullies, are an aberration with (relatively speaking) short shelf lives. However, we must remain alert. There's a wannabe bully hiding under every other rock. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 

  

                             

Facebook & The Goog

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"Sometimes, giving up your privacy is a little like going to the dentist and we have let him have access that no one's ever had."   -Tom Petty

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

Social media has been much in the news lately; the Goog (A.K.A. Google) always seems to be in the news. My psyche's currently featuring a mind movie that's about yinz walking around in the world after I'm dead -- or gliding around in the world on an anti-gravity platform (AGP) of some sort.

You'll be interacting with social media, and the cloud, via an implanted transceiver. Another implant will project a virtual screen in front of you when desired. Both devices, and your AGP, will be controlled by your thoughts.

Your AGP will have a self-driving function so that you can float through the world in a virtual electronic cocoon without having to interact with other meat puppets any more than you wish to.

Well, until all of your devices and software suddenly go dark because you were zapped by a raygun of some sort (I hope I'm not being too technical for you) wielded by an evil ne'er-do-well intent on robbery, or worse, and you land on your face.

There will always be evil ne'er-do-wells. Virtual cocoons are as temporary as real ones. Good -- life would be rather dreary otherwise. Think about this.

The above is not the point I set out to make but since it's a good point I shall leave it stand.

If you ain't paying for it, you're not the customer, you're the product.

That's the point I set out to make. It's certainly not original to me, in fact, you can trace its roots back to 1973.

The reason that social media is much in the news is that a series of scandals/new European privacy laws/revelations/etceterations have revealed to, or reminded, Mr. and Ms. Plebensky that the statement above is true.

I'm so old that I can remember when computers were as big as a small house, required a dedicated AC unit, and, were tended by clipboard-toting technicians in white lab coats.

There was no internet when these giants weren't roaming the earth. Computers were around long before there was much of an internet to speak of. And yes, I miss how much easier it was to maintain a bit of personal privacy back in the Black & White ages.

However, I don't need constant reminding that the data I generate interacting with "free" software and related services are sliced, diced, and sold to the highest bidder.

I'm so old that I know there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Big But

The maxim is not complete. It should be: If you ain't paying for it, you're not the customer, you're the product -- but, everyone wins bright, shiny door prizes just for showing up.

Tell 'em, Johnny! 

Well, Wink, In exchange for letting our Algorithmites, Data Dragons, and Botmonsters lose in your life, social media will enable you to effortlessly exchange all sorts of shtuff with other H. sapiens without having to get dressed and leave the house, free and no charge. 

As to the omnipresent, the Goog, you name it and they've got it, free or on the cheap. Blogging platforms, office suites, world-class search tools, cloud storage, Chrome books and boxes... why, the list goes on and on! 

[Wait,wait,wait... I for one am not crazy about inviting Algorithmites, Data Dragons, and Botmonsters into my home.]     

You're in good (and numerous) company, Dana. But the thing is, you don't have to actively avail yourself of the services of the data harvesting industry. I personally know all sorts of people that go out of their way not to and who are doing just fine.

I know of other people that enthusiastically participate in our brave new world but have discovered that with a little bit of knowledge and effort it's not that hard to electronically cover your electronic tracks.

[Yeahbut I heard you can't erase all traces. And short of living in a cave in the otherwhere, some of your personal data is parked in a database and/or sitting on a server somewhere.]

Welcome to 2018. Until someone develops a subdivision of caves with indoor plumbing, climate control, and Wifi, I'm staying put and counting my blessings.


Hopefully, My Dear Stickies, we'll work it all out without becoming too much like Xi Jinping's (A.K.A. Xi Dada) China. The Zuck's in trouble again for telling fibs about Facebook. Some of the social justice warriors that The Goog likes to hire, and encourage, have begun chewing on the hand that feeds them.

Gotta run. The techs are here to install the T1 line I ordered for Casa de Chaos. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 

 

Housekeeping & Racism (HT:GDA)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"Bias and prejudice are attitudes to be kept in hand, not attitudes to be avoided." -Charles Curtis, Hoobert Heever's VP (and a politician that could legitimately claim Native-American ancestry).

Dear (eventual) Grandstickies & Great-Grandstickies,

This part, the housekeeping part, is directed mainly at my gentlereaders. FYI, this missive exceeds the WPC limit by a hundred words or so, but you get two columns for the price of one.

I'm sure you're probably sick of the endless media info-storm so let me answer the question all my gentlereaders are asking. Why did he reverse the direction of the Blog Archive?

As those of you who read my column at the source (my web page) already know there's a techno-generic looking button at the top and to the right labeled Blog Archive. Until recently, clicking on this button would provide access to every column I've written in the last (almost) three years, counter-clockwise counter-historically.

Clicking on that same button now will still provide access to every column I've ever written, but now, clockwise historically.

[Huh?]

Think of it this way.

If you had printed out all of my columns from the very beginning and put them in a binder, my very first column would be the very first column you would see upon opening your treasured binder.

Click the Blog Archive button and you will have this same experience, virtually.
The archive starts with my first blog post/column/letter.

[Uh huh... why?]

When I first began cranking out my feeble scribbles, I mentioned in the About Me box (scroll down a couple of inches below the Blog Archive button) that reading the columns in the order they were published would provide an extra dimension or two as to what I'm trying to get across.

Once (much to my surprise...) I had accumulated quite a few columns because I'd actually stuck with my plan to write a new one every week, advising gentlereaders to read them from the beginning seemed goofy.

However, the mysterious GDA credited in the title of this missive pointed out that reading me from the beginning does indeed provide an additional dimension (maybe two) to what I'm trying to say. That's not exactly how it was put but it's close enough and in this space (although unfortunately nowhere else) I'm God (GRIN).

Besides...

It occurred to me (eventually...) that at the end of every current letter one can scroll down and not only comment -- or click on a Smile/Enlightened Infotainment/Epic Fail button without Facebook adding it to your Permanent Record Card (just sayin')...

And...

Older Posts is floating around down there (it should look like a button but doesn't) that will provide access to the previous week's letter (which will provide access to the letter before that...) if you just want to dip into the past with a virtual big toe.

The Other Part

This part is directed to anyone who is still reading. It contains an opinion and a fact. I don't wish to dedicate an entire column to them because both are about the race thing. I'm in the midst of dealing with some serious health problems and I've no desire to court controversy.

[Excuse me, the race thing?]

Yeah Dana, the race thing. A subject that's beaten to death daily but never dies. According to social justice warriors, I'm a member in good(?) standing of the White Heteropatriarchy. As such I have two things I wish to say about the race thing and I'm done.

First, the opinion. I'm old. I've been around long enough to have met a lot of people and I confess that the majority were/are white. I estimate that Nowadays 99% of the melaninically challenged Citizens of the Republic could give a damn what race/color/creed/sexual orientation/etceteration anybody, including our fellow privileged saltines, identifies as or with.

Live and let live; pay your own way if at all possible. If you really can't, we want to help/have you helped. Let's get real. The welfare state isn't (and shouldn't be) going away. What we're fighting about its structure and size. Personally, I think that Singapore figured it out a long time ago.

Hint: They have a cradle to grave social security system built on real money and individual choice/responsibility, not a Ponzi scheme run by The Gummit.


Second, the fact. The concept of implicit bias is pure, unadulterated bonkercockie -- it's also a growth industry.

1998, the implicit association test is born, the world will never be the same. A very long story short...

Two social psychologists "...developed a new tool that measures the unconscious roots of prejudice." (from a press release).

2013. A bestselling book, by the same shrinks, spreads the word. Implicit bias goes viral.

2015. The same two "scientists", in a jargon-heavy paper written in Mandarin, referencing said wonder-tool (am I the only one reminded of Ron Popeil), point out that its "problematic to use it to classify persons as likely to engage in discrimination," and "attempts to diagnostically use such measures for individuals risk undesirably high rates of erroneous classifications."

[In other words... Sure, our test is bogus, but we're still making a very nice living (and so are a lot of other people) by pretending it ain't.]

Full disclosure: the preceding was gleaned from The Creators of the Implicit Association Test Should Get Their Story Straight by Jesse Singal, an article that explains the scam in detail (and in English) if you're interested.

Lotsa money is being made by "experts" laboring to exorcise the demons of implicit bias based on science discredited by the original scientists. They even managed to close all the company owned Starbucks for a day. Hoo-boy. Poppa loves you.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down. 

News That You Can Use (No. 1)

If you're new here, this is a weekly column consisting of letters written to my grandchildren (who exist) and my great-grandchildren (who aren't here yet) — the Stickies — to haunt them after they become grups and/or I'm dead.

[Blogaramians: Blogarama renders the links in my columns useless. Please click on View Original to solve this problem and access lotsa columns.]

Irregularly Appearing Imaginary Guest Stars

Marie-Louise -- My beautiful muse and back scratcher 

Iggy -- My designated Sticky

Dana -- My designated gentlereader

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." -- Sun Tzu

Dear (eventual) Stickies & Great-Grandstickies,

[Stickies and gentlereaders: "News You Can Use" is the title of a feature that's been a feature of various and sundry media outlets since the dead trees format ruled the Earth. Often legitimately, sometimes sarcastically (HT: WSJ/James Freeman).

I've added the word That, and do hereby declare my intention to crank out an occasional column that will contain legitimate/sarcastic/hybrid news -- That, you can use.]


While I'm certain, My Dear Stickies, that none of you will even consider experimenting with recreational pharmaceuticals till your cerebral cortex is completely mature (age 25) and/or that by the time you're grups we will have come to our senses, as things stand just now...

"Portugal's policy rests on three pillars: one, that there's no such thing as a soft or hard drug, only healthy and unhealthy relationships with drugs;

Two, that an individual's unhealthy relationship with drugs often conceals frayed relationships with loved ones, with the world around them, and with themselves;

And three that the eradication of all drugs is an impossible goal (my emphasis).

The paragraph above is from an article written by Susana Ferreira, and published in The Guardian on 12/5/2017, about why Portugal called a truce in the war on drugs.


I recently read somewhere that Attorney General Jeff Sessions (full disclosure, I'm not a fan) is happy that he recused himself from the perpetual investigation into whether the Donald and the Pooteen are tangled up in a bromance.

Mr. Sessions enjoys being America's top cop and his recusal frees up his time. See, he can concentrate on eradicating other stains on America's character, like the use of recreational pharmaceuticals.



"On November 18, 1918, prior to ratification of the Eighteenth Amendment, the U.S. Congress passed the temporary Wartime Prohibition Act which banned the sale of alcoholic beverages...." --Wikipedia

America went dry and criminals all over America broke out the champagne and raised a toast to The Gummit. Let the profiteering and bloodletting begin! The law of...

[Wait, wait,wait... This ain't news, this is ancient history. I thought...]

Hold on Dana... The law of unexpected consequences was triggered and this failed experiment was ended in 1933. Yes, everyone (well...) knows this.

Big But

Prior to The Gummit coming to its senses, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (the DEAs grandfather) was born in 1930. It was run by one Harry J. Anslinger, a veteran of the Bureau of Prohibition.

Thus, Mr. Anslinger, and many of his fellow teetotalers from the Bureau of Prohibition, were spared the indignity of being on the dole during the Great Depression.

The war on drugs is a holding action and the battle has raged for better than ninety years. It...

[Fine, I didn't know that, but still, it ain't news, it's olds.]

True, but the fact that Portugal called a truce in 2001 and has gained control of its drug problem is news in that most of the world doesn't seem to have noticed.

The British paper the Guardian did.

[Fine then. So, what happened?]


From the Guardian, "...Portugal became the first country to decriminalize the possession and consumption of all illicit substances. ...those caught with a personal supply might be given a warning, a small fine, or told to appear before a local commission -- a doctor, a lawyer and a social worker -- about treatment, harm reduction, and...support services."

"...criminal penalties are still applied to drug growers, dealers and traffickers." -Wikipedia

Back to The Guardian: "The opioid crisis soon stabilized, and the ensuing years saw dramatic drops in problematic drug use, HIV and hepatitis infection rates, overdose deaths, drug-related crime and incarceration rates."

The perpetual war on drugs was canceled and replaced by a public health program.


O.K., well that about sums it up...

[Mon nounours! We are at least a 'undred words short.]

Thanks, Marie-Louise. However, I wish to proffer a lengthy but pointed question that will put us about a hundred words over the official 755 WPC (words per column) limit.


I realize that the gummits, The Gummit and the employees of local, state and federal agencies (roughly 21,000,000 people), for the most part, wish us nothing but the best. Which is cool, because if 1 out of 16 of us works for the gummits or The Gummit, them is (are?) us.

Yet Another Big But

Given that the war on drugs has been going on for better than 90 years and that Portugal figured out that a truce is likely the best one can hope for

And, 

Prior to Harry J. being appointed the first drug Tzar/General/whateveral America regarded drug abuse as a public health problem  

["Marijuana is taken by musicians. And I'm hot speaking about good musicians, but the jazz type." --H.J. Anslinger]

Settle down, Harry J. And in light of how the prohibition of alcohol (Iran bans alcohol...) worked out, and how the war on drugs is working out, and the fact that we're spending $50,000,000/year (in the U.S. alone)...

Shouldn't we be funding a Congressional junket, or perhaps even some folks with a clue, to visit Portugal and ask around? Poppa loves you.

[25 Poppa, seriously?]

Yes, Iggy, seriously.

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2018 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to comment — or react (way cooler than liking, and Facebook doesn't keep track) — please scroll down.