1st, I have been busy. 2nd, insights or the anger necessary to rant about politics sometimes takes a break for refreshing and other obligations.
But this morning we are back and wondering why the NY Times would write an article about Trump supporters on the Internet protesting his Syria actions. How do we know they are Americans? How do we know they are not Russian's? The internet is a wonderful thing, but it is also a mechanism that allows nefarious types to commit fraud, lie, obscure, and create chaos. And the NYT has no way to check the people who post on these websites.
Now I know of course that Steve Bannon and Breibart News do all these nefarious things and look where he is. But I also know the Russians do all this and I hold the NY Times to a higher standard. They should not be using these websites as a reason to write a story. There are no confirmable facts available as to the motivation of the information on the blog.
And they should not use me as a reason to write anything for the same reason. I am not newsworthy.
David Brooks has a view on how intellectualism has changed over the last 100 years. I read Herman Hesse, but I guess a predominance of America has given up trying to form an intellectual basis.
Link to Brook's column today
Oh, P.S. Hillary still doesn't understand why she lost. Rather than admit she ran an awful campaign without an economic message, she focused on anti-feminism and Russian hacking. People who voted for Obama and then for Trump did not decide on the basis of the latter, they wanted an economic message they could believe in. And she didn't give them one.
No comments:
Post a Comment