Reflections From a Murky Pond

GA-6’s Real Loser May Be Pelosi

Republican Karen Handel beat Democrat Jon Ossoff in the GA-6 special election runoff may be the actual result of the recent election, but the real loser of GA-6 may well be Nancy Pelosi. As the crazy, old bat is seen by many Democrats as one of the major reasons for Ossoff’s defeat.

Some Democrats want to replace Pelosi atop their caucus, as they have more and more since last November’s poor showing at the polls  they say that it will be impossible to get back into a Congressional majority with her as their leader.

I think you’d have to be an idiot to think we could win the House with Pelosi at the top. Nancy Pelosi is not the only reason that Ossoff lost. But she certainly is one of the reasons.

— Representative Filemon Vela Jr. (D-TX-34)

~*~

There comes a time when every leader has to say, ‘For the good of the order and for the betterment of the party, it’s time for me to step aside.’ And I wish that that would happen right now. This is not a personal thing. I want to get back in the majority.

— Representative Kathleen Rice (D-NY-4)

Yes, it looks like there’s a certain and growing amount of rancor against Pelosi and that more and more Democrats believe that she has become an anchor around their party’s neck. Simply put, irrespective of whether or not Pelosi is a competent negotiator and political sausage grinder, there’s the waxing belief that her public presence does more to aid Republicans seeking office than Democrats do so. And do remember that, at the end of the day, these are professional politicians. As such, they’re far more concerned about elections than legislating.

While I doubt that Pelosi will be removed as Minority Leader, I do see her having to defend herself and her privilege to hold that position as a clear sign that she’s suffered the greatest loss in GA-6’s election.

Tags: America | Democrats | Dissent | Elections | Georgia | Pelosi | Politics

This entry was posted on Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 7:41 am and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

So, after so many months of coyly refusing to state that she’s was going to run for POTUS in 2016, Hillary Clinton finally decided to officially announce her candidacy.

It’s apparently a case of “bros before hoes,” a phrase that once meant you didn’t abandon or betray your friends for your girlfriend but, during the 2008 Democrat primaries became that Blacks come before White women.

Sadly, when dealing the possibility of Hillary following Obama into the White House, it’s a case of a bro before a hoe but both coming before- and hastening the collapse of America.

Hillary Clinton became an iconic figure by feeding the media and the Left the kind of rhetoric they love. Barack Obama did the same and became president. Neither had any concrete accomplishments beforehand besides rhetoric, and both have had the opposite of accomplishments after taking office.

They have something else in common. They attract the votes of those people who vote for demographic symbolism — “the first black president” to be followed by “the first woman president” — and neither is to be criticized, lest you be denounced for racism or sexism.

It is staggering that there are sane adults who can vote for someone to be president of the United States as if they are in school, just voting for “most popular boy” or “most popular girl” — or, worse yet, voting for someone who will give them free stuff.

— Thomas Sowell
The National Review (March 24, 2015)

This is what the American electorate, thanks to the warm body franchise, has devolved and degenerated into – “People” who decry racism but vote for a candidate solely because of his race to be followed by those who decry sexism but will vote for candidate solely because she has a vagina.

Tags: 2016 Elections | America | Clinton | Dissent | Feminism | Hillary | Obama | Politics | Racism | Sexism

This entry was posted on Monday, April 13th, 2015 at 11:32 am and is filed under 2016 Election, Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Google modifies, tweaks, and just plain changes its search algorithm on a regular basis, most often to disrupt the effectiveness of Search Engine Optimization (SEO) efforts. Now, however, a Google research team is trying to change  the algorithm, to measure the “trustworthiness” of a page, rather than its reputation across the web.

The system – which is has not yet gone live – counts the number of “incorrect” facts within a page to determine its ranking in search results instead of its reputation or popularity, as measured by incoming links, across the web.

Google – The Internet’s Gatekeeper

This, of course, begs the questions of whose facts? Whose truths? Who will decide what is innacurate and, hence, to be downlisted and effectively censored by Google?

Google’s answers are that facts that the web unanimously agrees upon are considered to be a reasonable proxy for truth. Web pages that dissent from this consensus by containing contradictory information are to be bumped down the rankings, effectively censoring them by removing them from the bulk of the web’s users.

So, insofar as the internet’s greatest gatekeeper, Google is concerned, consensus reality will be the only reality. And, of course, Google will be the arbiter of that consensus.

I guess, if Google’s plan is allowed to be implemented, nobody will read where you wrote, “And yet it moves.“

Tags: Bias | Censorship | Conformity | Consensus | Consensus Reality | Dissent | Facts | Google | Innovation | Internet | Lies | Myths | Observer Bias | Politics | Science | Social Engineering | Stagnation | Technology | Truth

This entry was posted on Monday, March 9th, 2015 at 8:52 am and is filed under Politics, Society, Technology. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.