Total Pageviews

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Wednesday's Ride - 1972 Ford Mustang Mach 1 R Code For Sale

Lies do travel faster than the truth

Mark Twain is said to have remarked that a lie can travel around the world and back while the truth is still lacing up its boots. In these modern times, of course, a lie can spread just about as fast as a human finger can click “retweet.” And scientists, who can record all of those finger-twitches in real-time, can finally test Twain’s proposition: Do lies really spread faster than truth?

We finally know for sure that lies spread faster than the truth. This might be why.

Definitely yes, according to a new paper from Soroush Vosoughi and Deb Roy of MIT’s Media Lab, and Sinan Aral, a professor at the institute’s Sloan School of Management. In fact, these researchers found, “It took the truth about six times as long as falsehood to reach 1,500 people.” You might comfort yourself that lies and the truth must be the proverbial hare and tortoise, with the lies racing out of the starting gate, and the truth eventually catching up, perhaps? Sadly no, at least not on social media: “Falsehood also reached far more people than the truth.”

Read more:

The CPC is applying Karl Roves Handbook - be afraid Canada

For those not on Twitter, or not following @DianeMariePosts, here is an interesting list of Tactics that I see the #CPC/#Rebel crew using:
1. Take the offensive. This puts the opponent on the defensive. Even if the offensive point is untrue, the opponent looks weak by being forced to defend against it.
2. Attack one's opponent's strengths. This forces the opponent to abandon them and be left with his or her weaknesses.
Example: Conservative attempts to try to make Trudeau abandon his habit of leaving the Ottawa bubble to mix with Canadians.
3. Pre-emptively accuse an opponent of what he or she could accuse one of - that is, accuse one's opponent of one's own weaknesses.
Example: Conservatives accusing Liberals of increasing the debt despite fact that it is actually a Conservative weakness.
4. Go negative, then cry foul. Make a wild allegation, then when opponent retaliates, complain about "dirty campaigning". No obvious example of this comes to mind but perhaps fellow tweeps can offer one.
5. The "Big Lie". People are suspicious of little ones but are more accepting of audacious, outlandish ones.
Donald Trump has this one down to a science. Any factual rebuttal is labelled "fake news".
6. Appeal to moral values. Wallow in faith-based rhetoric (religion).
This is exactly where the Conservatives are these days. Opponents can appeal to non-religious moral values: alleviating homelessness, inequality, poverty, etc.
7. Sell the persona. In Canadian political terms, the Conservatives sell macho/blue collar and try to paint opponents in "weak" and often homophobic terms. Macho candidates never apologize - this is seen as weak- but demand that opponents apologize.
8. Sell an adolescent worldview. Appeal to those who prefer to see problems/challenges in simple, "common sense" terms.
Example: Doug Ford and his 4% waste-cutting appeal. Such appeals are attractive to binary (black-white) thinkers who dislike complexity.
9. Exploit the media while also denouncing and intimidating it. The Conservatives turned the CBC into a state broadcaster (and we see the damage done) while using the CBC to fundraise. Call the media "liberal", all evidence to the contrary.
10. Create straw issues to distract people from what is really going on.
Prime examples are the Atwal-as-terrorist and lentil tariff issues to distract citizens and the press from noticing and reporting on the instrumentality of the India visit.
11. Employ surrogates to do one's dirty work. Here we have the Conservatives using Rebel to spread dirt while Mr. Scheer tries to appear above the fray - a Christian family man - who nevertheless employs Rebel people in his campaign.
12. Use emotional appeals. Make people feel fearful and insecure so that they are easily manipulated. Try to make them conclude that they need the protection of the politician who told them what to feel fearful and insecure about.
13. Rely on expert testimonials. The Campaign-Industrial Complex is full of people who will pretend to be expert. Lobby groups will gladly weigh in. Quasi-PACs: CTF, NCC, Frontier, Frappuccino Institute. The press loves them, too. Free content.
14. Use rhetorical devices. Mischaracterize what an opponent has said, take comments out of context.
An example: Mr. Trudeau's comment that China's government can impressively turn on a dime was framed as admiration for communism.
15. Use of language. Indulge in Orwellian newspeak. Employ code-words that only one's base gets. In modern terms, dog-whistle away. Citizens clearly have to watch out for these tactics. They infect our political discourse.

In researching the Republican strategies (syn: Karl Rove), I came across an interesting analysis of the G.W. Bush (syn: Karl Rove's puppet) re-election campaign that may be of interest.  It is the closest thing to a "Rove's" handbook that I've seen.  It discusses both the tactics used and suggests responses/countermeasures.  
Medical cautions:  Do not view if you suffer from high blood pressure, fits of rage, manic depression or thoughts of suicide.  Do not read if you have a history of computer abuse. Remove all sharp or throwable items from arms lenght before reading.
You should be 18 or older, or view with supervision.
Side effects:  Viewing may result in damage to household property, yelling, screaming, or thoughts of revenge.  Temporary hair loss, ringing in the ears and eye gouging have also been reported after viewing.

Tons of conservative baloney here

lso not everything will be impacted. Electricity generated by renewable sources won't be touched. And while most products and services could go up directly or indirectly because of the carbon price, the impact on the majority of what Canadians spend money on will be small — and, in many cases, offset by rebates.
For these reasons, this statement earns "a lot of baloney."

Baloney Meter: will Liberal carbon tax really mean paying more for everything?

Tuesday, March 20, 2018


Fake news begins with Fox News

"The parents of Seth Rich — the Democratic National Committee staffer police believe was murdered during a botched robbery in 2016 — have sued Fox News over a retracted story that peddled a conspiracy theory about his murder, claiming the network “intentionally exploited” the tragedy for political purposes. The May 2017 story stated, falsely, that investigators had evidence showing Rich leaked thousands of DNC emails to WikiLeaks in the midst of the 2016 presidential election, just weeks before he was shot to death in Washington. That story line — popular among conspiracy theorists and in alt-right online groups — contradicts U.S. intelligence that Russia was behind the WikiLeaks email dump that damaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign."

Fox News sued by parents of Seth Rich, slain DNC staffer, over conspiracy theory about his death
Read more:

What does this mean for America

The new CIA director, Gina Haspel, is a torturer. Her office skill set includes overseeing torture and taunting victims as they lie gasping and near death. President Trump is revving up Big Torture again.
The consequences will be bloody generally, will cause American captives to be tortured, destroy whatever international goodwill the U.S. had left, and lead to awkward comparisons with other regimes that tortured: Argentina’s generals, Pinochet’s Chile, Hitler’s Germany, Duterte’s Philippines, Putin’s Russia, Japan during the Second World War. The U.S. executed Japanese soldiers for doing to prisoners what the U.S. does now in a fragile peacetime.

Instead of being in jail, Haspel is CIA director

Had President Obama prosecuted Gina Haspel and other CIA torturers, she would have gone to prison. But Obama said he wanted to look forward, not back. Now the past returns. The past has that tendency.

GOP Coverup exposed

GOP Rep. Tom Rooney Breaks Ranks On Russia Report: 'We've Lost All Credibility'

House Intelligence Committee member says "there is evidence" Russians worked to help Trump.

A GOP member of the House Intelligence Committee is breaking ranks with his fellow Republicans over a contentious report released Monday on Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible ties to the campaign of Donald Trump
Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) told CNN that “there is evidence” the Russians worked to help Trump. 
“I don’t know that necessarily there was a full-fledged campaign to do everything that they could to help elect Donald Trump,” he added. “I think that their goal was chaos.”
The draft report released by his fellow Republicans on Monday claims otherwise, saying Russian President Vladimir Putin interfered in the election but not with the goal of aiding Trump. 

Russian News screen shot - Trump is ours

World view of America - More dangerous than Mexico

Monday, March 19, 2018

Monday's Ride - 1955 Chevrolet Chevy Corvette Nomad Wagon Motorama Concept on My Car Sto...

Canada's NRA Puppet

Round Up

Meanwhile, Kenney is playing an utterly disingenuous game of semantics with his objection to the province’s carbon tax, insisting that it didn’t give them the “social licence” to get their pipelines approved. But to suggest that was the only value of such a tax is to be deliberately misleading. The real purpose of a carbon price is to provide a market signal for industry to reduce their emissions, by providing them a financial incentive for them to do so. It’s proven the most efficient way to reduce emissions in the most cost-effective manner possible, and while correlation may not be causation, it has bene pointed out that those jurisdictions in the country that have implemented carbon pricing have roaring economies, while those resisting one (such as Saskatchewan) don’t. Whether there is a correlation or not, provinces like BC have shown that the carbon tax allows them to lower other taxes which are generally less efficient taxes regardless. As for social licence, it’s part of the overall balancing act to show that there is a sufficient plan to achieve reductions as part of transitioning to a low-carbon future, but I’m not sure that anyone suggested that it would magically end all protests (and if they did, they were fools for doing so). But for Kenney to claim that this was the promise is utter nonsense.
Like the bogus calls to invoke Section 92(10)(c), it’s all about putting forward a plausible-sounding argument in the hopes that the public doesn’t bother to actually read it to see that it’s actually bullshit. But that is apparently how political debate works these days – disingenuous points that don’t actually resemble reality, or lies constructed to look plausible and hoping that nobody calls you on it, and if they do, well, they’re just apologists or carrying water for your opponents. This isn’t constructive or helpful, and it just feeds the politics of anger and resentment, which in turn poisons the discourse. They all know better, but keep doing it because it’s so addictive, but never mind that the house is burning down around them.

Roundup: Reading the constitution and a map

Read more:

Will the Feds see the light and dissolve that entire P3 department built by Steve?

Wow. MB Gov't cancels four P3 schools, finding it can build 5 schools using traditional means. Lesson learned: P3s cost (one school) more.

Read more:


1 - Shocking... not that P3s are just a mechanism to shovel extra money to the private sector, but the fact that the MB gov't dared to say so - and to cancel P3 contracts in favour of building more public schools for the same cost.

2 - When will the federal gov dissolve that entire P3 department built by Steve?
It was never needed. It was never wanted by the public. Take away their giant shovels and be careful there's no money sticking to them.

All the Trumpian promises - Jobs are on the line

In 1995, Mike Harris "promised" his government wouldn't touch the education system. Upon election and tabling their first budget - the education system was their first target. In 2011, Stephen Harper "promised" his government wouldn't touch the healthcare system. When they brought their funding "proposal" to the First Ministers' meeting - they plunked a $13 BILLION cut to healthcare on the table and walked out of the room.
Now we have Doug Ford promising NO LAYOFFS as he "find's efficiencies"....

Doug Ford’s pitch to Ontario voters will cut costs, size of government — but no layoffs

Keeping it simple: Doug Ford says his pitch to Ontario voters will be five main points on things that affect their lives.

Read more: