Category Archives: Reason

Fake News USA Assert The Security Of The Election System, BUT Refuse To Investigate It

Argument, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Journalism, Media, Reason, Technology

CNN’s Jeremy Diamond and his American circle-jerk of progressive, activist reporters ought to take lessons from BBC’s James Clayton, of “Click,” a BBC program.

Six minutes and 12 seconds into the clip on digital voting, the coverage of “serious security issues” begins. Techies who’ve “reversed engineered voting systems” are worried.

BBC News clearly still does the job Fake News USA refuses to do: investigate the security of the election system, not simply assert it.

Jeremy Diamond, a specimen in the national, journalistic circle jerk, is CNN’s White House correspondent. He’s a reporter, not an opinion-purveyor. Yet opinion is what he and his cohort purvey.

While reporting, Diamond will constantly express his opinion by exclaiming how “remarkable” and “outlandish” it is that President Trump wishes to overturn “a democratically held election.”

Breathy exclamations of disgust, surprise and frustration have no place in the repertoire of a reporter. It’s one thing, moreover, had CNN and Mr. Diamond investigated the election-fraud claims wending their way through the Courts—there are constitutional violations uninvestigated by them, too. But they don’t. The aforementioned BBC program, Click, clearly has no issue investigating and concluding that digital voting, for one, is fraught.

Had the American media done the work required; then they could legitimately say, “Having investigated and reported on the election fraud allegation, we find that there is no …”

But Diamond and his CNN crooks do not argue their case; they use their powerful positions in front of the camera to assert their claims, relying on viewers not to know the difference.

The same can be said of every other reporter on the CNN and MSNBC Fake News makers. They all offer their opinions on panels of opinionaters and from the field. Abby Phillip is another young journalist like Diamond who does opinion, not reporting.

‘Woman on Fire: Passion, Liberty, and Reason’: Talking To Buck Johnson

Ilana Mercer, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Paleoconservatism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Reason, Republicans, Technology

My wide-ranging conversation with the fun and fierce Buck Johnson of the “Death To Tyrants” Podcast has been published:

Woman on Fire: Passion, Liberty, and Reason, with Ilana Mercer”:

My guest this week is the wonderful paleo-libertarian writer, thinker, and author, Ilana Mercer. Ilana is the author of several great books including “Into the Cannibals Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa”. She is here to discuss a multitude of topics with me ranging from: Paleo-libertariansism, Conservative Inc, mainstream libertarianism, her books, Donald Trump, and even some wonderful advice for my listeners. Many outlets are afraid to publish her work, including many libertarian and paleo-conservative outlets! This makes me love her even more, and as always, I welcome controversial guests who aren’t afraid to break from the mainstream and approved talking points. Ilana is a wonderful writer, a sweet person, and a great interview. I think you will enjoy this. Subscribe to Ilana’s Youtube here: Follow her and contact her on Twitter: Like her FB page here: Visit and connect with her here.

The “sweet person” designation, from one as kind-hearted and courageous as Buck: Those are the impressions one values most—just as when Erik Rush mentioned “good friend” before all else. Those personal touches that come from a place of care, kindness and appreciation are the things that mean the most in this impersonal world. A cliched sentiment, perhaps, but heartfelt.   

*****
I never listen to myself. If I did, I would not give interviews. However, I recall this error made:

I likened the profit-motive structure in many a Deep Tech organization to that of a petro-state.

Billions flow, top down, from a Sheik-dominated org to his political fiefdoms. I erred in naming my example. I meant to point, as an example, to Microsoft’s Kin phone project (which was well-covered and critiqued in the financial press), and not the Kinect.

For the rest, do please send me any questions you have about the broadcast via the Comments Section to this blog post.

Connect with me:
https://twitter.com/IlanaMercer
https://www.facebook.com/ilana.mercer.author
https://www.ilanamercer.com/mailing-list/
https://www.youtube.com/c/ILANAMERCERAuthor/featured

UPDATE II (10/30): NEW ON YouTube: Critical Race Theory Rapes And Loots Reality

Britain, Political Correctness, Propaganda, Race, Racism, Reason

ON YouTube: Critical Race Theory is so much rubbish. Systemic rubbish. “The cornerstone of the Critical Race pop-jurisprudence is that, provided you are white, you are a racist without having committed racism, which is like being a murderer, robber or rapist without having murdered, robbed or raped. …

READ: https://www.ilanamercer.com/2020/09/critical-racist-theory-robs-rapes-reality/

Watch the “Racism” Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/c/ILANAMERCERAuthor/playlists

UPDATE I (10/28):  Welcome to my world. Via YouTube: 

UPDATE II (10/30):

The British have always fostered intelligence. The UK “Equalities Minister,” a black lady, reasons, yes reasons (who does that in the US government and media?) against a political construct like Critical Race Theory, to indoctrinate kids.

UPDATED (10/14): No Notes, No Nonsense: The Genius Of Amy Coney Barrett

Argument, Constitution, Democracy, Federalism, Intelligence, Law, Reason, The Courts

After hysterical preludes, Amy Klobuchar, the senator from Minnesota, questioned Amy Coney Barrett. I feared Barret’s tart tones—the American woman’s gravelly, vocal fry of a voice—would drive one to distraction, but she’s brilliant. Barrett looks disarmingly sweet and girly, but her replies are gloriously pointed and cerebral.

Advisory opinions are prohibited on the Court, Judge Coney Barrett teaches, as she explains a “concrete” as opposed to a “procedural” or “abstract” injury to the plaintiff. Her duty, as she sees it, is to address “concrete” wrongs, only, and in accordance with democratically-enacted law.

To the question of, “Why fight the Affordable Care Act, Amy Coney Barrett answered: “Ask the litigants. I don’t know.” Genius, because her replies are meta: They nail down the role of the SCOTUS in the federal scheme.

No doubt, Amy Coney Barrett will be the best mind on the SCOTUS! Her analytical reasoning—construction of an argument, the way she seals it logically, her preference for higher-order, principle- and process-oriented thinking, makes Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Roberts, Alito and Breyer pale by comparison. (Roberts is oriented toward administrative thinking; he has the mind of a functionary of the managerial State. As I pointed out in 2005, “Roberts is flummoxed by first-principle quandaries,” whereas first principles is Coney Barrett’s thing.)

For obvious reasons, Sonia Sotomayor was left off my just-cited list of SCOTUS justices whom Amy Coney Barrett easily usurps. An affirmative action baby (her term for herself), Sotomayor was advised to read children’s classics and basic grammar books during her summers, to get up to speed on her English skills at Princeton University. READ.

UPDATE (10/14):

Lots of cringe-worthy cliches and schmaltz came with the “quizzing” by Joni Ernst of Amy Coney Barrett. On being a mom, advice to young girls, exercise, role models. There is not daylight between Republican and liberal women, when it comes to this mushy drivel.