It was a small piece in the news late last night.....a book company has hooked with David Hogg of the Florida school shooting fame (and his sister) to write a book. Name for the book? Never Again. Publishing date? Well....this is interesting, first week of June. Yeah....basically six weeks away.
I sat and thought about several factors over this.
First, generally....books take several months, with a draft period, and sometimes lawyers need to pour over what's written. To suggest it'll be done in four weeks, and be reviewed....then mass produced by early June? It can only be done if the book is already half-written.
My bet is that some foundation is hooked up with the book company, and that Hogg (with his sister) are basically writing the introduction chapter, but the rest of the book is already done (written by someone hired by the foundation). This is probably a draft copy that's been sitting around for six to twelve months....waiting for the right folks to 'front' the book.
Second, why such a hasty publishing deadline? Well...if you are seeking to influence the November elections....you need this book out there as part of the trend. July and August would see Hogg and his sister in various interviews, and hyping the book....which all plays into the November election.
Third, the next phase of Hogg? Well, I will predict that CNN hires him in July timeframe to front some teen-show concept....an hour-long show on Sunday evenings....mostly political in nature and anti-gun. He will skip starting to college this fall, and run this CNN teen anti-gun show instead. All of this would start weeks prior to the November election. After the election....toward the spring semester, he'll show up at some private New England university for a year of studies.....then likely return to CNN to continue the show for the 2020 election period.
Finally, I come to this odd part of the book deal. You have to ask yourself.....what do 15-to-18 year old kids read? Assemble a hundred kids, and shock yourself. They generally don't read Hemingway or Steinbeck. They hate biographical pieces. They generally don't read lecture books. Their general hype is science fiction or fantasy-type books.
So would they even read this book written by Hogg? Maybe one or two kids out of a hundred. Will the book then be picked up by teachers and forced onto students to read? Will anti-gun parents rush out and buy the book to force upon their kids to read?
Friday, 20 April 2018
Thursday, 19 April 2018
Evangelical Story
About six to eight months ago, I kinda noticed the creation of a religious 'fraud'....evangelical in nature....attaching itself to a foundation, and being hyped up as a political device. Oddly enough....it anti-GOP. That's something that you would not have noticed a decade ago.
So today, it came up about this BIG private meeting going on....a select group of fifty evangelical ministers (the top elite from across the nation), who'd been invited up to Wheaton College (Chicago). This was supposed to be a two-day session and lay out some ideas and discussion, which everyone invited figured that it wouldn't be about the Presidency.
At some point yesterday...all heck broke loose and a number of folks just got up in the middle of discussions and left. The chatter that made them leave? Hyped up anti-Trump talk.
To the degree covered....no one wants to talk about the private group who arranged this meeting, or their agenda business. I noticed this with CNN, Washington Post, and NY Times.
My humble guess? These various politicized agenda groups have attached themselves to foundations, which talk of religious objectives, but tend to be very political in nature. If you look at the November schedule for elections....it's come to a time to gather the evangelical 'herd' and lead them out of the 'Trump-Valley'. Big shocker?
Basically, you'd have to build some religious argument that Democrats are on some moral high ground, and vote down against abortion and twenty other topics that evangelical topics. Well....it's awful hard for the Democrats to stand up in some church environment and hype their moral standing on these topics. So the foundation groups use what I'd call a proxy....this is a highly enthusiastic and charming minister who knows the inside to their agenda and is there to use the Jesus-talk and lead the 'herd' to the right position.
All of this is being done....with this mass meeting of the top fifty.....to lead onto a June meeting with a thousand-odd evangelical leaders from across the nation. They would get the right anti-Trump message and then lead their members to vote wildly in Novembers election.
If this group fails? That's a curious thing.
If people figure out the agenda...the 'fakes' involved....and the foundations hyping this anti-Trump theme, then the whole effort of the past decade will be laid out as a fraud. It has basically nothing to do with evangelical positions. It's just plain hype.
My guess? If more than half of these folks in the fifty-group have left.....it leaves twenty-five sitting there and positioning themselves to be part of the fraud later in June.
In some ways, it's comical. 'Jesus' for Democrats, and anti-Trump....imagine sitting in some church group and hyping the message.
So today, it came up about this BIG private meeting going on....a select group of fifty evangelical ministers (the top elite from across the nation), who'd been invited up to Wheaton College (Chicago). This was supposed to be a two-day session and lay out some ideas and discussion, which everyone invited figured that it wouldn't be about the Presidency.
At some point yesterday...all heck broke loose and a number of folks just got up in the middle of discussions and left. The chatter that made them leave? Hyped up anti-Trump talk.
To the degree covered....no one wants to talk about the private group who arranged this meeting, or their agenda business. I noticed this with CNN, Washington Post, and NY Times.
My humble guess? These various politicized agenda groups have attached themselves to foundations, which talk of religious objectives, but tend to be very political in nature. If you look at the November schedule for elections....it's come to a time to gather the evangelical 'herd' and lead them out of the 'Trump-Valley'. Big shocker?
Basically, you'd have to build some religious argument that Democrats are on some moral high ground, and vote down against abortion and twenty other topics that evangelical topics. Well....it's awful hard for the Democrats to stand up in some church environment and hype their moral standing on these topics. So the foundation groups use what I'd call a proxy....this is a highly enthusiastic and charming minister who knows the inside to their agenda and is there to use the Jesus-talk and lead the 'herd' to the right position.
All of this is being done....with this mass meeting of the top fifty.....to lead onto a June meeting with a thousand-odd evangelical leaders from across the nation. They would get the right anti-Trump message and then lead their members to vote wildly in Novembers election.
If this group fails? That's a curious thing.
If people figure out the agenda...the 'fakes' involved....and the foundations hyping this anti-Trump theme, then the whole effort of the past decade will be laid out as a fraud. It has basically nothing to do with evangelical positions. It's just plain hype.
My guess? If more than half of these folks in the fifty-group have left.....it leaves twenty-five sitting there and positioning themselves to be part of the fraud later in June.
In some ways, it's comical. 'Jesus' for Democrats, and anti-Trump....imagine sitting in some church group and hyping the message.
The True Hype Never Existed
I noticed this small item in the news today, from a poll done by the NBC News and Wall Street Journal folks. So their poll question asked: is Hillary Clinton popular?
The answer? 27-percent of folks said 'somewhat positive'. The rest? Less so.
So the general question by the news media is why.
I sat and pondered over this. I came to this conclusion....Hillary Clinton probably never was that popular.
Oh, the news media hyped her books, and her speeches....but when you get down to accomplishments, there was never anything to demonstrate long-term popularity.
It's like talking about the 2012 Florida Marlins baseball team. For a brief season, with tons of money thrown around....the Marlins built this mega-team, and won games. All of this would mean fans coming to the park and hype around the entire state. Well....it briefly lasted a year, and then they dismantled most of the team, and today.....no one remembers the 2012 Marlins team.
It's like talking about the actor Nicolas Cage, and asking people to name one of his movies. The hype carries him but few remember the movies.
I think Hillary just rode out this massive wave for well over thirty years and the wave came to an end. No one can cite any great accomplishments in life. At least with Jimmy Carter, they will talk about his houses that his foundation group helped to building over the past three decades.
In three years? I suspect that a quarter of the public will have forgotten her entirely.
The answer? 27-percent of folks said 'somewhat positive'. The rest? Less so.
So the general question by the news media is why.
I sat and pondered over this. I came to this conclusion....Hillary Clinton probably never was that popular.
Oh, the news media hyped her books, and her speeches....but when you get down to accomplishments, there was never anything to demonstrate long-term popularity.
It's like talking about the 2012 Florida Marlins baseball team. For a brief season, with tons of money thrown around....the Marlins built this mega-team, and won games. All of this would mean fans coming to the park and hype around the entire state. Well....it briefly lasted a year, and then they dismantled most of the team, and today.....no one remembers the 2012 Marlins team.
It's like talking about the actor Nicolas Cage, and asking people to name one of his movies. The hype carries him but few remember the movies.
I think Hillary just rode out this massive wave for well over thirty years and the wave came to an end. No one can cite any great accomplishments in life. At least with Jimmy Carter, they will talk about his houses that his foundation group helped to building over the past three decades.
In three years? I suspect that a quarter of the public will have forgotten her entirely.
Wednesday, 18 April 2018
The Starbucks Episode
I spent an hour this morning....trying to understand this whole Starbucks racial episode that occurred in Philadelphia and how the cops got involved.
It's basically a eight-line story.
'Joe' and 'Marty' (both black) show up at this Starbucks and one of them wants to use the restroom. No, they hadn't bought any coffee, tea, or $5-muffins. They just wanted access to the restroom. Starbucks, like so many commercial operations, prefers to allow use of their restrooms...ONLY to customers. Joe and Marty declined to buy a $4 cup of Starbucks coffee or a $5 muffin. So they go and sit down in the customer area. Yep....just sitting there. This peeves the manager, who calls the cops. Joe and Marty have not violated a single law. The cops arrived (white guys). They handle this in a semi-professional manner but intend to remove Joe and Marty. All of this is captured on video. End of the story.
Most folks will suggest that if they need to use a public toilet....they will walk in and buy something (a soda, a muffin, a cup of coffee, etc). In the past twenty years....I've probably gone and done my public toilet business with the act of a stupid purchase at least four-hundred times. Via McDonalds....I've probably wasted over $150 on something in this period....just to 'appreciate' their public (clean) toilet. I've even bought at least twenty cups of Starbucks coffee....because of toilet needs.
Joe and Marty's tactic of sitting there? That's the thing about the story. They weren't going to buy coffee or a $5 muffin. They just intended to sit there. Maybe there was some physical message, or some intimidation factor....but then...that's not illegal.
All of this makes Starbucks look bad but then what really is the understanding over the public toilet business?
In Germany over the past decade....I've seen a number of public toilets go to a 'charge-deal', where you actually pay a buck for use of the restroom, and you get a 50-cent ticket upon leaving to use at McDonalds or Starbucks. I suspect long-term....that practice will start to occur in the US, and free toilets will disappear.
As for Joe and Marty? Starbucks will have to pay them off in some fashion. It wouldn't surprise me if this got into the half-million range....all because of a toilet decision by the manager.
It's basically a eight-line story.
'Joe' and 'Marty' (both black) show up at this Starbucks and one of them wants to use the restroom. No, they hadn't bought any coffee, tea, or $5-muffins. They just wanted access to the restroom. Starbucks, like so many commercial operations, prefers to allow use of their restrooms...ONLY to customers. Joe and Marty declined to buy a $4 cup of Starbucks coffee or a $5 muffin. So they go and sit down in the customer area. Yep....just sitting there. This peeves the manager, who calls the cops. Joe and Marty have not violated a single law. The cops arrived (white guys). They handle this in a semi-professional manner but intend to remove Joe and Marty. All of this is captured on video. End of the story.
Most folks will suggest that if they need to use a public toilet....they will walk in and buy something (a soda, a muffin, a cup of coffee, etc). In the past twenty years....I've probably gone and done my public toilet business with the act of a stupid purchase at least four-hundred times. Via McDonalds....I've probably wasted over $150 on something in this period....just to 'appreciate' their public (clean) toilet. I've even bought at least twenty cups of Starbucks coffee....because of toilet needs.
Joe and Marty's tactic of sitting there? That's the thing about the story. They weren't going to buy coffee or a $5 muffin. They just intended to sit there. Maybe there was some physical message, or some intimidation factor....but then...that's not illegal.
All of this makes Starbucks look bad but then what really is the understanding over the public toilet business?
In Germany over the past decade....I've seen a number of public toilets go to a 'charge-deal', where you actually pay a buck for use of the restroom, and you get a 50-cent ticket upon leaving to use at McDonalds or Starbucks. I suspect long-term....that practice will start to occur in the US, and free toilets will disappear.
As for Joe and Marty? Starbucks will have to pay them off in some fashion. It wouldn't surprise me if this got into the half-million range....all because of a toilet decision by the manager.
Yahoo
At present, I think I've had to agree or accept the 'oath' now.....about 60 times. It's reached a point where I'm questioning the logic of this continually popping up.
About nine years ago, I came to this point with Yahoo.....where I regarded them as a fairly lousy platform. They have all these engineers and geeks on the staff, and they do lousy work. Things never get tested. When they say function-X works this way.....it typically fails. Why?
UPDATE: Day seven. I've punched the 'I accept' button now at least 100 times. There was absolutely zero testing with this stupid 'terms' page.
Monday, 16 April 2018
By the Numbers
I sat for an hour today looking at FBI statistics from 2012 on homicides. It's an interesting data sheet.
2012:
- 12,888 folks were dead from homicides that year. Pistols were used in 6,404 episodes.
- 298 were rifle episodes. No one splits this up, from assault-rifle to 22-rifle. You would think that they'd want get this data.
- Shotguns were used to kill 310 folks.
- Knives? They were used to kill 1,604 folks.
- Blunt objects (bats and hammers)? 522 folks.
- 707 folks were killed by fist, boots, or bodily harm.
- 13 folks were poisoned to death.
- 8 folks were killed by bombs.
- 90 were strangled to death.
- 87 folks were killed in some fashion by fire.
So, if you look at the 'facts'.....it's hard to see this assault-weapon hype getting to the top....when you might want do something about bats and hammers. If the FBI had split off the assault rifle numbers from the 298 rifle homicides? That's a curious thing. If you got down to where there's only forty-five people killed by assault rifles that year.....well....twice that many were strangled to death.
2012:
- 12,888 folks were dead from homicides that year. Pistols were used in 6,404 episodes.
- 298 were rifle episodes. No one splits this up, from assault-rifle to 22-rifle. You would think that they'd want get this data.
- Shotguns were used to kill 310 folks.
- Knives? They were used to kill 1,604 folks.
- Blunt objects (bats and hammers)? 522 folks.
- 707 folks were killed by fist, boots, or bodily harm.
- 13 folks were poisoned to death.
- 8 folks were killed by bombs.
- 90 were strangled to death.
- 87 folks were killed in some fashion by fire.
So, if you look at the 'facts'.....it's hard to see this assault-weapon hype getting to the top....when you might want do something about bats and hammers. If the FBI had split off the assault rifle numbers from the 298 rifle homicides? That's a curious thing. If you got down to where there's only forty-five people killed by assault rifles that year.....well....twice that many were strangled to death.
Friday, 13 April 2018
Lost in Space?
I sat today and watched the ten episodes of the new Netflix series.....'Lost in Space'. So, some comments.
1. Whatever you remember of the 1960s series....it might relate to five or six basic functions of this series, and that's it.
2. Doctor Smith in this series....is a female nutcase who has killed a few people, and I would regard her as someone that needs to be dropped off into some prison or mental institution.
3. The robot angle to this story? A five-star dynamic, and you really don't figure this out until episode ten.
4. The biggest difference between this series and the 1960s version? People die in this series.
5. The acting in this series? Not exactly remarkable, but it's Netflix-produced, so that's not a big deal.
My humble guess is that a 2nd season will come out of this, but the robot angle is the question-mark.
1. Whatever you remember of the 1960s series....it might relate to five or six basic functions of this series, and that's it.
2. Doctor Smith in this series....is a female nutcase who has killed a few people, and I would regard her as someone that needs to be dropped off into some prison or mental institution.
3. The robot angle to this story? A five-star dynamic, and you really don't figure this out until episode ten.
4. The biggest difference between this series and the 1960s version? People die in this series.
5. The acting in this series? Not exactly remarkable, but it's Netflix-produced, so that's not a big deal.
My humble guess is that a 2nd season will come out of this, but the robot angle is the question-mark.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)