Saturday, the NYT Editorial Board Shoots Itself, by David Lindsay and others

Saturday, the NYT Editorial Board Shoots Itself

On Saturday, May 3rd, the NYT put out a scree, Investigate Tara Reade’s Allegation, that so infuriated me, that I considered seriously whether to cancel my subscription to the Times. I thought it was pathetically overboard. I went to the comments to find solace and confirmation, which I found in spades. Like the top comments:

RogerD

PhiladelphiaMay 2

Times Pick

No. The accusation against Biden should not be investigated without the same type of investigation into the multiple allegations against Trump. Both men are running for the highest office. Both must be held to the same standard. Why does the Editorial Board give a pass AGAIN to Trump? Both candidates should be treated the same in this instance. Investigate both or none.

22 Replies3184 Recommended

 

dre commented May 2

D

dre

NYCMay 2

Times Pick

This editorial says there are inconsistencies in her claims and accusations. A huge understatement from what I’ve read. Most of us agree all serious accusations should be taken seriously. But there has to be believable corroboration, facts, supporting evidence…and a consistent pattern of integrity and believability on one side or the other. I don’t see evidence of integrity on her side. If you look at everything she has said and written about Biden over nearly 30 years, she doesn’t seem credible. She has said repeatedly over the years that he was basically an ok guy, though he rubbed her neck once and made her uncomfortable, but it was not sexual in her own words. All of a sudden though her favorite, Bernie, is trounced, and it’s now for the first time, in March of 2020, a claim of sexual assault. And hard to believe but she has written she loves Putin, too. Everyone of course has to make up their own mind about her credibility, but unless something new and significant comes up, Joe will get my vote.

14 Replies2439 Recommended      https://nyti.ms/2WolEkW

 

Bret Stephens reminded his co-workers at the editorial board, in his piece Biden and the Presumption of Innocence, that you are usually considered innocent until proven guilty, but he slammed Biden for going too far in 2011, trying to stop or reduce male on female assaults in US colleges, by making it too easy for any complaint to terminate any male student. https://nyti.ms/3cZkF18

 

Lisandra Villa at Time Magazine wrote: “After she came forward with allegations against Biden, Reade’s credibility was called into question by some critics, who noted her support of other candidates in the 2020 Democratic cycle as well as blog posts she wrote praising Vladimir Putin, including a now-deleted Medium post entitled “Why a Liberal Democrat Supports Vladimir Putin.” Reade says her past posts regarding Russia have been taken out of context. “What I would say is I do not support Vladimir Putin any longer,” she says.”

One news source I read last week? reported that Tara Reade told someone she left the US government partly because she was fond of Putin and Russia, and didn’t like how they were treated by the US government, but I can’t remember the source.

Source: Tara Reade Accuses Joe Biden of Sexual Assault: What We Know | Time

There was an interesting conversation at my facebook page after this post.

  • Tinker Lindsay She’s not well.

     

    Carolyn Siebert BobsinCarolyn Siebert Bobsin replied
    • Delete or hide this
    • Tinker Lindsay Carolyn, I respectfully disagree.
      Delete or hide this
    • Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Tinker Lindsay Ford had some weird issues. She said she was afraid to fly yet she had flown for business and pleasure. Two front doors built in her house ? Her demeanor looked like she was unsure of what she was saying. The questions asked of her were leading her along. Something happened to her but it was not Kavanaugh.
  • Ellen Unger Freiler The social media trap caught her squarely…
    • David Lindsay Gregory F. Todd Wow. That’s horrible. Do you know anything about Salon, it is new to me.
      Edit or delete this
    • Gregory F. Todd David Lindsay – the story in Salon was picked up from another (left leaning) website (Raw Story), which picked up the original story from reason.com.

      Anything in Salon or Raw Story is something I like to trace back to another source, — but just because it appears on those websites does not make it false.

      (I’m surprised, in a sense, that you are surprised by this. Are you familiar with the tricks and practices of Karl Rove, James O’Keefe, and so many others in the right-wing media ? It’s well worth our study to know who we’re dealing with!)

      Delete or hide this
      Reason.com
      REASON.COM
      Reason.com
      Delete or hide this
      Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Reade is a lot more believable than Ford. This must be seriously investigated!
      Delete or hide this
    Write a reply…
  • Seth Bates It’s time to stop giving this story air UNLESS it is in the context of “allegations of sexual misbehavior against Trump and Biden must be fully investigated, in parallel, by objective parties” (not the DOJ which is run by discredited and biased Bill Barr.)
    Delete or hide this
    • Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Seth Bates the Trump accusations were throughly investigated. I think he did have sex with the women but it was consensual. Then it becomes a he said, she said. Money is probably the motivation. Reade’s situation is different. She looked up to Bieden. She didn’t want to get him in trouble until he became the Dem candidate. Then maybe her conscience became her motivation.
      Delete or hide this
    • David Lindsay Carolyn Siebert Bobsin Hi Carolyn. what you say about Tara Reade is absolutely possible. But it seems more likely to me that she is a well paid political saboteur. Those of us outside the Fox News bubble already know that Trump tried to get the President of the Ukraine to start a phony smear on Biden. And, If your thinking is right, she should have spoken out when he was up for Vice President.
    • Peggy Kane Carolyn Siebert Bobsin You need to look into both situations further.
      Delete or hide this
    • Seth Bates Carolyn Siebert Bobsin well, Carolyn, let me start by pointing out that your comment to me is worded to show that you have accepted each of Ms. Reade’s statements as true, without any proof. Not an open mind, or just accident of grammar.
      I have not seen ANY details about the 25 allegations against Trump and they have not been asked in the press. And on the other hand I have read extensively about Reade’s accusations and her personal history. It’s a confused and jumbled mess, and it does not give me any sense of her reliability.
      I stand with my statement – the Trump allegations must be investigated, in public view, just as everyone is suggesting should be done with Biden. If not, this descends into a one-sided smear of Biden.
      And all of that being said, even if the Reade allegations turn out to be supported, I have to choose between Trump and Biden in November. Sorry, but there is no question to me but that reelection of Trump would result in further, possibly fatal, attacks on justice, voting, the environment, and the American people.
    Write a reply…
  • Gregory F. Todd The New York Times does that a lot: handwringing, earnest angst, thoughtful whining, wanting to do always the right thing, and overthinking it.

    I’m inclined to believe her, to the effect that something happened. But what??

    Why did she change her account just recently?

    To be honest, I think the representatives from the MeToo movement should have an open-sit down with Tara Reade to understand who, what, why she is motivated to modify the story now

    • David Lindsay I’ve enjoyed these discussions. I don’t mind investigating Joe Biden, as long as we do the same with equal ferocity to Donald Trump, and to Biden’s apparently flakey and sole accuser. I would like to know if someone put her up to changing her story, or if she was motivateed by her own politics. As Maureen Dowd wrote in her excellent but complicated essay in the Sunday Review in the Times, women, as well as men, are just as capable of really bad, dishonest behavior. Maureen listed every known great mistake Joe has made against women, and which does not include assault, but still balanced his imperfection against the convenience that this story has in helping Trump and hurting Biden polically with women and young people, both of whom are vital to the up coming election. Dozens of women, who have known Biden for years, don’t believe this accusation. I have read their testimonials in the comments section of the NYT.
      Edit or delete this
      • L

    • Gregory F. Todd David Lindsay – absolutely. It seems admitted that he ‘touched her’ in a way that ‘made her feel uncomfortable’. This was a view shared by a number of women last year, who mentioned ‘creepy’ neck massages etc.

      There’s a difference b/w that and putting your finger in someon’es p*** (the Drump image, ha-ha). And while the claim is that several witnesses say this is what she told them, the fact remains that she didn’t say anything about it publicly until recently.

      Why?

      And what is the effect, if any, of the great support for Bernie Sanders, and the adulation for Putin?

      These are all interesting questions. I’d love to get to the bottom of it.

      But my guess is that the right-wing strategy will be: NO. NO WAY. You won’t get to the bottom of anything. THIS WILL FESTER!

      The right wing are obsessed with “getting back” at teh “other side”, in this case the Kavanaugh thing.

      They will never get over it, based on my obsservations.

      Delete or hide this
    • David Lindsay Gregory F. Todd Probably won’t. But they will hopefully and probably get a lesson in humility by the 2nd Blue Wave.
      Edit or delete this
    • Seth Bates David Lindsay That’s my take as well. However, and this is critical, there will NEVER be an investigation of any credibility (or of any kind) into the 25 allegations that Trump is facing. If we agree on that then… THEREFORE it doesn’t make sense to flog this dead horse.
    • David Lindsay Seth Bates I am an optimist. If we, including environmentalists from both parties, take all three branches of government, we can investigate Donald Drumpt, up and down, from Russian collusion to awkward moments with the IRS, and as James Thurber might say, from his guggle to his zatch. Think of all the times Robert Mueller said, we couldn’t go there, because we had a narrow mandate. So Peggy Kane, I expect there will be a lot “there.” From the perspective of the dead, Trump’s refusal to use his powers to protect Americans from the COVID-19 pandemic could be viewed as criminal behavior. Even if I’m a pathetic, arm chair idealist, history will not be nice.
      Edit or delete this
  • Peggy Kane It’s a travesty, imo. So little there, there.

Opinion | Winners and Losers of the Democratic Debate – The New York Times

“Welcome to Opinion’s commentary for the Jan. 14 Democratic presidential candidate debate in Des Moines. In this special feature, Times Opinion writers rank the candidates on a scale of 1 to 10: 1 means the candidate probably didn’t belong on the stage and should probably drop out; 10 means it’s on, President Trump. Here’s what our columnists and contributors thought about the debate.”

 

 

David Lindsay Jr.
Hamden, CT | NYT Comment
I enjoyed the panel’s observations and many of the comments. I agree with one paragraph of one commenter, that there should have been more focus on who could deliver the six red or purple swing states that allowed Trump to beat Hillary Clinton. Warren might be the most exciting senior, but she lost and Joe Biden won against Trump, in the last poll of these six states run by Nate Cohn, and analysed by David Leonhardt. I suspect that Bernie did tell Warren that a woman can’t win. He was telling her something that the polls and elections point to. I might have said that to her, not to diminish her brilliance and leadership, but to remind her of the weakness of our weird form of democracy, where small red states have more say than populous blue ones. My ticket remain Joe Biden for President, Pete Buttigieg for VP. What a magnificent way for Pete to build bridges with the black voters. If Joe Biden doen’t agree to give Elizabeth Warren any cabinet position she wants, I might have to reconsider my position, and let Trump boil our children to death. These are all such fine people, I would like to see a Team of Rivals in the government, who ever saves us all from certain damnation in the form literally of hellfire and high water. All subject to revision, base on the next polls on the critical 6 swing states.

Opinion | Trump Kills Iran’s Most Overrated Warrior – By Thomas L. Friedman – The New York Times

By 

Opinion Columnist

A portrait of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani carried during a demonstration in Baghdad in 2015.
Credit…Thaier Al-Sudani/Reuters

“One day they may name a street after President Trump in Tehran. Why? Because Trump just ordered the assassination of possibly the dumbest man in Iran and the most overrated strategist in the Middle East: Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani.

Think of the miscalculations this guy made. In 2015, the United States and the major European powers agreed to lift virtually all their sanctions on Iran, many dating back to 1979, in return for Iran halting its nuclear weapons program for a mere 15 years, but still maintaining the right to have a peaceful nuclear program. It was a great deal for Iran. Its economy grew by over 12 percent the next year. And what did Suleimani do with that windfall?

He and Iran’s supreme leader launched an aggressive regional imperial project that made Iran and its proxies the de facto controlling power in Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad and Sana. This freaked out U.S. allies in the Sunni Arab world and Israel — and they pressed the Trump administration to respond. Trump himself was eager to tear up any treaty forged by President Obama, so he exited the nuclear deal and imposed oil sanctions on Iran that have now shrunk the Iranian economy by almost 10 percent and sent unemployment over 16 percent.”

David Lindsay:

Ouch. I want to support this assassination, because that would be easy. But if Suleimani was so dumb, and so bad for Iran, why did we turn him into a gigantic martyr?  Why didn’t the Israelis, who had penetrated his organization, take him out?  The awful probable truth, is that Trump is in trouble and he needs a war. The Ayatollah of Iran is in trouble, and he needs a war. Why, with so many issues and questions, did the Pentagon go along with the orange orangutan who is president, and who continually serves the interests of Putin and the Russians? Did any of you reading this, see the exposé in the NYT the other day, about how the Russians and Syrian air force are bombing hospitals and schools in northern Syria? They are bombing our allies, whom we fought with and for. Perhaps the best question, is, why did Putin want this to happen? It will probably go very badly for the United States.

There Are No Children Here. Just Lots of Life-Size Dolls. – The New York Times

By 

Photographs by 

“NAGORO, Japan — The last children were born in the remote mountain village of Nagoro 18 years ago.

Now, just over two dozen adults live in this outpost straddling a river on the Japanese island of Shikoku. The elementary school closed its doors in 2012, shortly after the last two students completed sixth grade.

But on a recent bright autumn Sunday, Tsukimi Ayano brought the school back to life.

It just so happened that she did it with dolls rather than humans.

Ms. Ayano, 70, had arrayed more than 40 handmade dolls in a lifelike tableau on the grounds of the shuttered school. Recreating a school sports day known as “undokai,” a staple of the Japanese calendar, she had posed child-size dolls in a footrace, perched on a swing set and tossing balls.

“We never see children here anymore,” said Ms. Ayano, who was born in Nagoro, and has staged an annual doll festival for the last seven years.”

David Lindsay:  Comment to NYT

What a lovely, strange story by Motoko Rich and  Nadia Shira Cohen. Thank you. Dr of Nothing commented to this extraordinary piece: “What we are seeing here is a town at the end of its lifespan, but also a society and culture in significant decline. Japan is predicted to have half its current population by the end of the century, so this is more than just a retreat, its a collapse.”

I must disagree completely.  Japan is one of the most overpopulated places in the planet, and naturalists  are suggesting that for the life as we know it to be sustainable, and with other creatures, we need to reduce world population from 7.6 to perhaps 4 billion. That the Japanese are doing their part to bring their own country to more sustainable human numbers, to allow for other species, and clean air and water, and less climate change is magnificent.

Wikipedia reports, “According to the World Bank, the population of Japan as of 2018 is at 126.5 million, including foreign residents.[3] The population of only Japanese nationals was 124.8 million in January 2019.[4]

Japan was the world’s tenth-most populous country as of 2018. “  They showed that in 1910, the population was only about 51 million.

This fact that overpopulated states are going down in population is not bad news. It is good news, and a necessary part of our survival through a slowing of climate change and the sixth extinction of species.

David Lindsay Jr. is an author of “The Tay Son Rebellion”  and blogs at InconvenientNews.net.

How Laws Against Child Sexual Abuse Imagery Can Make It Harder to Detect – The New York Times

“Child sexual abuse photos and videos are among the most toxic materials online. It is against the law to view the imagery, and anybody who comes across it must report it to the federal authorities.

So how can tech companies, under pressure to remove the material, identify newly shared photos and videos without breaking the law? They use software — but first they have to train it, running repeated tests to help it accurately recognize illegal content.

Google has made progress, according to company officials, but its methods have not been made public. Facebook has, too, but there are still questions about whether it follows the letter of the law. Microsoft, which has struggled to keep known imagery off its search engine, Bing, is frustrated by the legal hurdles in identifying new imagery, a spokesman said.

The three tech giants are among the few companies with the resources to develop artificial intelligence systems to take on the challenge.

One route for the companies is greater cooperation with the federal authorities, including seeking permission to keep new photos and videos for the purposes of developing the detection software.

But that approach runs into a larger privacy debate involving the sexual abuse material: How closely should tech companies and the federal government work to shut it down? And what would prevent their cooperation from extending to other online activity?

Paul Ohm, a former prosecutor in the Justice Department’s computer crime and intellectual property section, said the laws governing child sexual abuse imagery were among the “fiercest criminal laws” on the books.

“Just the simple act of shipping the images from one A.I. researcher to another is going to implicate you in all kinds of federal crimes,” he said.”

David Lindsay Jr.
Hamden, CT | NYT Comments.
I’ve worked with computer clients since 1991 who shaked with anger about how hard it is to master their computers.They still do. I say to them, what I say about this article, “Just think, in a hundred years, people will write comedies about how we struggled in the early, dark ages of computer science. Nothing is seemless. Nothing works as promised.”
Plug and play still hasn’t happened everywhere for everyone, and you get absurd stories like this one, where the government expects big tech companies to clean out child porn, but they aren’t allowed to store or share the photos they are targeting to remove from the internet. We are living through a comedy, every day.
The best way to deal with the pain is to laugh, and keep working to slowly improve interconnectivity with some respect for privacy. (David Lindsay Jr. is the author of “The Tay Son Rebellion” on 18th century Vietnam, and blogs at InconvenientNews.net.)

Opinion | Is China Heading for Crisis? – by Bret Stephens – The New York Times

“In 2001, Gordon Chang, an American lawyer who had spent many years in Hong Kong and Shanghai, published a book forebodingly titled “The Coming Collapse of China.” At the time, the thesis seemed improbable, if not preposterous.

It looks a great deal less improbable now.

China — or, rather, the Chinese regime — is in trouble. Tuesday’s gigantic parade in Beijing to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the People’s Republic looked like something out of the late Brezhnev era: endless military pomp and gray old men. Hong Kong is in its fourth straight month of protests, marked and stained by this week’s shooting of an unarmed teenage demonstrator. The Chinese economy is growing at its slowest rate in 27 years, even when going by the overstated official figures.

Meantime, capital is fleeing China — an estimated $1.2 trillion in the past decade — while foreign investors sour on Chinese markets. Beijing’s loudly touted Belt-and-Road initiative looks increasingly like a swamp of corruption, malinvestment and bad debt. Its retaliatory options in the face of Donald Trump’s trade war are bad and few. And General Secretary Xi Jinping has created a cult-of-personality dictatorship in a style unseen since Mao Zedong, China’s last disastrous emperor.

Remember the “Chinese Dream” — Xi’s vision of China as a modern, powerful, and “moderately well-off” state? Forget it. The current task for Chinese leadership is to avoid a full-blown nightmare of international isolation, economic decline, and domestic revolt.”

David Lindsay Jr.
Hamden, CT | NYT Comment
Bret writes well, but doesn’t seem to know much about China. In reading the comments, I am reminded that most Chinese do not care about democracy, but getting out of poverty, and they are pleased with their government.
One astute writer this summer, pointed out that China doesn’t need Hong Kong’s market anymore. The Chinese market makes China independent financially from Hong Kong. That writer suggested that the dissidents of Hong Kong are doomed. I am impressed that the CCP has announced a $500 billion push over the next five years into solar and sustainable energy. They have announced that all cars will be electric by 2030, and now have 42 companies making electric cars. The News Hour showed last night that you have to join a lottery to get a automoblie license, and it getting harder and harder to get a license for gas vehicles.
A Vietnamese professor teaching at a universtiy in the USA, recently reported that the top government officials of Vietnam have been bought out by the Chinese CCP, and are quietly not fighting China’s take over of the South China Sea. There is a question among my friends about whether a democracy like the United States, is capable of dealing with the existencial threat of the climate crisis.
If the oil and gas companies continue to control our politics for their short term profit, we might be the biggest threat to our own future.
David Lindsay Jr. is the author of “The Tay Son Rebellion” and blogs at InconvenientNews.net.

Impeaching the Peach One, by Maureen Dowd, the New York Times

“WASHINGTON — It’s a beautiful day for an impeachment.

Or at least an inquiry about an impeachment inquiry.

So on Friday, as summer stretched on, I went to the Capitol to see what the speaker of the House was thinking, now that she has lowered the boom.

At the tender age of 73, Donald Trump may finally have to face some consequences for his depredations. His casino games have caught up with him and this time Daddy’s not here to bail him out. How delicious that a woman has the whip hand.

“Isn’t it something, Maureen?” Nancy Pelosi asks about what she calls her “wild week.”

I nod. It surely is. “The president says you’re no longer speaker of the House, that you’ve been taken over by the radical left,” I say to Pelosi, who looks smart in a pink pantsuit and sparkly pink high heels.

She laughs. “See, I always think he’s projecting: When he says ‘She’s not the speaker of the House,’ what he really means is ‘I shouldn’t be president of the United States.’ When he says that Adam Schiff should resign, what he really means is ‘I, Donald Trump, should resign.’ He knows that this is really very incriminating.”

The speaker is in a fine mood, now that she’s turned her focus from reining in the progressives to reining in the president.”

David Lindsay Jr.

 Hamden, CT NYT Comment

“The man who always claims the system is rigged against him keeps trying to rig the system — proving Pelosi’s point that Trump projects.” Bravo Maureen Dowd. When your are this good, you are great. I am terrified though about the warnings of Ross Douthat and David Brooks. Ross warned, Trump really wants this, because, it changes the discussion from about his lousy record, to his being persecuted by a witchhunt. So, Democrats, pay attention to these warnings. You must make room in the press for the candidates to run their election.

David Lindsay Jr. is the author of “The Tay Son Rebellion” and blogs at InconvenientNews.net.

Opinion | Which Way- Pete Buttigieg? – by Ross Douthat – The New York Times

By Ross Douthat
Opinion Columnist

April 27, 2019, 601
Pete Buttigieg spoke to a group of high school students from Massachusetts and New Hampshire this month in Nashua, N.H.
Credit Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York Times

“One of the central problems in Western politics is the impasse between a governing class that lacks legitimacy, and populist alternatives that are poorly led and unready to govern. This impasse reflects a deep trend of the last few decades — the working-out of meritocracy’s iron logic, in which the most talented young people (or at least the most talented résumé-builders) self-segregate in a small group of metropoles while the hinterland declines.

For a clinical rather than impressionistic assessment of this trend, you can turn to the new report from Senator Mike Lee’s Joint Economic Committee, which tracks “brain drain” trends across American states and finds a pattern, both longstanding and accelerating, in which the highly-educated cluster in “dynamic states” and “major metropolitan areas,” leaving less-educated Americans in “rural and post-industrial states” behind. The report describes this “geographic sorting” as one factor behind economic stagnation and social breakdown; it’s also clearly a factor driving the class-based polarization that’s given us Donald Trump, and in European politics the Brexiteers and gilets jaunes and more.

This background is part of what makes Pete Buttigieg, the bright young man of the Democratic field, such an interesting figure. In many ways Buttigieg is a kind of uber-meritocrat, a child of academic parents who made a swift climb up the meritocracy’s cursus honorum: a Harvard degree and then a Rhodes scholarship, a brief stint in D.C. followed by three years at McKinsey. And beyond the résumé, an obvious part of his appeal depends on his performative intelligence, his college-interview style of “humble” showing off.”

David Lindsay: Ross Douthat, there you go again. I had a busy weekend, and didn’t get to the Sunday NYT till Sunday night after dinner at 9 pm. By 10 pm, I was struggling to stay awake as I practiced my intellectual “flossing” by trying to follow the gymnastics of right wing, ultra religious conservative Catholic, Ross Douthat, as he cut up Pete Buttigieg, and accused him of going back to South Bend Indiana after a spectacular early career, because he was plotting for the presidency. Reading Douthat, I kept closing my eyes to sleep, and this morning, I drank in the most recommended Times comments, 2 or 3 dozen, which shredded Douthat for the narrow, intolerant, fascistic but brilliant Catholic that he is. These comments were so much more focused and clear headed than I was capable of last night. If you want a clear delineation of what is evil in conservative right wing evangelical or Catholic meddling in politics, I recommend these comments. They also are a powerful recognition, that in Pete Buttigieg, people hear the intelligence and calming clear voice of another Lincoln, FDR or Obama.
About my fabulous, bitter-sweet weekend. Kathleen was busy all day Saturday at the Hamden Earth Day Fair at the Hamden Middle School, where she was manning the table for her Sustainable CT initiative, where she is working relentlessly to get Hamden certified by the Sustainable CT organization, a massive two year effort. In the morning, I was reading in the Times that Obama loved having Biden as his running mate, twice, because Biden could speak and win over white working class males from the rust belt. I reworked the old song, “I’m Ready When You Call me Lord, But Give me Just a little More Time.” When I got to the Earth Day Fair, I found Kathleen in front of her table, free style dancing to rock and roll with a 10 year old boy and his mother, because, “the young man really wanted to dance, but was too shy to do it by himself.” I found many vendors who could guide me in making my house and life more sustainable.
On Sunday, one of my music partners Gail Pells came over and we three rehearsed our three songs, before singing with many others at the Memorial Service of my long-time friend and former singing partner David Green of Branford, at the Evergreen Woods Life Care Community. It was great to see his widow, my friend Ginny Shaw, and hear her articulate, teary-eyed daughters and family. Kathleen and I went in the afternoon to Bill and Gina Dunlap’s house Concert to hear Hughie Jones of England and the two Bobs of Staten Island, Bob Conroy and Bob ? in concert that was extended by songs led by some of CT’s finest traditional singers, who were in the audience. In the kitchen pub sing after the concert, Kathleen and I performed, the half traditional, half David Green version of “I’m Ready When You Call Me Lord, But Give me just a little more Time,” for the second time in the same day.
And now, here is Ross Douthat, see if you can see any faults in his crafty, articulate logic.

Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon and Facebook – The New York Times

By Astead W. Herndon
March 8, 2019, 337 c

“Senator Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Democrat who is bidding to be the policy pacesetter in the Democratic presidential primary, announced another expansive idea on Friday: a regulatory plan aimed at breaking up some of America’s largest tech companies, including Amazon, Google and Facebook.

The proposal — which comes on the same day Ms. Warren will hold a rally in Long Island City, the Queens neighborhood that was to be home to a major new Amazon campus — calls for the appointment of regulators who would “unwind tech mergers that illegally undermine competition,” as well as legislation that would prohibit platforms from both offering a marketplace for commerce and participating in that marketplace.

Ms. Warren’s plan would also force the rollback of some acquisitions by technological giants, the campaign said, including Facebook’s deals for WhatsApp and Instagram, Amazon’s addition of Whole Foods, and Google’s purchase of Waze. Companies would be barred from transferring or sharing users’ data with third parties. Dual entities, such as Amazon Marketplace and AmazonBasics, would be split apart.

[Sign up for our politics newsletter and join our conversation about the 2020 presidential race.]

“I want a government that makes sure everybody — even the biggest and most powerful companies in America — plays by the rules,” Ms. Warren said in a statement. “To do that, we need to stop this generation of big tech companies from throwing around their political power to shape the rules in their favor and throwing around their economic power to snuff out or buy up every potential competitor.” “

Felicity Jones is shy but relentless as Ruth Bader Ginsburg in ‘On the Basis of Sex’ | Mick LaSalle – Datebook – San Francisco Chronicle

David Lindsay: I have good news about the State of Our Union. Kathleen and I today celebrate our 5th year anniversary of relationship.
Also, we decided to skip Trump’s state of his union speech last night, and instead we went to see “On the Basis of Sex,” the fabulous and inspiring docudrama of how the Ginsbergs stole Christmas from the reactionary, keep the women in their place crowd, back in 1972, represented in the film by Sam Waterson. Furthermore, if you are near New Haven CT, the film will be at the Criterion New Haven for another week. Metacritic.com gave this film an aggregate 60, which was a crime. But their numbers are always suspect, since they are not generated by the critic, but by a reader at Metacritic. Scott of the NYT gave the film a rave review in my mind, and the reader scored the review as a 60! What is wrong with Metacritic.
There was a good piece in the NYT today about Trump’s lies last night, which I decided not to post. You don’t need to read it, but for reference, it is:
State of the Union Fact Check: What Trump Got Right and Wrong
President Trump appeared in front of a joint session of Congress for the annual address. Here is how his remarks stacked up against the facts.
https://www.nytimes.com/…/fact-check-state-of-the-union.htm…

Mick LaSalle 

Like Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself, the movie about her life, “On the Basis of Sex,” sneaks up slowly, growing steadily in estimation, until a point is reached, not at the end but well into the proceedings, that it’s all downright inspiring. Here’s the story of a woman who not only shaped the journey of women in the second half of the 20th century, but whose life embodied that journey.That life translates well into the movie medium, in that Ginsburg’s story from her days at Harvard Law School through her appointment to the Supreme Court has the built-in narrative structure of a dramatic film. As in a rags-to-riches tale, Ginsburg starts off underestimated. She’s quiet, she’s little, and she’s female, and few will recognize her brilliance. She’s constantly blocked and put down and experiences doubts and disappointment, but she eventually emerges as a figure of fame and permanent importance.“On the Basis of Sex” makes you feel the cost it took to build this life, the years and years of work, in the face of almost monolithic resistance. Interestingly, and this feels intrinsically true, the movie shows that the obstacles Ginsburg faced often came from her closest male allies, who, after all, were steeped in the very same culture as her political foes. Ginsburg was at a disadvantage with these men, not only because she was a woman, but also because she was mild of temperament, not someone who could easily put herself forward. However, she did have the most significant advantage in her favor: She was smarter than everybody else.She had the further benefit of a supportive, understanding husband, whose outgoing personality complemented her watchful reserve. The old line that behind every great man is a great woman sometimes goes the other way, and so “On the Basis of Sex” is also the saga of an exceptional marital partnership.

Source: Felicity Jones is shy but relentless as Ruth Bader Ginsburg in ‘On the Basis of Sex’ | Datebook