Censored

WARNING: Adult Language Show – if you are offended by bad words, DO NOT listen to this episode of The Dave Bowman Show




So… fair warning. There is a great deal of adult (read that as “sailor”) language in this episode. I mean, it’s not gratuitous or anything, it’s just necessary to illustrate a point or two. If that offends you, well… to paraphrase George Carlin, there are two buttons on your MP3 player. Use them and keep your complaints to yourself.

It’s been a stressful week. Some days it’s had to concentrate on the issues we talk about because life intervenes. but… we were able to make the best arrangements we could yesterday and will finalize them today. So hopefully things will be a little calmer over the next few weeks.

I’m fascinated by the mentality behind censorship. It doesn’t really matter who is doing it, I always find myself wondering why they feel the need to make other people shut up? I get the control aspect of it. at the root of it all is, of course, controlling people by controlling what they can and cannot say. And, if Orwell is to be believed, what they even think. Or at least admit that they think.

So when Mark Zuckerberg sits in front of Congress and “asks” to be regulated, I get that he doesn’t get it. At the end of the day, why would he?

But when so-called “Leaders” agree with him, we are left to ponder where the whole thing went wrong. When the very people who have sworn to uphold and defend our rights don’t, with what options are we left?


Advertisements




Over the last seven years, I haven’t had much to say about Julian Assange. There’s a reason for that. Mainly because he was never what either side as portraying him. He is neither an evil genius supervillain enemy of the State nor is he a 1st Amendment Hero of the Free Press.

Look, I get that Assange, Manning, and Snowden have revealed things that we could not confirm before their actions. That doesn’t change the fact that (a) they most likely committed crimes or conspired to commit crimes to reveal these secrets; and (b) because Snowden and Assange ran away, we have not had the chance to debrief them. We actually have no idea the extent of the potential damage. Sure, they revealed things to us that embarrassed our government. What did they reveal to their hosts that we don’t know about?

The stupidity of the conspiracy theory that the US is just somehow going to disappear Assange is ludicrous. Bradley Manning participated in it all. He’s out of prison and ran for Congress. Assange is facing five years in a Federal lockup. And even that is a big assumption as many legal experts have already weighed in on the indictments inherent weaknesses. It is equally possible that a jury might never buy the governments arguments that he assisted Bradley Manning in successfully hacking into defense department computers. As it turns out, there is a line – thin though it may be – between investigative journalism and hacking.

He spent seven years living in a de facto jail cell inside the Ecuadorian embassy abusing their staff and property because, and again, I say this because I believe it, he is an ungrateful jerk and a moron.

At the end of the day, there’s a great deal of noise and commotion over Julian Assange. almost all of it unnecessary and meaningless. But – believe me – it makes him feel like he is the most important man in history.

He’s not.


Who Is In Charge Here?





Vice President Martin Van Buren believed the principle of non-interference by the government which he had shared with his President, Andrew Jackson. when he became Jackson’s hand-picked successor as President in 1837, he made it VERY clear that he had no intention of of using his executive authority to put the government in places he did not believe that it belonged.

He also made it clear that as the executive power was “vested” in himself, he could also decide what things the government would not do.

And when Congress disagreed, it took the Supreme Court about five minutes to explain to the President just who was in charge here…

Timothy Bloodworth




As Virginia and New York debate and ratify, North Carolina’s delegates gather in Hillsborough to decide the fate of the ratification in North Carolina. The Delegates were elected back in March at the direction of the State Legislature, and the Federalists are badly (2:1) outnumbered. They know that they will most likely lose. The Anti-Federalists aren’t against the Constitution per se. They are just dead set that they will not vote to ratify without a Bill of Rights.

Among them is one Timothy Bloodworth and he is an example of everything that is right with The United States and the Anti-Federalist idea.

In an unusual twist to the debates so far, the Federalists believe that the Constitution doesn’t go far enough in the powers it grants to the new central government. But they are resigned to defeat in the matter. Consequently, they do two things:

First, they hire a stenographer. If (when) they lose, they intend to make it stick to the Anti-Federalists. Secondly, they decide to take a long view of the matter. Like New York, they realize that the Constitution is a done deal.

Even though North Carolina will vote to neither ratify or reject, the stage will be set for the final battle.


In the process of show prep I came across this BRILLIANT song parody

that a teacher uses to teach his kids about the ratification debates:

Was It Worth It?




Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear that he does not understand the 1st Amendment. Or what “political speech” actually is.

Now, within the context of his creation, Facebook, he is free to promote or suppress speech as he sees fit. The problem is that he doesn’t want to do it. I mean, he does want┬áto do it, but he doesn’t want to be blamed for it. Instead, he wants the government to do it for him.

The problem is, of course, that like many in the entertainment and governmental industries, he doesn’t seem to grasp that the Government cannot do that… well… in fairness, there aren’t very many people who grasp that.

It all makes my annual question to 129 men who died this day in 1963 more poignant.


Truth From a Well


 


Let’s say that Person A says that he or she thinks that something is so.

Let us also accept that Person B disagrees with what Person A says.

Once upon a time, there would be a discussion, some reasoning, some logic, some research and maybe even a snarky comment or two. Ultimately though, for the most part, the facts of the matter would win out. Sure, some people would still cling to whatever person was incorrect, but it wasn’t a matter of life and death.

Over the last weeks, Person A, who made the discovery that he thinks is highly significant, wanted to let people know about his potentially significant discovery. So… he wrote the paper, submitted the research paper to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences – and when the journal announced that it would publish it, the University he works with sent out a Press Release announcing the discovery.

Or… at least hinting at what the discovery might be. Or at least stirring the pot about what the discovery could possibly represent…

It set off a firestorm of argument, debate, furious Social Media postings, and even a text chat between myself and my favorite Paleontologist.

Notice something important here: ALL OF THIS WAS BEFORE WE EVEN KNEW WHAT THE PAPER SAID.

All of this over a bed of fossils that may or may not have been formed when an asteroid hit the Earth 65 Million years ago.

But there is a lesson in it for the rest of us…


The Best Feeling In The World




It was a wonderful vacation. I finally got to Crescent City and Ft Bragg. I caught four innings of a Stockton Ports game and spent some great time with my folks.

I also turned off all of my news apps. Well… until one story snuck through…