X22, And we Know, and more- July 13

 

I only expressed interest in the stupid unions and their talks because I want the NCIS's back to resolve what happened to Hetty since LA can't anymore. And now I will say this:

If Linda dies suddenly at any time between now and whenever the franchise is able to return and offer up a real update or resolution to how that Morocco mission went, it won't just be the showrunner I will blame for never bringing Hetty home like he should've when he had the chances, Every single WGA and SAG member who wanted to walk out of their jobs to forcefully delay the NCIS's returning for their new Seasons to such a long length of time that it became too late to get Linda to guest star on any of the shows will also get my blame. Because their selfish actions will not only be responsible for making such an unhappy scenario happen, but also for all the angry fans that will be wondering when their favorite shows will return because the actors and writers didn't want to film them because of their fucking fear of being replaced by AI!! 🤬🤬

I hope she lives long enough to be Hetty again, but right now, anything can happen between now and whenever the hell the NCIS's get back to filming. And that scares me because of what could happen that could ultimately destroy the last living possibility there is of seeing Hetty get her happy ending.

Ten Reasons Why Affirmative Action Died ~ VDH

by Victor Davis Hanson for American Greatness 

The end of affirmative action was inevitable. The only surprise was that such intentions gone terribly wrong lasted so long.

First, supporters of racial preferences always pushed back the goal posts for the program’s success. Was institutionalized reverse bias to last 20 years, 60 years, or ad infinitum? Parity became defined as an absolute equality of result. If “equity” was not obtained, then only institutionalized “racism” explained disparities. And only reverse racism was deemed the cure.

Second, affirmative action was imposed on the back end in adult hiring and college admissions. However, to achieve parity, remediation early at the K-12 school level would have been the only solution. Yet such intervention was made impossible by teachers’ unions, the rise of identity politics and government entitlements. All were opposed to school choice, self-help programs, critiques of cultural impediments, or restrictions on those blanket entitlements,

Third, class, the true barometer of privilege, was rendered meaningless. Surrealism followed. The truly privileged Barack and Michelle Obama and Meghan Markel lectured the country on its unfairness—as if they had it far rougher than the impoverished “deplorables” of East Palestine, Ohio.

Fourth, affirmative action supporters could never square the circle of proving that racial prejudices didn’t violate the spirt of the Declaration of Independence and the text of the Constitution. What they were left with was the lame argument that because long ago the 90% white majority had violated their own foundational documents, then such past bad unconstitutional bias could legitimately be rectified by present-day “good” unconstitutional bias.

Fifth, supporters never adequately explained why the sins of prior generations fell on their descendants who grew up in the post-Civil Rights era. Nor could they account for why those who had never experienced institutionalized racism, much less Jim Crow apartheid or slavery, were to be compensated collectively for the suffering of long-dead individuals. No wonder 70% of the American people in many polls favored ending affirmative action including a half of African-Americans.

Sixth, there never was a “rainbow” coalition of shared non-white victimhood—a concept necessary to perpetuate the premise of white privilege, supremacy, and rage, so integral to race-based reverse discrimination. More than a dozen ethnicities earn more per capita than do whites.

Asians have been subject to coerced internment, immigration restrictions and zoning exclusions. Yet on average they do better than whites economically and enjoy lower suicide rates and longer life expectancies. The arguments for affirmative action never explained why Asians and other minorities who faced discrimination outperformed the majority white population. As a result, affirmative action ended up discriminating against Asians on the premise they were too successful!

Seventh, no one ever explained when affirmative action was to apply. Blacks, for example, were vastly “overrepresented” in merit-based professional football and basketball. Yet no one demanded “proportional representation” to address such “disparate impact,” despite underrepresentation of all other demographics.

Yet if blacks were “underrepresented” in baseball, then reparatory measures were supposed to address that fact—even if Latino players were “overrepresented” and whites “underrepresented as well. No one in our race-obsessed culture,of course, objected that white males died at twice their demographics in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Eighth, in our increasingly intermarried mass-immigration society, few could adjudicate who was what, or much less what standard gave one racial preference. In lunatic fashion, pink, blond Senator Elizabeth Warren became Harvard’s first “Native American” law professor due to her “high cheekbones.” Light-skinned Latinos were considered marginalized while some darker Italians or Greeks were not.

Ninth, an odious wokism absorbed affirmative action and changed it into something even more abhorrent—as the original spirit of the Civil Rights movement was trashed. So Americans were asked to stomach a return to distasteful segregated dorms, “separate but equal” graduation ceremonies and racially exclusive workshops.

Tenth, and finally, affirmative action was insidiously destroying meritocracy. That hallmark American value of tribally-blind inclusivity had once explained why the nation outshone the world by discarding the old class prejudices of Europe. But increasingly this value seemed to have been abandoned.

When Stockton Rush, the late captain and inventor of the ill-fated Titan deep-sea explorer was quoted postmortem bragging that his company had no need of “old white guys” with long military expertise in submarining, Americans realized that woke racial discrimination was not just repulsive but could get you killed.

A nation whose pilot training, medical-school admissions, and military high command promotions were increasingly adopting racial, gender, or sexual-orientation essentialism was a country headed for the sort of Third World tribalism characteristic of failed states abroad.

In the end, the court finally stepped in to end this unconstitutional aberration, more like the old Soviet commissariat than our ideals of equality under the law.

The American people concurred. And the only regret seemed to be why not sooner?

The U.S. Navy’s Personnel Crisis Is Only Getting Worse

What happens when the U.S. no longer possesses the manpower necessary to maintain its status as a global hegemon?

Shawn Fleetwood reporting for The Federalist

Following the end of the Vietnam War and its accompanying draft, the U.S. military transformed into an all-volunteer force. In the decades that followed, the promise of good benefits, a chance for adventure, and comradery prompted swaths of Americans to give up their civilian lives to defend the freedoms of their fellow countrymen. It’s a sacrifice that has generated much-deserved respect from the nation.

But what happens when the country with the world’s most sophisticated navy no longer possesses the manpower necessary to maintain its status as a global hegemon? It’s a question the U.S. is having to grapple with as its maritime force experiences the worst personnel crisis in recent history.

In April, The Military Times reported that the Navy is expected to miss its recruiting targets for fiscal year 2023 by roughly 6,000 sailors. The news came months after it was revealed the branch failed to meet its targets for new officers and reservists for fiscal year 2022, despite meeting its active-duty enlisted recruitment goal.

To combat its ongoing personnel crisis, the Navy also increased its maximum enlistment age from 39 to 41 in November “in an effort to allow more civilians to join its ranks.” Nearly a month later, it lowered its entrance test standards. And just last month, the branch announced further plans to extend the work week for its recruiters from five days to six to address existing shortfalls but backed away from the policy after facing backlash from sailors.

The situation has gotten so bad that Navy leadership recently turned to Yeoman 2nd Class Joshua Kelley — an active-duty drag queen who goes by the stage name Harpy Daniels and identifies as non-binary — to be a “Navy Digital Ambassador.” The program — which ran from October 2022 to March 2023 — was reportedly “designed to explore the digital environment to reach a wide range of potential candidates” for military recruitment.

Potential Causes

While there’s no singular factor responsible for the Navy’s recruitment crisis, Navy veterans and policy specialists have varying ideas on why America’s maritime force is struggling to bring new sailors into service. 

For Brent Sadler, a Navy veteran and senior research fellow for The Heritage Foundation’s Center for National Defense, one of the most glaring causes advancing the Navy’s personnel problems is the Biden Defense Department’s embrace of DEI ideology, which he says is alienating potential recruits from demographics that lean more conservative. DEI, which stands for “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” is a divisive and poisonous ideology dismissive of merit in order to discriminate based on characteristics such as skin color and sexual orientation.

“When you start alienating where you draw the vast majority of your recruits, you’re going to take a hit,” Sadler told The Federalist.

The embrace of DEI is “a conscious decision by this administration,” he said. “It’s going to take them a while to figure out how to actually mitigate that and if they’re going to try to broaden and diversify their recruiting. They haven’t been effective at it yet.”

In addition to its drag queen “ambassador” stint, Navy leadership also issued a memo in May 2021 outlining an action plan to promote DEI throughout the branch. The document instructed the Navy’s assistant secretary and chief diversity officer to “lead and oversee all DEI efforts across the Department to synchronize key policies and initiatives … and to develop a strategy to advance DEI across the enterprise.” Last year, the branch also published an instructional video advising service members to create a “safe space” by using “correct” pronouns. 

“I do hear from veterans [who] are concerned” about these policies, Rep. Jennifer Kiggans, R-Va., told The Federalist. “When I served, I didn’t care what political ideology, what religion … what race you were. We were there working together, doing the job that our country asked us to do. That’s where the [military’s] focus needs to be.”

Kiggans — who served as a Navy helicopter pilot for 10 years and whose district includes Naval Station Norfolk — also pointed to quality-of-life issues as a potential factor contributing to the Navy’s recruitment headache. “Are we able to house our sailors properly and their families? Are we taking care of their families? What kind of health care are we providing for them? And mental health care is a big part of that,” she said.

Mental health issues, particularly suicide, among U.S. service members have been on the rise for years. An October 2022 Defense Department report shows that “suicide rates for Active Component Service members have gradually increased since 2011, although the 2021 rate [was] lower than in 2020.” A Pentagon report released earlier this month documented a similarly alarming trend for the 2023 fiscal year, with the “overall number of active-duty suicides — 94 — from January through March … up 25% compared to the number of troops — 75 — who took their own lives in the first three months of 2022.”

How to Stop Sailors From Abandoning Ship

Efforts to dismantle the Pentagon’s DEI complex have already begun, as House Republicans gear up to pass their version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2024 before summer recess. 

Among the bill’s provisions are those mandating the Pentagon use a merit-based system to determine military promotions and assignments and prohibiting the defense secretary from appointing or employing anyone, military or civilian, “with a rank or grade in excess of GS–10” to carry out DEI-related duties. Sections barring the “use of federal funds for certain training or education that promotes critical race theory,” prohibiting the use of federal money for drag shows and drag queen story hour, and cutting the position of DOD chief diversity officer, are also included.

Unsurprisingly, the White House has already expressed its opposition to the provisions, claiming in a memo to ranking members of the House Armed Services Committee the Pentagon’s use of DEI instruction “promote[s] a cohesive and inclusive force.” 

Also included in the NDAA are several amendments sponsored by Kiggans derived from the “Sailor Standard of Care Act,” a bill she introduced in May that directs the secretary of the Navy to provide more mental health resources for sailors and requires the Navy to conduct mental health screenings for “each member … designated for limited duty.”

According to an office press release, provisions added to the NDAA include requirements for the Navy to “brief the House Armed Services Committee on its recommended standard operating procedures for responding to multiple suicides” and “study the feasibility of constructing and managing a dashboard to track quality of life programs and their utilization rate,” among others.

We must ensure that our military is “taken care of, and that they have the resources and tools they need to get the job done to serve the country,” Kiggans said.

Read Part 1 of The Federalist’s breakdown of the biggest problems facing the U.S. Navy here.

Artificial Intelligence Positioned to Define Terms of Reality

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

There has been a great deal of increased discussion surrounding the issues of automated Artificial Intelligence, colloquially called “AI.”

At the central core of the AI issues in communication; you inevitably enter a discussion on the issue of definitions and terms.  Who is determining the definitions of what constitutes valid information? Who is determining what types of information are not valid, not approved for communication networks and how are their definitions being applied?

A solid and short-read thread on the assembly of people, groups and institutions surrounding the issue of AI in communication and media is presented HERE.

[Article/Thread LINK]

The topic of AI in general is a very large conversation.  The topic of AI specific to communication is equally large and perhaps even more significant.

AI applied to communication must first establish a need for it to exist.  Within that discussion, government interests and corporate interests take large seats at the table.  Social media platforms, communication outlets, almost the entire technology sector and various special interest groups are also stakeholders in the discussion of how AI can be applied to the filtering of information – or what I would more appropriately call the CONTROL of information.

The predicate of the conversation jumps around a little, but the issue of defining reality is throughout the discussion.  This is where my prior warnings about defining information must be emphasized.  I am losing the current argument, but I retain optimism that eventually the control mechanisms will need to be destroyed by a generation that falls under its influence.

“There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation” or “malinformation”.  There is only information.  There is information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”

There are only two elements within the public discussion of information – truth and not truth.

In an era filled with “fact-checkers” and institutional guardians at the gates of Big Tech, let me explain exactly why it is important not to accept the speech rules of the guards.

When you accept the terms “disinformation”, “misinformation” or the newest lingo, “malinformation,” you are beginning to categorize truth and lies in various shades.  You are merging black and white, right and wrong, into various shades of grey.

When your mind works in the grey zone, you are, by direct and factual consequence, saying there is a problem.  You are correct; however, this is where people may make a mistake. The problem is supposed to be there.

It is not a solution to the problem to try and remove the grey simply because it takes too much work to separate the white pixels from the black ones.  You were born with a gift, the greatest gift a loving God could provide.  You were born with a brain and set of natural instincts that are tools to do this pixel separation, use them.

If you define the grey work as a problem you cannot solve on your own, you open the door for others to solve that problem for you.  You begin to abdicate the work, and that’s when trouble can enter.

The sliding scale of Pinocchios is one of the most familiar yet goofy outcomes.

Put more clearly, when you accept the terminology “disinformation”, you accept a problem.

The problem is then the tool by which authorities will step in to make judgements.

Speech, in its most consequential form, is then qualified by others to whom you have sub-contracted your thinking.

When you willingly sub-contract information filters to others, you have lost connection with the raw information.

CTH was founded upon the belief that truth has no agenda, nor does it care about you, your feelings, or your opinion of it.  It just sits there, empirically existing as evidence of information in its most pure form.

The search for truth, in all things, is the mission objective of this assembly.   Often, we don’t like the truth; often, the truth is bitter, cold, challenging and even painful to accept.  However, the truth doesn’t care.

Information in its most raw form is ambivalent to your opinion.  If you struggle to accept these things, that’s when you need grey.  The New York Times is not called the “grey lady” accidentally.

Personally, I am an absorber of information – perhaps on a scale that is unusual.  But I do not discount information from any form until I can put context to it and see if the information makes sense given all the variables present.

When something doesn’t feel right, it’s almost always because it isn’t right.

Often, I find myself struggling in the grey and complex.  It is not unusual to spend days researching, digging, clarifying a situation, only to discover the path to finding the truth is in another direction entirely.   Erasing everything and starting over is frustrating, but it is genuinely the only approach that works; and often finding truth is supposed to be difficult, that’s why it is rewarding.

In the digital information age, we are bombarded with information.  It is easy to be overwhelmed and need to find something or someone who has better skills at separating the black grains from the white ones.  All opinions in this quest should be considered; thus, it is important to allow the free flow of information.

I am not necessarily a speech absolutist.  There is some language that needs to be constrained if we are to participate in a respectful society, with grandma’s rules and knowing the audience.  The CTH has guidelines for comments for this exact reason.  However, those constraints need to be based on a set of inherent values.   When it comes to information it is important to draw a distinction from speech.

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.  Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove speech from the discussion.  Be careful about those who advocate to automate this process via Artificial Intelligence filters.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

Teach your family, especially your children and grandchildren, to view information only insofar as it is valuable to your understanding the real world based on morals and virtues.  Upstream, those who are now defining the rules and terms of automated information filtering do not carry those same morals and virtues.

No one is going to get to avoid this issue.  We are on a glidepath to a future that was/is entirely predictable.

Some happy news on this miserable day: New pics from Swing into Romance 💗

 

Source: https://itsawonderfulmovie.blogspot.com/2023/07/danica-mckellar-reveals-co-star-in.html

While on a much-needed vacation with her family after filming back-to-back movies for Great American Family, Danica McKellar took to social media today to reveal who her co-stars are in her upcoming Great American Autumn movie, "Swing Into Romance."

Danica will be reuniting with actor David Hadyn-Jones (A Bramble House Christmas, Dear Santa) once again! The two previously starred together in the sweet Hallmark movie, "My Christmas Dream," back in 2016!

David responded to Danica on IG with this comment, "Utter joy Danica!! So hope the fun play dance and kindness comes through on the screen!! Infinite thanks to you and Gleb for this challenge."

Even their "My Christmas Dream" co-star, Christian Convery, who played the young boy Cooper in the film, responded with "Amazing!!!🎉🎉❤️

Also joining Danica McKellar and David Hadyn-Jones, is Gleb Savchenko (pictured on the right above), a professional dancer from "Dancing with the Stars."

Storyline for "Swing Into Romance" via Great American Media:

"In Swing Into Romance, when former dancer Christine Sims (McKellar) temporarily returns to her hometown in time for the town’s Fall Festival, she discovers her family’s General Store is in trouble. In her efforts to save the business, Christine will need to dust off those dancing shoes one more time, face her ex-fiancé, and maybe even find love."


Danica also shared several more pictures with her co-stars from their Autumn-themed movie...

Danica explained the major drop of pictures from her movie was made just in case the actors vote to strike today. If they decide to strike, she felt she might not be able to share any images from the film or promote her movie, which she stated is expected to premiere on Great American Family in September.

In addition to recognizing her co-star, David Hadyn-Jones, for taking on this challenge of learning an entire "Dancing With the Stars" level jive routine, Danica also gave shouts out to several people, including her husband, Scott Sveslosky, for creating the original story idea for "Swing Into Romance" and Marcy Holland for writing the script. She also gave her gratitude to Great American Family, Bill Abbott (CEO of Great American Media), producing partners Brad Krevoy & Amy Krell, director Bradley Walsh, film producer with Hideaway Pictures, David Anselmo, and several of her film co-stars, including Gleb Savchenko, who she thanked for his "coaching and patience in bringing out the dancer in me."

Plus, Danica shared a behind-the-scenes dancing video with Gleb Savchenko...

Did any of you guess Danica's co-star was David Hadyn-Jones? After seeing the commercial recently where they showed Danica dancing with her co-star (who was only seen from behind), I actually said to my family, "You know, that kind of looked like David Hadyn-Jones from Bramble House." However, I wasn't quite sure enough to share that guess publicly. I mean, that clip is a pretty quick flash and all. But, it is sort of fun to think, YAY! I got it!

Be sure to look for "Swing Into Romance" this September on Great American Family!

The Jokes Write Themselves When Kamala Harris Tries to Explain Artificial Intelligence

Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

Vice President Kamala Harris stands a very real chance of becoming America’s next leader. As 80-year-old President Biden bumbles and stumbles around Europe, saying crazy things and skipping important NATO dinners, it’s becoming more and more apparent that it’s unlikely that he would be able to finish out his second term should Americans be insane enough to hand him victory in the 2024 elections.

He’s already lived almost ten years past the life expectancy of males born in 1942, his birth year, and he’s got one of the most stressful and demanding jobs in the world (even if he does always seem to be on vacation).

But Harris would be a disaster if she took the helm. In her speeches and comments, she always speaks as if she’s talking to little children and makes points that would make Captain Obvious shudder. Take this, for example, where she explains to a group of labor and civil rights leaders on Wednesday in Washington, D.C, what the acronym “AI” stands for (as if there’s anybody with a pulse who doesn’t know by now):

I think the first part of this issue that should be articulated is AI is kind of a fancy thing. First of all, it’s two letters.

It means artificial intelligence, but ultimately what it is, is it’s about machine learning.

It’s a fancy thing? AI is complex, potentially scary, amazing, mind-blowing—I could go through my entire thesaurus, but I don’t think I’d ever use the word “fancy” to describe the awe-inspiring power of artificial intelligence. (If you don’t believe me about the mind-blowing part, just head over to ChatGTP and ask it to write 1,000 words on a random subject. It will produce a perfectly acceptable (though boring) essay in seconds. Or check out DALL-E 2 and ask the artificial image generator to come up with almost anything you want—in any style—and you’re likely to get some pretty amazing results.)

But Harris didn’t stop there, of course—she went on to try to explain how AI works. It didn’t go well:

And so, the machine is taught — and part of the issue here is what information is going into the machine that will then determine — and we can predict then, if we think about what information is going in, what then will be produced in terms of decisions and opinions that may be made through that process.

So to reduce it down to its most simple point, this is part of the issue that we have here is thinking about what is going into a decision, and then whether that decision is actually legitimate and reflective of the needs and the life experiences of all the people.

Um, what? I need AI to translate that.

The jokes almost write themselves. “Artificial intelligence, well, one word certainly applies to the VP, but she doesn’t seem to have much of the other.” Or, “perhaps she could get AI to write speeches for her because right now they sound like they were written by a kindergartner.” (I’m sure somebody could do better—feel free to add your joke in the comments section.)

This tweet sums up the situation perfectly:

Megyn Kelly Has Some Rather Brutal Thoughts 

About Kamala Harris' Speaking Prowess

Bonchie reporting for RedState

It’s easy to forget Kamala Harris exists these days. After once being pumped up as the president-in-waiting and a key decision-maker in the White House, the vice president has mostly been relegated to low-attended speeches in front of political activists. Unfortunately for her, she’s not good at that either.

Kamala Harris’ awkward, tortured speaking style has become a meme over the years. For those not familiar with it, here’s one of her most recent bangers as reported on by RedState.

Harris: Well, I think culture is — it is a reflection of our moment in our time, right? And — and present culture is the way we express how we’re feeling about the moment.

And — and we should always find times to express how we feel about the moment that is a reflection of joy, because every — you know, it comes in the morning. (Laughs.) We have to find ways to also express the way we feel about the moment in terms of just having language and a connection to how people are experiencing life. And I think about it in that way, too.

Or who could forget this legendary example?

Most notable in Harris’ speaking patterns is the weird circular way in which she formulates any statement that she believes is profound. That typically leads to a repetition of the same words repurposed in different sentences as she fumbles over her thoughts. She’s the type of person who says a lot while not actually saying anything.

Megyn Kelly has noticed, and she offered a critique on her podcast on Tuesday. Let’s just say it was pretty brutal.

KELLY: I gave her the benefit of the doubt. I did not think she was an idiot. I now think she’s a moron. She’s just not that smart. Forgive me, I’m still one of those people who gets wooed by titles. I’m like, “She’s the attorney general of the state of California. How dumb could she be?” The answer is very, very dumb, is the answer. And I’ve come to the conclusion with my own eyes and ears from watching and listening to her, she can not put two sentences together. I mean, the old man is actually losing his mental faculties. She’s just not a smart person, and it concerns me because that’s all we have in line on the Democratic side, and as Trump’s numbers continue to go up and up, and I realize some of the polls are showing him beating Joe Biden in a hypothetical match-up, he’s still very vulnerable. He did not win in 2020, and it looks like it’s going to be the same matchup. And honestly, Joe Biden is knocking on the Grim Reapers door, and she could be the President of the United States in the next six years by default if things go in a dark and upsetting way. I’m concerned.

Well, that’s certainly one way to put it, and it’s hard to argue with. Harris has had significant turnover in her staff, including multiple speech writers, and she still can’t manage to give a coherent public statement that doesn’t end up sounding like someone trying to fill out an essay question they didn’t study for. She legitimately comes across as someone who does not prepare for anything, and that’s not a small thing when someone is next in line to be the president. Even then, you’d expect her to have been able to realize her faults and attempt to correct them at this point. Instead, she just keeps putting out more and more incomprehensible material.

Maybe Kelly is right and it’s just a question of mental fortitude. Even as a senator, Harris came across as a very shallow politician, propped up by one-sided adulation. The vice presidency has completely exposed her, though. There’s a reason Joe Biden is running for president in 2024, and it’s not because he’s actually capable of doing so. Democrats do not want Harris to be the nominee because she has proven to be one of the most disastrous politicians in modern history. That she has managed to become less popular than Hillary Clinton is truly a feat.

Unfortunately, Harris is just one example of many. Washington is filled with people who you wouldn’t trust to run a lemonade stand. Truly, the country is run by some of the most vapid people in existence, and voters seem to have no desire to change that dynamic.