News archives: 2013-12-19 to 2014-01-24

I included this because it seems haunting and incredibly riveting, if you’re in the right mood. I’ve often bought old yearbooks whenever I can find them at auctions. You wonder what happened to those people. And you realize how strong some bonds are and how some things remain similar, generation after generation. — MC

I don’t get it. Along comes a technology that answers many of the previous concerns of the environmental movement and they still want to stick it to the man. It reminds me of the mindless hippie rants back in the early 1970s. They loudly declared that they hated logic, which precluded your chances of winning with reason. Guess what? They still walk among us. — MC

This is from the DOJ letter, but it would be more fitting if quoted from Lewis Carroll’s most famous book:

“Schools … violate Federal law when they evenhandedly implement facially neutral policies and practices that, although not adopted with the intent to discriminate, nonetheless have an unjustified effect of discriminating against students on the basis of race.” — MC

News coverage by major media has grown so biased over the past two decades that it’s hard to find reliable sources. Of course, Media Research Center makes those leaning right much happier than those leaning left. You suspect that the organization, whose stated mission is to expose media bias in major media, is guilty of bias itself. Still, that’s hard to prove without major examples of bias in favor of conservatives. Would those be exposed by MRC? We’ll never know, right?

About the Chris Christie scandal itself, Poker1 is preparing to put up odds of all likely candidates winning the 2016 presidency. Were Christie’s chances damaged? Yes, but only in a weird mathematical way. If it turns out that he didn’t know about staff efforts to dramatically reduce bridge traffic and inconvenience commuters as political retribution, then his swift and decisive actions after finding out might actually endear voters.

So, Christie’s chances don’t seem to fall much on the surface. But, wait! What if evidence points to him having known. Then he’s toast. So, the odds for Christie are now volatile. He might not be damaged much, but he might turn out to have been fatality damaged. Only unfolding events will determine the truth. There’s little middle ground in the mathematics for these odds.

Christie could still be harmed by not having taken emergency action to fix the traffic situation immediately, while it was occurring. But we don’t quite know the circumstances surrounding that yet.

In any case, we won’t be giving him much of a shot at becoming president, because — although he’d have a good chance if he won the Republican nomination — he is much less likely to be nominated than most pundits seem to suggest.

The main reason I included this story, however, has little to do with Christie and a lot to do with the sad state of major American news agencies. — MC

Although this piece is from Pravda, it isn’t the Russian propaganda mill of old. In fact, you’ll find a lot to like and it will broaden your perspective. That’s assuming you’re careful to think critically and not interpret everything written as factual.

This one is an opinion piece, anyway. While you’re at Pravda click around. You’ll find lifestyle stuff that might interest you, too.

I hope you’ve noticed that Poker1 News scouts stories from radically liberal to ultra-conservative. And you’re probably confused by my comments by now, because they’re all over the map. If you’re expecting a specific agenda from me, you won’t get it. I share my thoughts, believing I’m right, and you take it from there. — MC

Senator Ted Cruz isn’t my cup of tea. I’m in sync with some of his thinking, but he’s too closely aligned with the religious right for my taste.

Nonetheless, since this is the page where I share my innermost thoughts about news and other stuff, I think he’s completely correct in his assessment of President Obama’s power grab.

Those liberals who currently cheer the president for refashioning some laws, ignoring some, and inventing others, are likely to regret not having spoken out loudly to stop this shift in power from congress to the White House. — MC

It seems to me as if many of President Obama’s choices have been more in-your-face than pragmatic. This may be another example.

The Mumia-Abu-Jamal case has energized both sides. Here is a link to a Wikipedia article about him that seems balanced:
→ GO THERE. — MC

Actually, some pretty solid thinking in this one. I suspect that it does “hurt” the brain more to comprehend evolution than to accept a religious explanation of creation and just move on with daily life. — MC

Just when I thought we might be able to logically win the argument against environmental extremists, along comes Pat Robertson to muck it all up.

If you have problems with this story, consider the sources. And, yes, I said “sources,” plural — Pat Robertson AND rawstory.com. — MC

(Full-size illustration at link. Forbes credit: Steve Brodner.)

At first I thought Sheldon Adelson, Las Vegas gambling magnate and fifth richest America, might be interested in the integrity of poker. That’s what some of his earlier remarks, a few months ago, sounded like to me.

He was worried, it seemed, that poker couldn’t be adequately protected, online or offline. So, I talked it over with my colleague, Bill Handy, whom I’ve teamed with to create a system to identify all forms of poker cheating online. It’s called COPS (Caro Online Poker Solutions) and uses my own methodology. And it works.

So, we thought, hey, maybe Adelson will lead our charge to get true protection into an online poker arena that strangely seems resistant to it. But scrap that idea. Adelson is against online gambling for moral reasons, he says.

So, on one side, we now have the liberal icon, George Soros, fighting with other big names along with Ceasars to institutionalize online gaming. And we have conservative Adelson on the other side.

One word of caution here. If Soros and company prevail and you live with big-government regulations for a while, you’ll probably wish Adelson had won so you could find an illegal, offshore, online poker room that still had plenty of players.

I don’t care who wins this war. One side wants to save you from yourself (and possibly protect current investments) and the other wants to take your money and regulate your life..

If you don’t think government has any business at all controlling your gambling life, please read my explanation of how it all got started: → The true story of how government got involved in gambling. — MC

Below is quoted from my blog…

Today the World Poker Tour announced a sponsorship deal with Monster. This deal makes me sad, because I’ve always been a fan of the WPT, made TV appearances on their behalf, and even taught twice at the poker Boot Camp in Las Vegas bearing its name. And I’m enthusiastic about Monster, too. That’s a company that makes superb audio necessities and headphones.

From the article at the WPT website announcing the deal: “With poker being the only televised sport where players regularly wear headphones during competition and use music to help their focus at the table, this is the perfect partnership.”

No, it’s not

No! This isn’t “the perfect partnership.” It may facilitate poker partnerships, though, because electronic equipment at the poker table has the potential to be exploited by sophisticated cheats. I’ll leave that technical discussion for another day. But those of you who have followed my crusade to promote poker ethics know what I’m saying. I have confidence in the WPT staff and my friend Mike Sexton, in particular, to be alert to that.

So, the main issue I have with headphones while at the table is that it detracts from the game of poker and interferes with tells and psychological competition that defines true poker. In fact, that’s what makes poker a unique game.

Headphones worn by players at the poker table don’t “help their focus at the table,” as stated in the article. They harm focus and make it difficult for opponents to focus, too, thus changing real poker into some hybrid competition far removed from the original intent.

Tolerating headphones is arguably bad in itself; encouraging them is terrible. And that’s why I’m calling this one a Monster mistake. — MC

You can’t argue that the Girl Scouts have been taken over. It just surprises me that so many parents haven’t noticed. Some parents, no doubt, do know it, but feel comfortable with the progressive agenda. I’m not comfortable with it. But I’m also not comfortable with a faith-based one, like American Heritage Girls.

Why not leave adult ideology out of it and let the girls simply do good deeds, learn stuff, go camping, and bond. Simple concept, right? Adults always effitup (a verb for you to look up). — MC

I have mixed feelings on this. I tend to wear pink a lot and feel warm and fuzzy toward guys having loving relationships with each other, if they choose.

Yeah, I know, the previous sentence was bigoted and insensitive. I’m not sure how or why it was, but let me save some of you the trouble of pointing that out to me. I acknowledge it.

The citizens of Utah voted overwhelmingly (two to one) in 2004 to disallow gay marriages. The population is largely Mormon. Hmm. Let’s think about that. Individual Mormons might or might not like gays, but they shouldn’t be voting on public policy from a religious perspective. They can legally, but they shouldn’t. Is that what happened? To some extent, yes.

So, score a point for the gays. It shouldn’t matter what the majority wants if it denies legitimate rights. But, then again, what are the rights here? Ah, yes, to get married. But marriage shouldn’t be a right granted by government. It should just be something people do because the government has no authority to stop them from doing it or to authorize them to do it. In other words, it’s none of government’s business who gets married or who doesn’t.

If the custom of marriage were just being invented, gays could and should argue for inclusion. And they can and should argue for inclusion in any government authorized sanctioning of a two-person relationship. And, no, I’m not saying “two person” because I have a bias toward traditional marriage. More than two is fine with me. But tradition has its place, and that’s why government shouldn’t be involved at all.

Sure, I understand the argument that government sanction of marriage was partly intended to help promote family. And that’s kind of an argument against gay marriage, although lately many gays have strongly argued that they do promote strong families (but can’t create them by bearing children unassisted). My position is neutral on the family issue, but it also doesn’t matter to me. Government should neither encourage nor discourage marriage, gay or traditional. Again, none of its business.

Bottom line. I side with gays on government sanctioned marriage, but I don’t think there should be any such thing. And I side with churches in excluding gays from marriages that they sanction. Whether or not I believe there should be any churches is another issue for another day.

Sure, I know. Many of you aren’t comfortable with my remarks on various issues. I think you’ll need to get used to people speaking their minds again, changing their opinions from time to time again, sticking to their guns at other times again, and sharing their thoughts again. I have officially declared the era of political correctness over. I know for a fact that I’m not a bigot or a racist or homophobic or sexist. But you might sometimes think I am when I share myself with you. If I avoid that possibility, I might as well not share at all, because it would all be bullshit. Maybe you don’t think I’m the right general to lead this charge, but I’m leading it, anyway. — MC

I’m going to rethink my Nvidia computer purchases now that it’s obvious that they are covering up the real story of crop circles. Exactly how much were they paid by the aliens to say this?

Why would a large corporation do this as a publicity stunt? Would they even be capable of achieving it without the guidance of a civilization thousands of years more advanced than our own? These are questions we all need to ask ourselves before falling victim to this lame cover story — a clear conspiracy among U.S. government agencies, Nvidia, CNN, and possibly others. — MC

When Aljazeera America took over Al Gore’s ailing Current TV network late last summer, I watched religiously. Now, if you think I chose the word “religiously” to point out that Aljazeera is a Muslim network, you’d be wrong. I chose it because most people would assume the connection, but they’d be wrong, too. Aljazeera doesn’t seem to be in the business of promoting religion.

Aljazeera is the biggest news organization in the Middle East. And it has credible resources there and globally. My impression was that it was pretty professional, with in-depth investigation added to the news fare. What I didn’t like was the near absence of humor and restrained silliness. I think you need that kind of mix to connect with an audience.

Beyond being too liberal for many, Aljazeera America seemed too consistently serious about itself. But it had its moments. It’s a mile better than Current TV, which I found insufferable.

So, consider Aljazeera America to be yet another liberal news agency. In fact, as you’ll see in this piece, they’re objectively liberal even in areas you wouldn’t expect them to be — gay rights, or in this case, transgender issues. I know, you’ve heard Muslims are anti-gay. You can be stoned to death for having homosexual friends, right? I hear you.

But Aljazeera America isn’t like that. And I thought you’d like to see this piece of journalism, more for what it says about the news agency than the subject it’s reporting. — MC

Fun to watch, even though I realize that too many deer in residential areas can be a problem. — MC

Go figure. No, really There are too many grand gambling halls being built. The age of lavish has left us. Casinos are too common to merit so much expense and fanfare. The next era will see smaller, neighborhood gambling hangouts.

Why? Because huge resorts made sense when there was just Las Vegas and then
Atlantic City. But when casinos can be found almost everywhere, they don’t need to be oversized. They just need to be convenient. Don’t believe me? Watch what happens over the next 20 years. (Oh, and by the way, there will be a backlash, too.)— go figure. — MC

You think? — MC

Go figure. No, really — go figure. — MC

One third of adult Americans say that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.” This opinion is mostly tied to religious beliefs and is much more widely held by Republicans than Democrats, according to the Pew Research poll.

They say you shouldn’t attack religious beliefs, but here goes. First of all, there’s no such thing as religious beliefs, when you think about it. We all use the term and know what we mean. But what makes something religious?

If I say there’s a raccoon that comes to my porch regularly and speaks wisdom about how life should be lived, you’ll be skeptical. If six other people join in and swear it’s true, you’ll think they’re delusional or scammers. So far, you’re free to argue logically about the likelihood of them being truthful.

But, wait! Now they form a religion and amass millions of followers. They’re called Racoonists of the Light. Organizations form to protect the Racoonists against defamatory statements. You must not speak against Racoonists insensitively, because their beliefs are officially religious.

So, I ask you: What changed? The intellectual raccoon thingy didn’t change. You still think it’s absurd. The only change is that now you can’t say so. Well, I can say so, as you’re beginning to discover if you’ve been following my news comments here.

And, in this case, I’m saying that people have no ethical right to teach children in churches that “living things in their present form have existed since the beginning of time.” If that’s what the church you’re driving toward does, turn around now. Go home. Save the children! — MC

But, what if your attorney gets deported in the middle of your case? Just sayin’. — MC

I hope this doesn’t happen in America. — MC

Go Rob! I’d hate to see this show canceled. — MC

This might be an anomaly. Or there could be real reasons, such as high prices and unpopular rules that, while guarding against injuries, don’t seem in harmony with what football is supposed to be.

Comfortable free high-definition viewing at home is also a factor. I’m going with the “rules” explanation, mainly. It’s not merely that they remove a good deal of physical intensity from the play, they’re just too hard to interpret

Does mommy send Johnny to the room for this one, or does it get overlooked? — MC

To listen to some, you’d think a horrible wrong had been fixed here. In actuality, this last name is ludicrous. And in deference to the culturally sensitive, let me assure you that I’m “just sayin’” Otherwise, I would keep my opinion to myself.

Hey, Janice. Let me suggest a name for you. I like Janice, but for this example, we’ll shorten it to just Jan. Your middle name is Lokelani, so let’s just make it Lo.

Now we get to the hard part. Your last name is
Keihanaikukauakahihuliheekahaunaele
so I’m thinking Key.

Now we have Jan Lo Key. Problem solved. You’re welcome. — MC