First thing was an attempted comment yesterday about me making, essentially, a rod for my own back. To go through this process is certainly that.
Second problem is at American Thinker itself - the lack of transparency and of course, detractors of N.O. and its main author would demand equal self-examination in return. Are people free to comment here? Not completely and that's partly Blogger, partly me. Blogger itself has provided its own security through this moderation device which, though obviously annoying, yet regulars know from experience that I click through comments and then review the rest. Hence the comment in the opening paragraph here.
It acts here, therefore, as a place to register, without any list, without any actual registration. You'd be aware, non-regular readers, that regulars are reading every word of this and you're within your rights to ask what if one of them disagreed with your claims of transparency, Higham? And there is no answer up front as yes, I could be playing fast and loose with comments, except that they would hardly continue - you saw yesterday what happened in a small incident of who said something - myself or DR.
In other words, you clearly get a feel for how it is here. I have zero details on commenters beyond the Blogger system which gives email. Every Blogger blogger knows how it is.
In that light, what of this w**kery of AmTh sending anyone who wishes to comment over to a separate place, having to go through a process to register and then all comments on all articles thrown into a hotchpotch on one page? They would say big deal - many sites do it, wishing to keep out trolls and who's most likely to have trolls? Highly politicised sites which appear to be on the dissident right ... or at least dissident.
So, passing over that, the third issue is the author of this post on Chile. Her name is supposedly Monica Showalter and she is listed twice in the authors column, once with underscore. Which is which? Who knows unless I wished her harm?
It is possible though I wish to know her dissident or cuck status as one of "the right". It's not clear from the article, which does cite CNN at one point. So the issue for me citing AmTh is are they trusted? And the only way to know is to go to the enemy and find out. I do find her here, which means they need checking out too. And again, they only list her articles, nothing about her. Google images provides this.
Real Clear Politics claims, 'independent, non-partisan'. Wiki's take, which would couch it in pejorative terms, were RCP actually on the right, says:
Since the end of 2017, Real Clear Politics has had a rightward, pro-Trump turn in its content according to some.
All right, let's go with 'cautious' but possibly OK, Ms Showalter.
Fourth issue then becomes the article itself and bias in the rhetoric - I have bias, you have bias, everybody has bias, gonna rock my baby, rock. You can decide that for yourself.
Chile votes itself a one-way ticket to communist hell
Weeelll, it has form, does it not? Allende. She quotes Reuters - why? Leftist. To compound it, Reuters quotes CNN as to the numbers. So, the NYT quotes the DNC - that's the sort of thing here.
And yes some things ring true:
Far-left Chileans don't even try to disguise who they are as they do over here; they enjoy advertising themselves as full-blown Castroite communists, all truth in advertising.That leaves the regular left, and I suspect that all of their claims of being sane leftists is pure window dressing. Based on what we are seeing now in our own Congress, left is left, and all of the left is rabid-left with only an occasional Joe Manchin in the mix.
OK, I feel safer reading her now, And what they have down there is a people who want free things, want it given to them. Enter the communist BS speakers who know which phrases trigger which responses and gain most loyalty. The real right seemed to get around 30%, maybe 32%, somewhere around Nigel UKIP figures, give or take whatever for sheer electoral fraud. Look at our own Electoral Commission and its shenanigans vis-a-vis TBP and UKIP.
The only people surviving and thriving in pretend-democracy are those who are either far-left, left, left-centre or right cucks. The actual right, meaning country, family, [a fair percentage pro-God], jobs, small govt, private property], being unable to organise themselves, get nowhere as usual.
And we desperately need a solution to this.