Dan Lipka Web Log

Unfortunately, but as usually, the Democrats in Congress have completely failed to communicate their agenda, motives, and goals in the impeachment of Donald Trump. As they rush through the process, refusing to wait for the courts to make rulings, they lose critically important opportunities to 1) interview administration staff under oath, and 2) have the courts officially have a position on whether the administration must comply with congressional subpoenas. Right now, the Democrats are legitimizing Trump's strategy to completely stonewall their entire process. So if another issue rises up, than they will have to start all over again. Weather you believe the President should be impeached, the whole world recognizes that (with the current evidence) there is zero change of him being removed from office by the Senate. The doesn't mean the house shouldn't proceed, it just means they have to look at the big picture. And for goodness sake, can the Democrats please hire a marketin

Sometimes I'm glad nobody reads this blog. There are a lot of ideas out there, that are profitable, that are just terrible for the world. Some will probably never happen, but others are inevitable.  Here is one that I just realized. Drones are getting more sophisticated and easier to control from hundreds of miles away. When is somebody going to have the idea to use drones to rob houses.  It wouldn't be that hard for a drone to break a window, than fly around the house (via camera enabled remote control) and look for small items to steal, like jewelry. Than fly back without a trace.  Of course, drones could also be used commit much more violent crimes (this is horrifying,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU ).  The future is filled will be filled with both the most helpful and the most destructive technology known to man.  Wish us luck.

Top Stories Washington Post (top story) - The U.S. deficit hit $984 billion in 2019, soaring during Trump era. NYTimes (2nd Story) - Federal Budget Deficit Swelled to Nearly $1 Trillion in 2019. Wall Street Journey (18th story) - U.S. Budget Gap Increases 26% in Fiscal 2019. Fox News - Nothing at all. Breitbart (9th Story) - Budget Deficit: Just Under $1 Trillion for 2019. AP News (4th story) -US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years. Trump Twitter - Nothing. ABC News (2nd Story) - US budget deficit hits $984 billion. USA Today - Nothing. This is a critical story for economic philosophy.  Did lowering the taxes on corporations lead to greater overall revenue.  Even during a strong economy, the answer is no. This combined with excessive spending, leads to a huge deficit. 

As the industrial age ends, there is new revolutionary technology that will radically change the world. It's onset is similar to the birth of the internet, in that it happened quick enough to change everything, but slow enough that it wasn't shocking to experience. This new technology is gene editing. The ability to modify the building blocks of all life. We are in the infancy of a technological transformation that started with the creation of CrisprCas9, but is rapidly moving beyond that. This has only one outcome, which is the establishment of eugenics (either controlled or uncontrolled).  As easy as it is to make genetically modified corn, we can make genetically modified anything. Of course, it will start with correcting "broken" genes that cause disease, but it will quickly move to optional changes. What if a country wants to modify the genes that controls metabolism so their people are less likely to starve to death, is that immoral? What about improving eyesigh

Is it possible that a lot of people voted for Trump because they thought he would lose. By doing so, they are able to complain for the next four years, "I voted for Trump and if he was President than everything would be better".  Instead of being able to say that, Trump voters now have to be accountable for everything he does and they are often on the defensive (especially in purple states). Perhaps in the next election they will vote against him (or not vote), just to avoid this.  It is more fun to hate the Patriots than love the Jets. 

There is just so much to write. At best (for the Democrats), Trump is impeached and it goes to the Senate, which will never, ever get the votes (66 votes) needed to actually impeach him (although it might embarrass Republicans). Once that is over, Trump is officially above the law and above oversight.  For this reason, the House will probably drag this out as long as possible.  Because afterwards, the House would never try to impeach him twice (or would they), especially if he is re-elected. Knowing that impeachment isn't a threat. Trump could do whatever he wants and with another four years, he would continue to stack the courts with those loyal to him. There goes the separation of powers, that quickly.  Luckily the limits of two terms for the President is a constitutional amendment and not just a law. Here is another fun thought, what is Trump wins re-election, evidence of a crime surfaces, and Nancy Pelosi impeaches again (of course, Pelosi should retire if Trump wins again)

Amazingly, there isn't a Republican candidate for President that proclaims to be Trump, without all the baggage.  Somebody whose policies are the exact same as Trump, who speeches are the same at Trump, and is also a megalomaniac.  However, it would be somebody who is not from New York, wasn't born into riches, hasn't been divorced, wasn't a Democrat, isn't a criminal, and generally doesn't act like an immature nutcase all the time.  Trump has proved that the President can dictate the policies of the entire country, has an almost unlimited amount of power, and can win national elections without the support of moderates.  This is the perfect time for somebody to say "Enough is enough, we thought Trump would be great, but he is really too weak. Let's impeach him collectively for violating the law and now I can be President".  Not one conservative is even trying, seems like a missed opportunity (or they really do love (or fear) Trump enough to support

How is it that humanity is simultaneously making great progress and plunging toward destruction.  We have made amazing strides in areas like extreme hunger, farming efficiency, literacy, civil rights, communications, and medicine.  As the same time, we are knowingly destroying ecosystems, causing the extinction of thousands of species, building more deadly weapons, adding to global climate change, poisoning our bodies with chemicals, and seeing an increase in authoritarian rulers.  We also just allow some terrible things to continue to exist (income inequality, racial and gender discrimination, maintaining power in the hands of few), while also wonderful and noble features of humanity remain strong (charity, friendship, empathy, family).   Is it a race? Can both these aspects continue, balancing each other. For example, we can make food that lasts longer (feeding more people and lower costs), but we have to add chemicals (which make us fat or gives us cancer) so science develops med

15 years ago I had Lasik to correct my vision, which was wonderful.  However, in the past few years my long distance vision has slowly gotten worse.  It's not terrible and I can function, but if I could get it fixed, that would be great.  The problem is that if I get my long distance vision fixed through Lasik, my near (reading) vision would get messed up.  So here are my options Option 1 - Lasik both eyes now Pro - Perfect distance vision. Con - I would need reading glasses now. Option 2 - Lasik one eye Pro - Distance vision would be better. Con - Reading is annoying (I tested this by wearing one contact), but I wouldn't need glasses for now. Con - When my reading vision deteriorates (in 3-10 years), I'll need reading glasses. Option 3 - Do nothing Pro - It's free.  Don't need reading glasses. Con - Vision not great for distances. Option 3a - Do nothing with glasses Pro - It's free, Don't need reading glasses. Con - Glasses are annoying and

Ever since Molly was about 6, I have taken her to at least one Yankee game a year. Molly played softball when she little and she knows the rules and can follow along, but going to the game isn't really about baseball. Molly is now 14 and the game we went to earlier this week was perhaps our best ever.  I didn't hurt that the Yankee crushed the Orioles, scoring in almost every inning, but that was secondary.  For 3+ hours, it was breathtakingly, sincerely, sublime daddy/daughter time. For every player we imagined that we were the world's worst/funniest announcer, trying to out-due each other on who could mispronounce each player's name the worst (Gio Urshela = Guy-O Ursela, Austin Romine - A-us-tine Ro-minny, Jonathan Villar = Jone-AT-han Will-air, Aaron Judge = A-A-ron Jud-Gee, etc).  Molly suggested that Coke buy the at space directly below the Pepsi sign and have it read "Stinks" is the same colors and font as the Pespi sign.  We wanted to buy space on the b

Over the past several months, I've listened to Infinite Jest on tape.  This book, David Foster Wallace, is almost indescribable, but here is my review... Bullet points:     1) It is long, really, really unnecessarily long (over 1,000 pages).     2) The writing style is very creative, overly informal (which I like), original (he uses words that are made-up, but seem just right), and it has a beautiful flow.     3) There are 3 main plots, and dozens smaller plots that are either completely unrelated to each other, or forced together.  It might be better as three different novels and 50 short stories.     4) There is no ending. It might has well ended in the middle of a sentence.  Nothing was resolved, there was no climax, and critical plot aspects were completely ignored. I liked the book, but would not recommend it to anyone (unless they were studying literature).  There was a stream of consciousness to the entire book, which helped sections flow into each other; however, the

10 Random thoughts on the 2nd round of Democratic Presidential Debates: 1) When they attach each other, they increase the chances of Trump using those same attacks against the eventual nominee. If getting Trump out of office is their #1 priority, than they have to play nice; however, it is not their priority (which is to get themselves prestige, power, or money) 2) When those are the far left attack Biden, I actually think it helps him among moderates and traditional Republicans. 3) Why can't major policy changes take place in increments instead of all at once.  Why not have Medicare-for-children first (as opposed to Medicare-for-all). Ask the country to try it and see how it goes. 4) The actual election will happen in reality, which includes the electoral college (which I am vehemently against). However, within this reality, any one candidate who doesn't provide a boost in swing states, just needs to step down. This includes all candidates from New York or California, sorr

Why are we sending rovers to Mars? Why do we care about Mars at all.  Here is an article... https://www.space.com/42518-why-we-keep-going-to-mars-insight-landing.html , but it contains nothing of substance that will have a chance to improve the lives of any human.  It is all vanity and intellectual curiosity.  I take that back, it is all vanity.  Why not research our own planet, or the ocean depths. There might be something actually useful there. However, for the geniuses at NASA that isn't cool enough.  I really love science and think that exploration is fascinating, but NASA is funded by tax payers.   "Mars exploration missions, as do most NASA missions, can be fairly costly. For example, NASA's  Curiosity  rover  (landed on Mars in Aug 2012) has a budget exceeding $2.5 billion.  NASA also has goals of collaborating with the  European Space Agency  (ESA) in order to conduct a mission involving returning a sample of Mars soil to Earth, which would likely cost at

How come the centrist candidates aren’t making “elect-ability” the most important thing in the race. “As Democrats, we should understand that America is a great and diverse country with lots of different believes and ideals. Do we want to do what President Trump is doing and totally dismiss half the country? Or do we want a President that reaches out to moderate voters? Do we want to have slow and steady progress, or do we want to lose another election and see another four more years of lies, corruption and a megalomaniac as President? Do you want want a moderate Democratic or Trump? Because if you want to win; can all candidates with no experience, live in NY or California, tried to speak Spanish during this debate, and are proud to be radically left, please just leave the stage. You can’t win! I can win because moderate and independents needs an alternative they can live with. (Why can’t Pete Buttigieg speak with a Kennedy accent).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/06/12/top-ai-researchers-race-detect-deepfake-videos-we-are-outgunned/?utm_term=.9c8fb160fc5e Basically, technology is at a point where videos can be completed fakes, including the addition of real people, saying fake things, acting in whatever ways the video producer wants. According to the article, experts are a barely ahead of the game in terms of deciphering what is a fake, but that won't last forever.  Imagine, if a video comes out of Joe Biden (I don't always want to pick on Trump) meeting with Hillary Clinton in 2015, having a discussion about completely opening the borders and ways to let illegal immigrant votes.  What could Biden do besides insist that it is fake. Would swing voters believe him.  This could happen to anyone, about anything, and the technology will only get easier, cheaper, and more believable. I'm amazing that this isn't significantly more common (this almost never happens, not even audio), but i

The world is filled with countless tragedies and the future looks shadowy.  I constantly think about some of the world's worst circumstances. Human trafficking, genocide, pollution, child pornography, etc. I think about how nationalistic governments are contagious. If it is "American First", than the next country must focus on itself just to compete. Will Brexit lead to the end of the European Union, it does seems inevitable. What would the world look like if every country embraced xenophobia, short-term economic gains, trade wars, and concentrations of political power,. It wouldn't be new, and we've all seen how it has ended in the past. My point is that it just feels somewhat wrong to blog about Game of Thrones, the NBA finals, or local politics. Even writing about the wonderful things happening the world (and there are many) makes me feel like I'm intentionally looking the other way.  Of course, this blog really doesn't matter, in even the tiniest way. 

Why do some people want to prevent abortions? The reason many give is that the fetus is a person and has the right to live. Simple enough. However, that statement is going to be put the test with new state laws that make it illegal to have an abortion in all instances, even in cases of rape or incest. If one truly believes this 1/2 inch fetus (6 weeks) is a person, than how this person was created should be irrelevant. That little person didn't cause the rape, so why should it be allowed to die? This is really going to push people's morality to limit, putting the mental/physical health of a pregnant woman against that rights of the 1/2 inch fetus (that has no awareness or mental capacity). For the record, I don't believe that what a woman does with her body is any business of the government.

Over the last few weeks, there have been so many things I wanted to blog about, but just can't find the time.  Here are some quite hitters. - Molly (with help and inspiration from Lindy) started her first business and had her first day of work. She sold flowers to parents prior to the 3rd grade school concert. She bought $30 in inventory, and collected $100 in an hour ($70 profit).  She was at the 3rd grade talent show the next night and wants to go to the 5th grade concert tonight. - I just don't get Game of Thrones. Why did HBO allow it to be rushed to an end. It could have continued for five more seasons, with different writers. The main thing I learned from the last several seasons is that the RR Martin (writer of the novels) knows how to write and Dan Benioff and D.B. Weiss (writers of the show) do not. I also think that their desire to keep everything secret, stopped them by getting any decent feedback. There is one episode left to go. My prediction, Dani kills everyone

So disappointed in the "Battle of Winterfell" episode of Game of Thrones.  Here are 10 things that I thought of in the past 10 minutes that they could have done.  1) Alternative Ending #1: The Night King walks towards bran (bran wargs into the wolf, Night King kills wolf, drinks it blood or something gross and ominously points at Bran). Night king gets closer, The Hound jumps from the tree and the Night King has to grab him with both hands, kills him instantly. Than the Night King’s main lieutenant, stabs him in the side. All the bad guys die. The lieutenant rips off his face and its Arya (who has the ability to do that) and Bran says “I was not expecting that!” End episode. 2) Either Sansa should have pushed Tyrion in front of herself in the crypt, or Tyrion should have tried to sacrifice himself for her, either would have made their relationship more interesting. 3) Sansa should have had to fight against her dead father, or bother, or mother, or something 4) Alterna

Every year, football experts spend months predicting how the NFL draft will go down.  And every year, they are almost impossible wrong.  Last year, they couldn't even get the first pick correct. Furthermore, their evaluations are virtually meaningless, as they are wrong more often than they are correct. However, there is no accountability; like the weather report, nobody looks back to get for accuracy.  Today, I'll highlight the mock draft from Sports Illustrated . (Note: the ESPN mock draft are within a pay-wall so I can't access them). Here are the SI predictions (with player evaluations here ): 1. Arizona: Kyler Murray, QB, Oklahoma 2. San Francisco: Nick Bosa, DE, Ohio State 3. N.Y. Jets: Quinnen Williams, DT, Alabama 4. Oakland: Drew Lock, QB, Missouri 5. Tampa Bay: Josh Allen, EDGE, Kentucky 6. N.Y. Giants: Dwayne Haskins, QB, Ohio State 7. Jacksonville: Jawaan Taylor, OT, Florida 8. Detroit: Montez Sweat, EDGE, Mississippi State 9. Buffalo: Ed Oliv

I like Game of Thrones, it is well written, creative, and surprising (although I wish I could un-watch of a few of the more unnecessarily violent scenes). Going into the last season, anything is possible.  Here are my quick predictions of who will live, who will die, and who will sit on the Iron Throne. Jon Snow - Tragically dies at the hands of the Night King. Daenerys Targaryen - Literally stabbed in the back, by Sansa Stark. Cersei Lannister - Killed by nameless, faceless soldiers. Tyrion Lannister - Dies protecting his brother, in battle. The Night King - Samwell Tarly saves the world. All the Dragons - All dead, but there are eggs. Sansa Stark - All hail the new Queen! Ayra Stark - She lives, but never settles down. Bran Stark - Spends the next 500 years as the 3 eyed raven. Jaime Lannister - Dies in spectacular fashion,  eaten by the Night King's dragon. Brienne of Tarth - She survives and it pregnant (the Lannister line continues). Theon Greyjoy - Becomes a Whit

When I  posted a warning two years ago that the Democrats focus on Trump's collusion would come back to hurt them, it just seemed like an obvious thing to write. If the Mueller report showed collusion, it would be a victory, but if it didn't, than it would be a terrible defeat (and discredit any future investigations or even concerns about the Trump). If they had just said the entire Mueller investigation was just about Russian interference and anything connected to it, than they would be a much better position. They didn't have to accuse Trump so blatantly, there was never a political advantage of that. Now everything the Democrats say or believe with just be met with "The were wrong about the Mueller investigation, they lied to the people about that, and now they are lying about health insurance, or NATO, or immigration. What will the Democrats do now? Why not, just whole heartily accept that Trump didn't collude and move on. They announce "There was en

Today, Molly (and a bunch of her friends) will joins millions of kids, around the world, to protest climate change inaction. I'm proud Molly is interested in fighting for what she believes in. Long-term, items like Climate Change will effect the next generation more than the current one, but we should be all be concerned on their behalf. There are many things about the science of climate change that give credibility to disbelievers. Perhaps the greatest are the incorrect warnings of a small minority of scientists in the pasts. There were scientists in the 1950s, 1970s, and 1990s, who all said that climate change is going to cause massive damage in the following decade (which is has not). Other scientists have been wrong about other issues, as well.  And generally, the science is complicated and goes against some generally basic intuition. However, to believe that Climate Change (caused by humans) is not happening you would have to believe in the greatest world-wide conspiracy i

I just don't get it. If you want Trump to lose in 2020, the absolute easiest way is to support a 3rd party candidate, specifically somebody who is religious, libertarian, or generic Republican. Democratic donors should not bother supporting a Democratic candidate, but give enough to fund a 3rd party candidate (it would take a lot of money, but could be funded by anonymous Superpac donors). Offer this person a top Cabinet position to entice them. Would John Kasich or MItt Romney agree to run as a 3rd party with the promise of being Secretary of State afterwards (if the Democrats won). Rand Paul would be perfect. Gen. James Mattis would do the trick. Or just focus the popularity of the 3rd party in a critical swing state. If they could get Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to run for President it would ensure a Democrat victory in Florida. The Democrats should offer to never run a candidate against him for Governor if he does this. Win-Win. It is much more likely to convince a conservative v

As of 3/6/19 at 4:00pm How do different "news" websites cover the same story. Today, a new report was released related to the U.S. trade deficit. Washington Post top story: U.S. posts a record trade deficit in goods despite ‘America First’ policies. NY Times top story: In a Blow to Trump, America’s Trade Deficit Hit a Record $891 Billion. Politico minor story: U.S. trade gap with China reaches all-time high under Trump. USAtoday: No Story. Fox News: No Story. Wall Street Journal, 2nd lead story: U.S. Trade Deficit in Goods Hits Record. Huffington Post: No Story. CNN: No Story. Breitbart Trending Story: Trade Deficit Hits Highest Level in a Decade. The Guardian minor story: Trump's tariff war pushes US trade deficit to 10-year high. Is this news or not? FYI, Here is the top story for news site that did not cover this story was all... USAtoday: Chick-fil-A serves up fish sandwiches for Lent, now through April 20. Fox News: Massive snake in Tennessee fores

Of all the sports, I enjoy basketball the most. I liked to play everyday when I was little, and still watch it on TV.  However, it has become apparent that about 1/3 of the teams are not trying to win this year, including historic franchises like the Knicks, Lakers, and Bulls. These teams, along with many others, are actively not signing good players in the hopes of having enough cap space to sign major free agents in the off-season. The incentive for the teams is extremely high because the top players have a pay ceiling. Meaning that the most a player can receive is about $40million per year. Of course that is a ridiculous amount of money, but top players (like Kevin Durant) would get significantly more if there was no ceiling (maybe $60million/year). So these players are the biggest bargains around. Teams don't sign players for this year so they could just have the chance to sign one, or even two max players. This would be ok if the strategy ensured a top player, but it certainl

Every 10 years, the Oscars should have a separate event to honor the best films of the decade; the best of the best movies, performances, etc. This would be just be fun and less controversial, since everyone is already a winner. They should also give awards to the most deserving people/films who didn't win is the year their movie came out (one winner per category per decade). History often gives perspective on these movies and provides value in its context. Great movies/performances should be recognized, even if it is a little late.  that's it, shortest entry ever.

Patriots owner Robert Kraft has been charged on two counts of first-degree solicitation after getting caught paying for a happy ending at the massage parlor. This should be his response (to save his reputation, and do the right thing). "First, I want to say that I will plead guilty to all the charges, I will not fight them and admit to my mistakes. The mistake was engaging in a sexual act with the employee of the spa. It was unbecoming and morally wrong. However, I want to assure my family and the world, that I had no idea how these women were being treated, that they were forced to be there, and were victims of human trafficking. I was sincerely naive and thought that each woman was just an employee and decided on this profession of her own free will. That she went home at the end of her night, like anyone else. Upon reading about the true nature of this establishment, I was abhorred and disgusted at this situation and the plight of these women. I am so sorry for playing any sm

It is so odd that the Democrats choose this time in history to move strongly to the left. For decades the Democrats have very slowly embraced more liberal ideas, and though it took patience, it also seemed to slide into the mainstream without disrupting the whole system. However, now the Democrats (on a national basis) are moving very quickly away from the center. This is happening at the exact same time when the Republicans are moving quickly to the right. Idealistically, this makes sense, if the candidates really believe in what they are saying, but in reality, many people are still moderates. Over 40% of voters consider themselves independents. For example, 13% of Trump voters had voted for Obama in 2012. That is a lot of people who voted for radically different ideologies. According to all political theories, in a two-party race, to ensure the best chance of winning, you want to position yourself to the immediate right or left of your opponent, to ensure that your base won't

Does Trump really want the wall to be built? If it does actually get built, than he won't have that issue to campaign on. If it is built, and doesn't reduce crime or drug use, than what will he say. What is more likely, it that he wants to do everything possible to push for the wall, without it ever being built.  Or, if he could get it started in the months leading us to the election, he can campaign on his success and if he doesn't win, that the wall will be removed (it will be interesting if money is spent to start the wall, if Democratic candidates will propose spending more money to have it removed). This is similar to Brexit, when the conservatives made up wild promises about the benefits of Brexit, which were really popular until they actually won and had to deal with reality. The realities of both building a wall, and declaring a national emergency, are almost as complex and make the plan almost impossible, which is what Trump might have wanted all along. Of course,

Large business and organizations have access to a level of technology and data that is far beyond almost anyone's capacity to understand. For most businesses, they use this knowledge to make more money, as that is their purpose. Unlike the past, in which companies relied on the quality of their products and the schemes of their marketing teams, today's companies have big data and AI to help them. When you watch a commercial, don't think that is just some guys idea to do something interesting and than a production company made the video. Each and every element of the commercial (colors, voice, text, images, style, editing, etc.) are tested using advanced metrics, surveys, psychology, social sciences, and AI. They test everything against everything, in ways that were impossible a decade ago. They use specific words that connect with their target audience. They are not guessing, they know 100%, which is most likely to work. They are not sharing information with you, they are a