Tag Archives: Powerline

Gun Grab — Power Grab

John Hinderaker of Power Line does a nice summation of the idiocy, strawman arguments and evil behind the modern antigun movement in “Wear Orange to Stop Gun Violence?

The simple-mindedness of the modern liberal would almost be amusing if it didn’t mask the darker, far more sinister true goal, the removal of firearms from private, law-abiding citizens. The idea that wearing orange will somehow engineer a magic “solution” that would render “gun violence” a thing of the past displays typical liberal dimwittery and wishful-thinking.

It also belies a “Baptists and bootleggers” coalition between totalitarian liberals wanting to disarm those that might resist their endless march to omnipotent power and criminals who find a disarmed citizenry to be a happy hunting ground. Both agree that a cowed population is in their best interests.


Out of the Mouths of Babes

I thought that this recent piece from Steve Hayward, “Why Do Democrats Hate Their Own Presidents?” was amusing and revealing.

The break with, repudiation of, their past that is happening among Democrats should not be surprising. It is baked into the mentality of the modern Marxist-oriented liberal. Much like the 1960s young Democrats love affair with Marxist totalitarians shocked their elders (who understood and had fought those totalitarians and kept their U.S. supporters at bay), these young liberals, even moreso, have no concept of the past or why Marxism is despised, has failed where tried and must be constantly fought.

The animating principle of Bernie Sanders and what Hillary Clinton is desperately trying to capture in her sprint to the left and repudiation of her husband’s successes as president, is to try to capture the “youth” vote. Many politicians foolishly think that “from the mouths of babes” ushers some kind of truths. The reality is that kids are ignorant, inexperienced and often quite stupid. (That’s why they’re in school!)

Following in the wake of the 1960s kids, they believe that everything that came before them was wrong and needs to be rooted out. They believe in Year Zero-style revolutions (completely oblivious to the legion of Year Zero failures, most glaring in Cambodia).

Abrogating all that came before allows a great deal of latitude in behavior and policies. Look no further than the war on marriage; successful people (e.g. You didn’t build that); the bizarre gender debates; the aggressiveness of SJWs and climate warriors; attacks on businesses and people who simply disagree with them; their mob violence on campuses; the virulent racism of Black Lives Matter; etc.

These young radicals coming off of the campus see themselves as bulldozers of everything before them. In their eyes they will rebuild society and make it perfect. They will create the perfect human (known decades ago by a similar movement as ‘The New Soviet Man’). No one got it right until we arrived, the think (echoing Obama’s solipsistic ‘We are the ones we are waiting for’). Using these coddled, arrogant kids as a compass is foolish and very dangerous.


I’ve been meaning to get to this outrageous story — the war upon Exxon that is brewing from several state attorneys general. See this somewhat accurate story that exposes the coordination between the AGs and “environmental” special interest groups.

This coordination alone, while not unexpected, is unethical and in some cases illegal. Ironically, it fits the definition of the RICO prosecutorial tool that the AGs seek to use against the company.

The really outrageous part (that’s like saying ‘But a really tall Himalayan mountain is…’) is that these supposed legal officials want to prosecute the company for its opinions on Global Warming. There is nothing illegal about what one thinks of Global Warming (at least not yet) nor should there ever be. One should be able to believe the Earth is flat and not have to worry about prosecution.

These attorneys general are wasting taxpayer dollars, going after something that has nothing to do with law and they are abusing their offices for political ends. They are the ones that need to be prosecuted because what they are doing is against the law and it is against the spirit of the Constitution and America.

I also had the same feeling about the prosecutions of tobacco companies (and I loathed smoking). These companies can believe that smoking is healthy if they want. Such beliefs, erroneous of not, should never be against the law or left to the judgment of legal authorities.

These are just the early steps of what liberals wish to do to all of their political enemies and businesses that don’t do their bidding (and line the liberals’ pockets as well).

Power Line’s John Hinderaker has a couple of stories on this disgraceful behavior by elected officials — “A Conspiracy So Intense” and “The Great Free Speech Issue of Our Time.” Bonus absurdity is Steve Hayward’s “Green Weenie of the Century: The Rockefellers.” Watching “Rockefellers” abandon the business that made them wealthy is a madness beyond analogy. But fear not, they won’t be giving that money back but they will continue to deploy in the destructive antibusiness/anti-American manner they have been doing for decades. John D. Rockefeller continues to spin in his grave at what his heirs have done.

The Inevitable Melting of the Snowflakes?

In the wake of the recent outburst of insanity on college campuses, some people took refuge in the satisfaction that the hypersensitive precious snowflakes were going to get theirs when they had to enter the real world, where their delicate sensitivities, intolerance of disagreement, ultrarighteous attitudes, shocking ignorance and simple inability to play well with others would doom them.

There is a lot of truth to that but it is likely that their closest encounters with the private sector will be employment in the media or in “diversity/HR” offices of major corporations. I also want to offer an alternative scenario.

It is far more likely that many of these graduates will simply become academics, government employees, work for NGOs and nonprofits or simply be professional activists. By adhering to these groups, they will be able travel in the protected libtard bubble for their whole lives – and be well-paid for it as well.

Most Americans have little to no idea how vast this network is. They often think of these groups as being pleasant little charities doing the Lord’s work for a pittance.

One couldn’t be any more wrong.

Millions are employed in the nonprofit world and tens of millions more in government. You can spend your whole life without encountering the “real” world. And be well-compensated for it.

We already see what a fever swamp academia has become and as any conservative student can tell you, most professors aren’t encouraging them to stick around for an academic career. One look at the resume/CV of professors and assistant professors tells you all you need to know. They often read like Onion parodies gone wild, yet they are real. John Hinderaker at Power Line provided some details on the grotesquely awful Melissa Click, Asst. Prof. at Mizzou. Talk about someone who should be disqualified for transferring knowledge to impressionable youth. Here is someone who has wasted their intellectual life. She’s merely typical of thousands of academics.

They inhabit a world where they defecate article after article of validation to bizarre and uncountable “academic” journals that are really nothing more than intellectual circle-jerks. There’s a world of “academic” conferences that perform the same duty.

Government employment provides a lucrative, powerful and natural shelter for many similarly-minded people. These people affect policy, make laws and render judgments. Creating more control over the citizenry is exactly what they live for. Has anyone noticed the proliferation of “diversity” offices at all levels of anything government touches? These people will be populating and running those offices too. And don’t forget, there’s always politics. Few things are more detached from reality than the life of the politician and his staff. Yet they rule us with an iron fist.

Few people outside of political activity are aware of the vast network of NGOs and nonprofits. Washington is awash in them. It can be surprising to see the number of people working at them, the range of issues, the number of “conferences” they are involved with and the amount of funding sources (private, public and other NGO/nonprofit) fueling them. Most of them advocate more government and more government control. Some of them are extremely aggressive. These can range from groups like the NAACP, ACLU and National Council of La Raza to the Natural Resources Defense Council, Greenpeace, Science in the Public Interest and the American Association of University Women. There are thousands of them. Hundreds are minted yearly. Not surprising, there is a revolving door between themselves and government. Conservatives are easily outgunned 10, if not 100, to 1.

Then there are similar groups at the “official” level of “Non-Government Organization.” Everything from the United Nations to the Smithsonian to the Carnegie Endowment for Peace is stuffed with liberals — often cycling in and out of academia and government employment. These jobs pay well and can lead to wildly lucrative employment in the corporate suites of major international corporations. It also has its own endless string of taxpayer- and corporate-funded “conferences.”

And then there’s the whole brave new world of the professional activist. A few years ago these jobs really were low-paying and only the most dedicated took them. But over the last decade, the rise of the liberal billionaire has created a whole new ecosystem. George Soros, Tom Steyer, tech lottery winners and dozens of trust fund kids have been pumping money into hyperaggressive liberal groups. David Brock’s Media Matters is just one. Others troll conservative websites, follow conservative politicians to harass them, participate in shady political activities, provide soldiers for political campaigns, staff Astroturf organizations, file endless lawsuits on a myriad of issues, etc. Here conservatives are outgunned probably 1,000 (or more) to 1.

This doesn’t even delve into dangerous consumer and trial lawyer groups and traditional think tanks. Many of the snowflakes will find very accommodating freezers for future employment when they tire of perpetual school. (And they will be well-paid and recycle much of that money back to liberal causes.)

These people will destroy us and are doing it on our dime. They produce nothing useful. They are parasites.

Remember, these youngsters have had it drilled into them since birth by the media (including TV and movies) and educrats that everything that existed and happened before them was unfair, racist, classist, sexist, genderist, etc., completely unworthy of saving, so is it any wonder that these little anarchists seem to have a nihilistic mentality? They are animated by the spirit of the French Revolution, the Cambodian cataclysm, the Cultural Revolution, Leninist/Stalinist purges. They think they can remove everything that came before and start from Year Zero. They think that the default position of humanity is some kind of utopia and it is only Western (i.e. white male) Civilization that has poisoned the well. To them Hobbes was a cartoon character.

You can see it in the faces of the chunky black women that animate Black Lies Matter, the angry feminists that inhabit academia and some small nonprofits or so many members of the wacky “marginalized student” groups; see it in their eyes — they view the average (i.e. ‘white’) American as a long-time criminal, a bloodsucker, an oppressor, a roach scurrying across the social paradise floor. It needs to be exterminated. Then the SJWs can take their proper place atop the food chain directing the survivors forward. (Interestingly, they seem to think the society and the economy will still function as if nothing happened. As one writer noted, ‘They think they can kick the supports out and the roof will magically hover above them.’)

This swamp needs to be defunded.

It’s All Vlad’s Fault

Our amazing president has done it once again.

Last week, on the anniversary of 9/11 he expounded on the crisis du jour, Syrian refugees. I guess it should be noted that he didn’t blame the United States for the crisis, nor the white power structure, though he did rope some white people into the fault so that only partially spared George W. Bush from his usual role as origin of all-things-wrong.

So what caused the Syrian crisis?

Russia did!

Most importantly Vladimir Putin did it.

Now I’m no Russia lover, especially of Vladimir Putin, he’s an old-fashioned strongman with delusions of grandeur — think of a Latin American caudillo writ large — but seriously? Russia?

According to an article in The Washington Times (warning: ad-heavy website), Obama said: “‘Russia has for many years now provided financial support, sold arms to Assad. I remember a conversation I had with Mr. Putin four or five years ago where I told him that was a mistake, that would makes things worse,’ Mr. Obama said. ‘He did not take my warnings, and as a consequence, things have gotten worse. It appears now that Assad is worried enough that he’s inviting Russian advisers and Russian equipment…We are going to be engaging Russia to let them know that you can’t continue to double down on a strategy that’s doomed to failure.’”

I seriously doubt President, Barack Obama (AKA Swami Obami, the Delphic Oracle of our time) told Vladimir Putin, to his face, that he, Putin, was on the wrong side of history, to use The One’s favorite phrase of self-justification and vindication. The simple fact that Putin’s alive today, not having died laughing or been shot by the Secret Service trying to give Obama a noogie, is proof of that. This is just another one of those self-serving stories that both Obamas traffic in (seem to actually live in) .

If there was any remotely viable causative effect one would have to say that Russia’s support has propped Bashar Assad up and kept him around this long, not caused ISIS — the chief Syrian underminer. Syria was a client state of the old Soviet Union, which provided weaponry and built-out a number of facilities — ranging from chemical weapons facilities and supplies to a Soviet naval base on the Mediterranean (Tartus) to standard planes, tanks and missiles. Russia inherited the relationship after the fall of communism and Putin has taken an interest in it. He certainly doesn’t want to see source of Russian income and of a fellow tyrant taken down. That sets a bad example, gives people the wrong ideas, you know.

Obama’s reasoning is exactly wrong. He couldn’t be any more wrong (well, maybe if he had blamed, say, Martian earthquakes, he might be slightly more wrong but on Planet Earth…). I suppose one could make a tautological argument that if Assad didn’t exist ISIS would have no one to overthrow and therefore would evaporate in a puff of logic but I suspect they’d probably be warring with whomever replaced Assad.

That leaves — Can he possibly believe such a pile of nonsense or was he in total BS mode as he just let that rip off-the-cuff?

I’m hoping it was just another bit of off-the-TelePrompTer impromptu speaking that Obama is famous for. He says something that pops into his head, that might serve a policy point he’s trying to make — say, arms sales = bad, and he comes up with a cock and bull story that he thinks sounds sophisticated, relying on the audience to be made up of his low information/high esteem supporters. It’s highly unlikely that anyone will publicly call him on it, certainly not on that moment. And then he’s off to a round of golf on Martha’s Vineyard. Mission accomplished.

Going back to the legendary “Reset” fiasco, the Obama administration has long tried to get the Russians to follow O’s lead. After all, he showed a willingness to suck-up to the Russians with a high-school level slam of the Bush administration (bad relations: All Bush’s fault). But after the Obama team agreed that Putie’s old girlfriend was a stupid slut, that really cute and rich boy (♥♥♥♥!) still didn’t ask us to the prom!

In fact, he started sleeping around with all of our friends (while we still did his laundry for him!) by invading and destabilizing neighbors, jamming up the Obama administration in international forums and just being a meany! Doesn’t he realize we’re smart and beautiful and talented and better than all those cheap tramps he hangs out with?????

If you want to know how Obama and liberals think and operate, think about the social dynamics of high school; if you want to know their policy thoughts, think kindergarten and elementary school.

Our “smartest-evuh!” president is shockingly ignorant, and not particularly bright (example, the error-filled silliness we are talking about now). He’s obviously gone through life with few people actually questioning him, much less simply explaining that he’s wrong about some issues. There’s also no indication that Obama is even concerned about facts but rather he focuses on narratives that “must” be true — like Putin is on the wrong side of history so if he’d just stop supporting Assad, Syria would reboot into the pleasant democracy it was before Putin supported Assad and created ISIS. Fore!

The scary part of this is — is this an example of Obama’s narcissistic tendency to think that whatever comes out of his mouth must be true simply because he said it? Did he knowingly throw out some absurd reasoning to fill some time at an event he didn’t want to be at or does he actually believe his Syria-is-Russia’s-fault story? Is his administration making policy on this concept?

There is the quasi-Nixonian possibility that O & Co. tossed that out because Obama is trying to get out from under the “ISIS is J.V.” analogy (another off the TelePrompTer remark) and taking any blame that yanking troops out of Iraq and grabbing his ankles on Iran had anything to do with the rise of ISIS nor his own vacillation concerning Syria. Laying the blame on Russia is classic Obama blame-shifting (ask George W. Bush about that). And don’t forget, Obama killed Osama! Al Qaeda and all other similar terrorist groups were supposed to roll over and wither away while pure, sweet, secular democracy was going to spring forth in the Middle East (as it had reigned in Muslim-dominated lands throughout history). Everyone in the late night dorm room BS session that is the Obama administration agreed that would happen and anyone who’s participated in a Mock U.N. or academic conference on the Middle East knows that should have happened.

But it didn’t and the ugly thought that serious military forces will need to be deployed to curtail ISIS is beginning to heckle Obama’s inner monologue. (Another other heckler is yelling ‘Bush, Cheney and the Taliban conservatives were right!’)

I’m hoping that’s it because the alternative, our president is delusional, is worrisome. Of course, using a 9/11 anniversary chat with the military to lay the groundwork for such a position is “bush league” but then that’s what Obama has always been.

He often treats the political arena, home of traditional give-and-take, as if its an inner-city basketball court and he’s the number one “trash-talker.” Except he believes his own BS.

Scott Johnson at Power Line has a good piece on this topic.

CBS Radio’s Nancy Cordes — Tool

I’m pretty much forced to listen to CBS Radio every morning in between the traffic, weather and sports reports. It’s a sad and sometimes stressful way to start the day.

Tuesday morning, with the release of a tranche of new Hillary Clinton emails, Washington correspondent Nancy Cordes ever-so-gingerly explained away the whole tempest in a teapot and the apparent inconveniencing of Hillary Clinton’s march to the White House by these so-called charges of impropriety.

She trotted out a lawyer, a supposed expert in these matters, who couldn’t see anything that Hillary had done wrong. Some expert. Mr. Magoo has better eyesight. See my take here.

Cordes cherry-picked a couple of innocent emails – Hillary asking what time “The Good Wife” was on and fluff like that. She off-handedly mentioned that there might be a couple of emails that maybe, just maybe, might, sort of, possibly be like… um… secret-ish if examined in a certain kind of light but anyone listening would be excused thinking that this really was much ado about nothing – which was the real point of the story. Nothing to see here, move along.

Cordes isn’t stupid. Like most of the top-level reporters she’s packed away a couple of Ivy League degrees (she’s also a graduate of the same high school Obama attended in Hawaii).

So we’re stuck. Is Cordes simply ignorant of the whole issue, in which case she shouldn’t be reporting on it? Or did she purposefully misreport the story? In which case she shouldn’t be reporting.

Anybody up on this case probably doesn’t pay much attention to major media anyway since the MSM won’t be breaking any embarrassing or damning stories on Hillary (unless the dam breaks), just recycling DNC talking points that the New York Times launders as actual news reporting. Cordes and CBS Radio aren’t aiming at those folks since they’ve already made up their mind. No, they are aiming at the low-info voter. The Obama voter. The person who thinks they are well-informed because they listen to CBS Radio. Keep them in line either through leaving out details or simply lying.

And just for laughs, add this to the “Imagine If This Were a Republican” file.

It’s shoddy or biased reporting like this that has driven faith in the news media to such low levels.

And speaking of bad and biased reporting. Courtesy of Power Line, get a load of the malarkey peddled in The New Yorker by the Dean of Columbia University’s School of Journalism, considered a top J-School. Note, Steve Coll is a former Washington Post star.

And journalists wonder why so many doubt them and their circulation and ratings have collapsed…

Suicide of the Web

Recently the leftie rag/website The Guardian asked a good question: Is Internet advertising technology ruining the Internet experience?

The answer to that is yes.

I’m all for free market and capitalism, whereas The Guardian isn’t, but there are limits to commercialism, or rather where it becomes counterproductive. Internet advertising at many sites has blown through that boundary.

I visit a number of conservative blog and websites. Several of them are shocking computer resource hogs. Sometimes I wonder, does anyone involved with those sites actually look at them or visit them from the outside (without their souped-up IT computer)?

I have an older Windows XP laptop that’s done me great service for years and a newer desktop machine (64-bit Windows 7 and 8 GB of RAM). I’ve taken to visiting many of these sites with Task Manager open – just to watch the “memory” numbers skyrocket – and then shut Flash down since it is the chief resource hog.

I’ll stick to generalizations mostly but I will note that the worst offenders, as a group, are the Townhall sites. They’ll grind the laptop to a halt in a minute. I also have to be wary of The Examiner, Washington Times, Pajama Media, Breitbart and Real Clear Politics. There are others that I visit that are better on some days than others, such as Power Line and National Review or visit less occasionally.

Pay attention webmasters!

It looks silly to have five (I’ve seen as many as seven) Flash windows open on a site and, often, all of them playing the same Annaliese Dayes, the egg lady, Food Planet, etc. videos, scenes from Uppercut or a Stylebrity fashion show video or whatever nom de video they’re running under that week.

Lately several sites have been running a syndicate of web videos that change their name about every two weeks but are the same celebrity programming/gossip and travel trash that isn’t particularly relevant to the conservative audience.

Annoyingly, shutting down those video windows, by clicking the shutdown X, sends you to that website. I know you think you tricked me but all you’ve really done is annoy me and deceived your client. I’ll have the pop-up window or tab shutdown in less than three seconds. Does that register a click? Is your client going to pay you for that nonimpression impression?

Here’s an idea. Since you stick cookies into my computer, don’t have me watch the same video more than say, three million times? You can keep count, I know you can.

Oh, and when I stop a video: Don’t then run an ad and then restart the video; don’t restart the video/ad when I scroll away or go to another tab. Simply don’t restart the video! What’s the point of running a video/ad that I’m not watching? To merely consume bandwidth or are you just jacking up “views” that aren’t actually views? Naughty-naughty.

Tip to you web designers out there — never have more than three Flash windows operating on a page. Not everyone has a bleeding edge, 8 GB RAM machine. Five is too many and seven is insane. Three is actually too many but there are compromises.

Then there are times of mysterious resource consumption. Hot Air is a repeat offender here. I have had every video window shut down – and I mean killed, not paused, yet I still can watch Flash in Task Manager spin upward past 500 MB in less than 30 seconds and over 1 GB if I walk away to get something to drink. I don’t see what’s running or using those resources.

Somebody at Hot Air needs to take a serious look at their website ad policy and stop worrying about their commissions.

Note that Liverail, AdapTV, Doubleclick, AdChoices, moatads, Scorecard Research, ping.chartbeat, any of the google.dots and amazon.dots, et al, are the spawn of Satan. These little ad purveyors, unsolicited content installers and verification monitors are in a desperate war with each other to fill slots and check that things are where they are or are not. It’s often a game of digital musical chairs – heavily-laden poorly-written code modules conflict with each other, possible purposely-written sabotage algorithms and the constant presence of constipated servers combine so that we are treated to Three Stooges-style doorway obstructions watching something hang on loading and everything else, including the content that you wanted, piling up behind it, all battling each other for a place on the page (or redirecting you to somewhere else).

Does anyone really click on a Photoshopped picture of an alligator swallowing a koala declaring that “One weird trick” can make you cancer-free and cut your car insurance by 90%? Somebody must because these companies stay in business. My God, people are dumb. (They can’t all be Democrats!)

Newsmax. Don’t even get me started on the Newsmax boxes appearing on sites – often 100% medical and financial snake oil. What happened?

Taboola and other “Sponsored Links” crapola are an annoyance but don’t seem to be resource-intensive. I’m surprised that conservative purveyors of their sites stomach the low-info voter content they peddle (picture of Kim Kardashian and text saying ‘Eight beauties with IQs over 200!’) but it’s likely that’s part of the blog package. I just saw one on Power Line with a black & white picture, clearly from the 1960s of a bikinied cutie on a bike. The tag – “WWII Photos From The Front Line.” The other three pictures in this “Popular Articles and Offers” all featured chesty women in exposing tops and were entitled: “Finding a bikini top that fits them properly is a chore for these 32 girls;” “These 28 photos of women bending seductively are straight-up attention-getters;” and “These Girls Wish These Embarrassing Photos Never Saw The Light Of Day.” This was at Power Line, I remind you. (BTW, I have nothing against these gals but at Power Line?)

Pop-ups (and the rarer pop-unders) — another of the Dark One’s devices. These are inevitably peddling crap services when not hawking malware. Lately I’ve seen the appearance of pop-throughs.

Another annoying ad tactic is ads that explode when you accidentally get near them – kind of like the alien. Sometimes they appear in the middle of the text and sometimes they hang around the edge and if your mouse gets too close they spring forth – obscuring what you were looking at or, if descending from a banner ad, push everything downward. It then snaps back when the ad is done and you are forced to search for where you were in the article.

Then there are ads at ad-heavy sites that go to war with each other. I got a good chuckle the other day when a site’s craptastic pop-up POS ad (Upgrade to eFax!) kept smothering it’s autolaunch freight rail ads in side boxes. Yeah, nobody at home at this very high-profile website. Unfortunately, ad wars on websites are rarely that good (like Iran-Iraq war good) and usually more troublesome, when not actually making the site impossible to navigate – if not actually continually crashing it.

Highlighted words – I’ve never understood this technique. I understand the (relatively sound) theory but the practice is reliably incompetent (if not completely idiotic). You see the phrase “river bank” with “bank” highlighted and if you hover over it (foolishly thinking it might be an infolink leading to another article about the river) a little popup shows up pitching a “5.8% mortgage rate from Columbia BANK” or something about a checking account, car loan or a credit card. Again, do any of the people involved with these websites actually look at their website? Does anyone peddling the link service look at how it performs? Does any client paying for this service look at its implementation? It’s a rip-off!

Some sites accidentally or on-purpose won’t let you leave them easily. Hot Air is a notorious jailer, often crashing Pale Moon (which I use in defiance to Mozilla/Firefox and IE) if I merely click on another link so I use the open-as-tab or new tab options to navigate away from the site. I’m not sure if it’s accidental or purpose-built sabotage code. Whatever, it builds anger.

As noted above, I keep Task Manager open and often purposely shut down the Flash player. That usually works and rarely does it affect the content you are there to see – unless it’s an awesome Remy or Andrew Klavan video.

I have to note that marketing minions aren’t stupid and will occasionally package a bomb in their Flash package that crashes your browser if you shut down Flash. I’ve had this happen mostly at Real Clear Politics but it has happened elsewhere. The craven marketers will do anything to pump their numbers up and they really don’t care about shoving at you a video that you won’t watch and then counting that when they bill the client. It’s the negative side of a great system called “programmatic” advertising.

Modern ad technology is supposed to be smart yet the programmatic buyers are being duped. Just because a site is political doesn’t mean that running PSAs for gays (I thought it was a spoof ad the first time or two I saw it) or campaign ads for a Minnesota libtard on a conservative website are a good idea.

So much of web advertising is designed into trying to trick you into watching or clicking on something. Why? Seriously, take a sober look at your ad policy. If the product or service is of interest we shouldn’t have to be tricked into clicking on it.

Stop making your sites actually painful to visit.