June, 2020 and Bill Barr

Amnesia, lobotomies, too many WORSE distractions? Don't choke on the flea after you've swallowed the camel? Bill Barr, then the Attorney General of the United States under Donald j. trump, amassed a private army of anonymous armed men in our nation's Capitol supposedly in defense of law and order and the American way. The armed men festooned in military riot gear were not identified in any way, either by name, organization, or authority. Nobody seemed to notice it then (well, you would have if you had wanted to protest the official government response to a protest) and nobody has said anything about it since. See: https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-8388143/Bill-Barr-deploys-army-federal-correctional-officers.html Now, the Washington Post is praising Barr with no mention to the reality of what he has done. We live in the 1984 land of “new speech” and the Dictator’s flunky “news media” reconstructing the past, the present, and our future.

More scary AI

Because I (foolishly) put my name into my blog, I googled my name to see if that had shone up. A picture of me came up so I clicked on it. Next came 30 pictures of elderly men wearing glasses, a ball cap, and who had graying gotees. Some of them looked like me. I am now considering going off line completely (or at the least stop sharing anything personal (AKA: anything at all?) because the all seeing AI is reproducing its self, its content, and what it has determined who and what YOU and I are. Our department of "war" is building AI bot soldiers and drone warriors. I have a feeling that these things will not be employed to protect me personally.... What could go wrong?

I might have to give this up

The end of human creativity is at hand. We just can't compete.

I am stupid, says AI.

Write an essay of 300 words that critiques and criticizes the essay: https://somelightsomeserious.blogspot.com/2017/09/paradigms-and-eeyore-why-we-cant-change.html in Ralph’s blog. Attack his logic, form, and knowledge from a position of your superiority in all three areas. I wonder if the bots will let me live after they take over. The essay’s central flaw is its unexamined confidence—an irony, given how loudly it complains about other people’s resistance to change. Its argument rests on a string of anecdotes, half‑formed analogies, and sweeping generalizations that never cohere into anything resembling a disciplined thesis. The author gestures toward paradigms, human nature, design, and even privatives, but treats each with the same casual superficiality, as though naming a concept were equivalent to understanding it. It isn’t. The logic is particularly brittle. The essay assumes that because some people resist change, all institutional or design stagnation must be caused by cowardice. That’s not reasoning; it’s venting. No evidence is offered, no counterexamples considered, and no structural analysis attempted. Corporate decision‑making, engineering constraints, market forces, and user research—real factors that shape design—are ignored in favor of a cartoonish dichotomy between brave innovators and timid “mentally old” managers. This is not argumentation; it’s caricature. Formally, the piece wanders. It leaps from Eeyore to computer code to dust busters to bicycle seats to photography history without transitions, hierarchy, or any sense of rhetorical discipline. The result reads less like an essay and more like a stream of irritations loosely tied together by frustration. Even the photography tangent—clearly meant to illustrate the persistence of outdated conventions—collapses under its own weight. The author never asks whether black equipment might have functional, economic, or manufacturing reasons behind it. He simply assumes ignorance and calls it stupidity. As for knowledge, the treatment of “privative” is emblematic: a dictionary definition dropped in without relevance or depth, as though etymology alone could rescue the argument. It doesn’t. The essay wants to diagnose why “we can’t change,” yet never engages with psychology, sociology, organizational theory, or design methodology. It substitutes opinion for expertise and irritation for insight.

Why Google yourself? Querry your style

My querry to ChatGPT: Write a 200 word essay about astrology in the style of Ralph Bolgiano as seen in somelightsomeserious.blogspot.com. The following is what I got (I made very minor changes)…. we are all doomed. To be kind to the ignorant who believe in astrology, is to allow them the distinction of thinking of it less like a cosmic science and more like a quiet human habit—one of those small rituals we perform to make the days cohere. They pretend it’s about the planets, of course, but anyone who has spent time with a natal chart or real astronomy knows the real subject is us: our hopes, our anxieties, our need to believe the universe is at least paying polite attention. What’s most interesting is how astrology becomes a kind of conversational permission slip, a shorthand. People who might otherwise hesitate to speak frankly about themselves will suddenly open up with, “I’m a Virgo,” as if the stars themselves have endorsed their meticulous drawer‑organizing. It’s charming, really—this cosmic shortcut to communication. Humans are inherently lazy and we love shortcuts. Of course, the cosmos remains stubbornly indifferent. The constellations don’t rearrange themselves to match our moods, nor are our lives affected by them other than our very existence. Astrology offers a moment of reflection, a pause in the day when we might ask why we are the way we are. If two strangers find a point of connection comparing charts, well, that’s its own kind of small miracle. Even if it’s all bullshit. If you’d like, I can explore astrological symbolism, analyze Bolgiano’s humor, or write another blog‑style essay. Analyze Ralph Bolgiano humor Ralph Bolgiano’s humor, as seen in Some Light, Some Serious, is best understood as a blend of wry observation, gentle self‑mockery, and a kind of philosophical shrug—humor that doesn’t try to impress you so much as invite you to notice the oddities of being human. There are no direct analyses of Bolgiano’s style in the search results, so what follows is an inference based on his writing voice rather than external commentary. The closest relevant material from search results concerns dark or satirical humor in other contexts—such as the psychologically abrasive humor of Ralph Cifaretto in The Sopranos and the satirical, socially reflective humor in works like Ciao Marziano . While these are not Bolgiano, they help triangulate what his humor is not: it isn’t cruel, performative, or aggressively satirical. Bolgiano’s humor tends to work differently: 🌿 Core Traits of Bolgiano’s Humor Gentle Irony — He often highlights human contradictions without judging them. Self‑effacing wit — He treats his own thoughts as slightly ridiculous, inviting the reader to smile along. Philosophical playfulness — Big ideas appear in small, domestic moments, making the profound feel approachable. Conversational warmth — His essays feel like a friend thinking aloud, not a performer delivering punchlines. Why It Works Bolgiano’s humor is disarming. It doesn’t demand laughter; it rewards attentiveness. He uses understatement the way others use exaggeration, finding comedy in the quiet places—hesitations, small rituals, and the way people explain themselves. If you want, I can write a Bolgiano‑style breakdown of a topic of your choice, or dive deeper into Bolgiano’s voice.

I tried again

I wrote this to my Congressman. Ben Cline, 5th district representative to the United States congress: I have noticed that you rarely invoke Donald Trump’s name. You seem to support all of his policies but seem to think that you are insulated from his crude, immature, erratic, immoral, and illegal behavior. I believe that as you continue to support him and his policies, you are obligated to your constituents to comment on his behavior and justify your continued support. Specifically, I am referring to his shockingly boorish, racist, and childish post on Truth Social of the Obamas depicted as apes: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/feb/06/trump-barack-obama-michelle-truth-social-epstein-latest-news-updates We deserve to hear your justification for not addressing behavior like his childish AI generated videos and why it is to the benefit of your constituents to accept Donald Trump as a legitimate president considering his lack of judgement, maturity, and fitness of mind. Please make an announcement as to why you believe that he is fit to be president of the United States of America, and how you believe that this honorably represents your constituents? I got the "perfect" response. His staff addressed not one of my questions or comments thereby proving the point I made in my first and second sentences. See below: *********** Dear Mr. Bolgiano, Thank you for contacting my office regarding political speech and rhetoric. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter. As you know, free speech in America is enshrined in our Constitution and forms the foundation of our government and society. All Americans have the right to express themselves and their viewpoints free from governmental interference or persecution. All voices contribute in a constitutional republic, and a healthy diversity of thought strengthens public discussion and can lead to sound policymaking. Since coming to Congress in 2019, I have also introduced or co-led nine pieces of legislation that have become law and are all bipartisan. I was the first Freshman Republican lawmaker to have a bill signed into law during the Democrat-led 116th Congress. In the 119th Congress I have introduced ten pieces of bipartisan legislation that are currently awaiting action on the House Floor. As a member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, I work actively to address issues aimed at helping my constituents, from higher education to domestic violence prevention. Public engagement remains essential to the strength of our communities. I encourage my constituents to get involved in any way they can, whether that be volunteering in their communities, voicing opinions in discussions with friends or neighbors, or taking the time to educate themselves on issues that are the most important to them and their communities. Thank you again for contacting my office on this important topic. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of further assistance. To receive the latest updates from my office, I encourage you to sign up for my e-newsletter at cline.house.gov, like/follow my Facebook, X, and Instagram. Sincerely,