Tag Archives: Twitter

Editor’s Inbox – The short-term budget vote

Damian Gadal (CC)

Damian Gadal (CC)

Damian Gadal (CC)


Here at Conservative Daily News, we read what you probably don’t have the stomach to digest. All the liberal tripe out there is what we wade through each day, and that includes getting that nonsense in our inbox. Today’s little gem comes from the folks over at Organizing for America – the perpetual Obama-campaign machine – and they are more than a little upset over the budget vote today. Of course, that’s not surprising since their boss was bellyaching over it already on Twitter.

What has them so angry is that the GOP members of the House added a measure to defund Obamacare in their bill to fund the Government for next few months. As reported in The Washington Post, here’s the tally:

Final tally: 230 to 189
How many Republicans voted for the bill?: 228
How many Democrats voted against the bill?: 188
How many Republicans voted against the bill?: 1
How many Democrats voted for the bill?: 2
How many lawmakers didn’t vote?: 14
How many seats are vacant?: 2

As for OFA’s response? Well, they’re operating under the assumption that John Boehner can’t control his House. Yes, you read that right. It couldn’t possibly have anything to do with constituents of the Representatives telling them that they don’t want ObamaCare. No, it must be that Boehner can’t keep his ducks in a row. Well, for those of you that can’t believe the audacity of that assertion, here’s the letter itself:

ofaboehnernote

(You can click on it, for easier reading.)

#MakeCollegeAffordable backfires for liberals

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)

Donkey Hotey (CC)


As Obama, the campaigner-in-chief, started a bus tour today touting his new plan to make college affordable, Twitter users decided to voice their own thoughts on his ideas. Like many liberal initiated hashtags, this one was hijacked by conservatives that are apparently fed up with government interference in all facets of life.

makecollegeaffordable1

Of course the free market option was brought up, as was the logical result of easy loans for students. The more money the government makes available for students to borrow, the more colleges will charge for their services. Then there was one that points out something that really should remain in the back of the minds of everyone. Is this latest tour just another ploy to get the public focused on anything but the myriad of scandals that have been dogging this administration from practically the very beginning? That very well could be part of the case, but the most likely reason for this little tour is to solidify support of younger voters that have been straying away from the Democrat party.

makecollegeaffordable2

Then there is Tim Wells (@rightwingnerd) that offers a couple priceless tidbits. Yes, Obama is interested in getting the student vote, but he’s also interested in keeping academia happy with him, especially since ObamaCare isn’t so popular on at least one campus. So, take from one pocket, while putting something in the other would be the theme for this trip. Also, pointing out the obvious, Wells shows that a college degree is not necessarily what one absolutely must have to be a success in life. BuzzFeed even offers a list of particularly successful folks that actually dropped out of school. One even made it to the White House.

Now, if you really want to find out about Obama’s new idea to tie federal aid packages to actual college costs, by all means take a look. However, one has to remember that this is an Obama plan. In order to be implemented, it will probably have to be shoved down the throats of the members of Congress, while they are told that they have to pass it to know what’s in it. There will be many promises about how it will help to reduce the costs of higher education, but because it is injecting more government money into the mix, it’s a fair guess that the schools will do exactly what was said previously – it will undoubtedly cause increases in tuition rates. And finally, there will be many corrections on the actual cost of the program, and eventually the CBO will come back with numbers that exceed initial estimates by trillions of dollars. Of course, those are all just guesses on how this will turn out, but educated ones, since we’ve heard this line before.

Could THIS Be the Bomber?

image

4-18-13 UPDATE: “Leaked photos” are expected to be officially released today in a news conference, accordinging to the New York Post and several other media sources. At least one photo rumored to be useful to authorities was part of this post yesterday. The New York Post is reporting the 2 young men in the “leaked” photos have been cleared of any wrong doing, though no official statement from law enforcement has been made.

4-18-13 UPDATE 2: Cleared by investigators. Multiple sources say 2 young men cleared of any involvement.
image

Twitter has proven the source of breaking news time and again when traditional media outlets fail. The Representative Anthony Weiner scandal, Fast and Furious, and more recently the Gosnell death trial have all gained nationwide attention due to the mountains of information available via social media.
image

We just might thank Twitter once again when it comes to the Boston Marathon bombings if David Shor is correct in his prediction.

Shor, who uses the Twitter handle @IshYimini, spent more than 2 hours last night researching, posting and trying to get the attention of media regarding a photo of a man in the crowd near the finish line carrying a large nylon bag. The bag, with thick black and grey strap, bears a striking resemblance to the one used in one of the two bombs found in the rubble.

image

Shor said that he has contacted the FBI about his research, but as of the early morning hours of Wednesday hadn’t heard any updates.

Officials have not yet named a suspect in the terror attack, nor have many details been released about the person or persons who are to blame. Perhaps trolling Twitter could lead to some promising leads.

See the original crowd photo here: Flickr.com/photos
*****************************************

4-17-13 UPDATE: More INCREDIBLE comparison photos here: IMGUR.com

*****************************************
Follow EJ Haust on Twitter!

North Korea social media hacked

petersnoopy (CC)

petersnoopy (CC)

petersnoopy (CC)


If you were keeping track of some official North Korean social media accounts and saw some odd posts from them, that wasn’t a mistake. Apparently they were hacked. Notably, the North’s Uriminzokkiri Twitter and Flickr accounts were hit, and ceased sending out typical posts depicting Kim Jong Un with the military.

Instead, a picture posted Thursday on the North’s Flickr site shows Kim’s face with a pig-like snout and a drawing of Mickey Mouse on his chest. Underneath, the text reads: “Threatening world peace with ICBMs and Nuclear weapons/Wasting money while his people starve to death.”

Another posting says “We are Anonymous” in white letters against a black background. Anonymous is a name of a hacker activist group.

Tweets, on the other hand, simply said “hacked”, and offered links to North Korea related sites. As a rule, the accounts are used to promote state initiatives, praise the North Korean system of government, and promote commentaries from the state-run media outlet – Korean Central News Agency. The Twitter account has been open since 2010, and has approximately 13,000 followers.

Posting Pics of Passed out Pals, the New Craze?

online buzz

With the advent of social media came the opportunity to share embarrassing pictures with friends on a large scale. These snapshots might be seen as funny at age 15 or even 21 but what about at 25 or even 35? Especially when looking for a job, these ‘tagged’ internet images, might well cause an employer to choose a less controversial job applicant.

Is it just a fun craze or will it cause problems down the road? Further encouraging these awkward and possibly humiliating smart phone shots of drunken friends is a new Twitter account inviting students from the University of New Hampshire to tweet pictures of their passed out pals.

The “UNH Blackout” Twitter page shares graphic pictures of unconscious young adults who imbibe in too much alcohol. As seen in the video, many of the UNH students find the photos amusing and think these compromising shots are just in good fun.

The students may be surprised when they apply for actual jobs to discover that employers now regularly check the internet and social media for applicant information. They may be further surprised to learn that, once posted, nothing is ever really gone from the internet.

 

 

Dismantling Washington

anh-usa.org
Washington, D.C. (which the DC part now stands for dirty cesspool) should become a thing of the past. Society has outgrown the need for a centralized government full of power hungry aristocrats, greedy lobbyists, and corrupt white collar criminals.

When I say criminals I am not just talking in the abstract; I am referring to real criminals.

According to a study from the online publication Capitol Hill Blue, the American people have elected a bunch of politicians that are better at breaking laws than making laws. America’s low information voters have chosen some real class acts to represent them.

Just how bad are some of our members of Congress?

29 members have been accused of spousal abuse, 7 have been arrested for fraud, 19 have been accused of writing bad checks, 117 have bankrupted at least 2 businesses, 3 have been arrested for physical assault, 71 have such bad credit that they can’t even qualify for a credit card, (yet with their special clearance as a member of Congress they get an Amex card without having a credit check.) 14 have been arrested on drug related charges, 8 have been arresting for shoplifting, and at least 84 members of Congress have been stopped for drunk driving but subsequently let go once they showed they were members of Congress.

If all that hasn’t made you lose your lunch this sure will.

According to the 2013 Congressional schedule, Congress will take 239 days off! That means they will only “work” 126 days of the year. If that wasn’t bad enough these hardly working, drunk driving, womanizing, bad credit, criminals get paid a minimum of $175,000 a year. Not bad for 126 days of so called work. They have worked themselves so hard that they don’t even have the strength to create a budget. The last time our dedicated public servants passed a budget was April 29, 2009. That is an unbelievable mind boggling 1,415 days without a budget, and counting.

This article’s intent is not to highlight the ineptness and unprincipled actions of our corrupt Congress; instead its purpose is to illustrate just how incidental and unnecessary Washington, DC has become. Former Republican Presidential nominee Rick Perry may not have been able to talk his way out of a paper bag; however he had the political will and courage to tell the American people that if he were to be elected President he would make Congress a part time job.

I couldn’t agree with him more. In fact, I’d like to take his suggestion a little further and dismantle Washington, DC altogether; and here is how we can do it.

We live in a virtual and digital society in which nothing seems impossible. The constant advancements in technology have created a very mobile society. We live in a world where you can start your car, turn the lights on and off in your house, and check your blood pressure, all by using your I-phone. There is no reason why Congress can’t conduct official government business from their respective state Capitols. Think about how much money they could save in travel expenses and housing alone?

With email, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, video conferencing, and websites such as gotomeeting.com; there is no shortage of technology that could be utilized to perform the everyday functions of Congress from outside of Washington, DC.

According to census.gov, 1 out of 10 workers over the age of 65 works from home. This is a growing trend that is only going to continue as more businesses look for ways to cut operating expenses and increase productivity. With so many older workers still in the workforce due to the Obama economy; many of these workers work from home.

Companies that employ workers who telecommute save on expenses such as office space, equipment, furniture, and supplies. Employees who work from home are able to save money on such expenditures as clothing, childcare, parking, and gasoline. Also, some studies have shown that workers who telecommute are more effective and efficient at their jobs than those who work in the office. Why not extend that same invitation to members of Congress?

According to statistics from the 112th Congress, the average age of a member of the House of Representatives is 57 years and the average age of a member of the Senate is 63 years. These folks should be required to work remotely from their respective states and only come into Washington a few times a month to cast votes.

Washington, DC is 68.3 square miles of influence, corruption, and centralized power. The only way to change Washington is to remove the influence, corruption, and power from it; and that starts with Congress. The only way to do this is by forcing members of Congress to not congregate permanently in Washington, DC.

A suggestion would be to pass a law in which no member of Congress is allowed to have permanent residence within 100 miles of Washington, DC. By doing this you automatically decentralize the influence and power, and make it harder for lobbyists and power brokers to influence fiscal policy. This is how you change Washington, DC.

To some who are reading this I understand it may sound a bit Orwellian. Telling free people where they can and cannot live may seem a little extreme. What is more extreme is having career politicians drunk with power spending future generation’s money on programs they can’t pay for. We are at a time in our nation’s history in which the only real solutions require real drastic measures.

The truth is that absolute power corrupts absolutely. If we take away Congress’s power we can return it to its rightful owners; we the people. Most Democrats who read this will think I’m crazy. Even some Republicans will think this is a bad idea; however most limited government Conservatives will love it. My only hope is that those members of Congress who believe in freedom, liberty, and limited government read my article and introduce legislation based on this idea. A good idea can only become a great idea when it is acted upon.

As a political strategist, commentator, and radio talk show host my job is to give solutions, not talking points. I may not always be right, but I am always thinking outside the box about different ways to make America a better, stronger, and freer country. If we are serious about saving this country and truly believe in a limited government it is time we put our money where our mouth is and dismantle Washington, once and for all.

Suggested by the author:
www.joshbernsteinpoliticalwriter.com
Dreams from my surrogate father
Now that Pope Benedict XVI has resigned who should replace him?
How the left uses identity politics and fear tactics to influence voters
The puppets of Pyongyang

250,000 Twitter accounts hacked by Anonymous

Twitter hacked by Anonymous

Twitter’s information security department has confirmed that 250,000 twitter accounts may have been compromised by the hacker group Anonymous.

Twitter’s director of information security, Bob Lord,  said that they detected unusual access patterns including unauthorized attempts to access user data. The data accessed included usernames, email addresses and passwords.

This attack was not the work of amateurs, and we do not believe it was an isolated incident. The attackers were extremely sophisticated, and we believe other companies and organizations have also been recently similarly attacked.

The attack seems to have been limited to usernames, email addresses, session tokens and encrypted/hashed passwords. To protect the Twitter users who may have been compromised, the social media giant has reset passwords and revoked session tokens for accounts suspected of being hacked.

In Deep with Michelle Ray – Conservative Offense

In Deep with Michelle Ray

When: Thursday, Janurary 17th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: In Deep with Michelle Ray on Blog Talk Radio

What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.

Tonight: I am joined by bestselling author and Breitbart.com editor, Ben Shapiro, attorney and Twitter warrior Todd Kincannon, and The Young Cons co-founder, Josh Riddle . This is how the Right learns offense.

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on Blog Talk Radio

In Deep with Michelle Ray – Meet The Twisters

twisters-twitter

When: Thursday, December 20th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: In Deep with Michelle Ray on Blog Talk Radio

What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.
twisters-twitter

Tonight: I am joined by @TheTwisters to have a candid discussion about family values in America and why nine women who met on Twitter decided to jump head first into politics. Please follow all of The Twisters on Twitter: @0402sgrl, @1SupremeGoddess, @Conservativeind @asskickymchotti, @runedart, @hipechik, @suzibasterd, @flyingpatriot, and me… @GaltsGirl

Atheist Take on the Tweeting Pontiff

Take the Pope, a social media juggernaut, and millions of people with the ability to interact without filters, and what do you get? The debut of the @Pontifex account on Twitter was aptly (if not intentionally) timed for 12-12-12, and it took nearly no time for Pope Benedict XVI’s personal account to garner close to a million followers – and at least a few detractors.

pontifex1

It isn’t surprising that at least a few would take the opportunity to attempt to communicate directly with the Pope about the Catholic Church covering up the scandal of child molestation by priests. It remains to be seen if the Pontiff’s personal Twitter account will be used to answer such questions, if they receive answers in any form from the Vatican.

pontifex2

Of course there was also the profane. I do not believe in a deity, and while I was raised Catholic, I excommunicated myself from the church over a decade ago. However, even at the lowest points, I can truthfully say I never considered spewing profanity at any religious leaders within the Catholic Church – let alone the Pope. Believe, disbelieve – agree, or disagree, it doesn’t matter. This nonsense is a symptom of the fact that people are not raised to respect themselves or each other anymore.

pontifex3

On the other side of the child molestation issue are the victims. These tweets will unfortunately be too common – perhaps some will be fabricated, although it is hard to wrap one’s mind around the concept of anyone doing such a thing. However, the bottom line remains that if the Pope will actually end up reading the tweets sent to his personal account, these should be some of the most difficult for him to read. Again, it remains to be seen if this account will be used for any sort of personal interaction – no matter what, it probably is not wise to even suggest that these tweets receive responses publicly, no matter how much it might make the faithful feel better about the past (and present.)

As an atheist, and former member of the Catholic Church, I am ambivalent about this step into the 21st century for the Vatican. I would prefer to see modernization in other areas first, such as an abandonment of stringent restrictions against disease preventing condoms in the regions where they can do the most good, by not only preventing disease, but also reducing the number of children born into poverty. I’ve said many times to people of many faiths, that if their deity is omnipotent, and omniscient, there is no way humans could come up with something that their deity did not intend in the first place – good or evil. Well, we’ll have to see if this little foray into the world of social media has any affect on the Vatican going forward. Maybe direct exposure to the antipathy that is often expressed about religion in general, and Catholicism will break the Pope from his echo chamber in Rome. Maybe this will be a real chance for him to see the views of the people, unfiltered. Or more likely, this will just be an account managed by one underling or another in Vatican City. We shall see.

Sen. Leahy – What Are You Doing!?

Screen Shot 2012-11-20 at 2.43.56 PM

Do Democrats see the United Kingdom as a model for their version of the surveillance society?  What on earth could Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) be thinking offering legislation that gives authorities access to personal information with no more than a formal written request and the contents of those communications with nothing more than a subpoena?

According to Declan McCullagh of C|Net, Sen. Leahy thinks it’s perfectly fine for law enforcement officials to troll your emails, twitter, and Facebook without a warrant.  It’s a perverse exploitation of the law, which hasn’t caught up to 21st Century standards – and any American who values their liberty should be appalled by this gross incident of congressional overreach.

McCullagh wrote today that:

Leahy’s rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — to access Americans’ e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge.

It’s an abrupt departure from Leahy’s earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boastedlast year that his bill “provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by… requiring that the government obtain a search warrant.”

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys’ Association and the National Sheriffs’ Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to “reconsider acting” on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

Here are the revisions:

✭ Grants warrantless access to Americans’ electronic correspondence to over 22 federal agencies. Only a subpoena is required, not a search warrant signed by a judge based on probable cause.

✭ Permits state and local law enforcement to warrantlessly access Americans’ correspondence stored on systems not offered “to the public,” including university networks.

✭ Authorizes any law enforcement agency to access accounts without a warrant — or subsequent court review — if they claim “emergency” situations exist.

✭ Says providers “shall notify” law enforcement in advance of any plans to tell their customers that they’ve been the target of a warrant, order, or subpoena.

✭ Delays notification of customers whose accounts have been accessed from 3 days to “10 business days.” This notification can be postponed by up to 360 days.

Now, this afternoon, The Hill reported that the senator had no such intention to support a bill with warrantlees searches.

CNET has it wrong,” an aide tweeted from Leahy’s account.”Sen. Leahy does NOT support an #ECPA exception to search warrant requirement [for] civil enforcement [for agencies] like FTC, SEC.” A Judiciary Committee aide confirmed to The Hill that Leahy “does not support broad carve-outs for warrantless email searches.” Leahy is pushing a bill that would revise the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986. The Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Leahy’s measure next week.

But we must remain vigilant. As long as Federalism remains under threat, we must keep a close eye on bills, from both parties, that seek to make us safer – while sacrificing our freedoms in the process.

Debate Tonight!

Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

10/2/12 Tonight marks the first of three debates between President Obama and his opponent Mitt Romney. It will be hosted at the University of Colorado and moderated by PBS’s Jim Lehrer (making his 13th Presidential Debate appearance). This also may be the first time the nation at large will get to see the “real” candidates. During the 2008 elections Obama was an unknown quantity, a blank canvas on which Americans could project their own ideas of who Barack Obama was, and who they hoped him to be. This time around Obama has a record, a string of scandals and an air of arrogance that has surprised many of his supporters. Since the mainstream media has already been grossly negligent in reporting on the Obama administration, tonight will be the first time the public will be able to see Obama directly challenged on his dismal record.

This will also be the first time many non-Republicans will get to see Mitt Romney in action. Tonight will be an opportunity for Romney to show America his “real” personality as opposed to what gets shown on the biased evening news reports from a negligent (yes, I used the word again because it cannot be overstated) national media. If played right, this could be Romney’s Reagan moment. Just like Reagan did in 1980 when running against Carter, Romney could have the opportunity to show a lighter side than has been painted in the media; to break away from the “evil Republican” caricature and give Americans the opportunity to say “Gee, I never realized he was such a likable guy”.

Already the mainstream media and the Obama campaign (one in the same, basically) have been hard at work lowering expectations for his performance tonight. There is no doubt that this debate is Romney’s to lose…but then again, Republicans have always been good at securing defeat from the jaws of victory.

There should be no issues finding a broadcast to watch this evening as nearly every major station will be covering the event, but here is a link to one live stream if you prefer to watch online. And don’t forget to follow me on Twitter as I’ll be live-tweeting the debate tonight and that is ALWAYS entertaining. You can follow me @kiradavis422 or just click on the Twitter button right here on the site to get connected.

Does A High Klout Score Mean That Your Tweets Are “Good”?

For the past week, I’ve been grousing over Michael Arrington’s sudden about-face in regards to the website Klout.  For years now, Arrington has been happy to relegate Klout to the pile of irrelevance, and I was in agreement with him.  But then he released this blog post last week that not only says he “likes” Klout now, but he’s also invested in the company.  I lamented so much that I spent 20 minutes complaining about it on last Saturday’s show.  I then called into Michelle Ray’s show last night and lamented again.

The reason is this, and it’s a simple one:  Klout cannot determine whether tweets are “good” or not, and a lot of people seem to get the idea that it can.  The service claims to measure how much influence you have, but all it really does is measure how many people reply to you on a social network site.

Users might think that a high Klout score means that they’re important or influential or that they say really good things, but all it really means is that people respond to them on sites like Twitter and Facebook.  And in a lot of ways, it rewards bad behavior.

Don’t believe me?  Below is the Klout score of a notorious (and some would say racist) troll on Twitter.  This is a man who has a relatively small number of followers, and you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks he contributes anything “good” to Twittter, but he has a higher score than most people I follow, and it’s only ten points off of the highest scored Conservative tweeters I know.  He did this by insulting pretty much anyone he comes across and watching his Klout score climb as they respond to his vitriol.  It’s just that easy.

 

 

This is not to say that the only way to attain a high Klout score is to spam and insult people; there are plenty of good folks on social media who contribute good things and are rewarded everyday, but it is dangerous, if not reckless to conflate high(er) Klout scores with good tweeting, or even good behavior.  We have to use our brains and try to keep track of the worthwhile tweeters, ourselves.  We can’t just assume that high scores equal good contributors.

It’s not just trolls you have to consider, either.  Another reason that Klout can’t be trusted as the end all be all and arbiter of who is a good tweeter is that it has no way of knowing which tweeters have been blacklisted.  I discussed blacklisting of tweeters on Saturday’s show, but I can offer some examples here too.

Simply put, when well known or influential tweeters want to shut down someone they see as a rival, they often put out ultimatums to their followers to not retweet, follow, or reply to certain people.  While I primarily spend time in Conservative circles on Twitter, it’s not just politics where this happens.  Just today, I saw a comedian discussing how comedians put the same kind of pressure on people in their circles to freeze rival comedians out.  I’m sure this takes place in plenty of demographics on social media, but Klout has no way of knowing when this has happened to someone.  As such, Klout can never be trusted as a tool to point you to the “good” people on social media.  It can only point you to who is “popular”.  And a lot of people have become “popular” by either trolling or being manipulative.  Again, a higher Klout score does not mean that the person or their content is any “good”.

So what do we do?  Should we dismiss Klout altogether?  That’s a tough question.  Because even if Klout did perfectly determine who was providing good content, you’d be doing yourself, and everyone else, a disservice by using it to discriminate in favor of or against people based solely on a Klout score.  In my gut, I feel that there could be good uses for a site like Klout, but when pressed to tell you some of what they might be, I come up empty.  So, as things stand, I can’t recommend the use of Klout as tool for determining good tweeters or content, but I’m not ready to completely give up on the site either.  My advice is to take Klout scores with a grain of salt, or better yet, a ten pound bag.  We still have to determine where good content is coming from for ourselves.

50 Shades of Conservative

Mikamatto (CC)

With the recent popularity of the novel Fifty Shades of Grey, the world of BDSM has been thrust into the mainstream. There is a twisted sort of irony to this, since this lifestyle – perhaps more importantly, some of the portions of the information about it online – have been either under fire, or used as ammunition in assorted arguments among conservatives on Twitter. For the record, this is a distraction, like just about anything else that causes conservatives in general to fight among themselves.

Mikamatto (CC)

However, I thought it might not be a bad idea to take this opportunity to point out a few interesting facts about BDSM that were apparently either skipped entirely, or at least misrepresented in the novel. First, I’d like to start with something obvious – yes, there are conservatives out there that engage in some form of BDSM, whether it involves inflicting pain, or simply involves a dominant and submissive relationship dynamic (D/s). Come on now folks! Let’s start using those little gray cells, shall we? There are some out there that would argue that many “traditional” marriages are really just committed D/s relationships, with one being generally dominated by the other. It’s logical, if you really think about it. If both are dominant, logic says they’ll constantly battle each other for supremacy. On the other end, neither one wants to take charge, so they can easily end up being undecided about the simplest of things. Now, if one is relatively dominant, and the other relatively submissive, that lends itself to a much more harmonious existence. Add a few sex toys to the bedroom, and that’s a recipe for a kinky relationship.

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

Now, onto the little things that bothered me about that lovely little book. First of all, anyone that decides to get into a master and slave contract with someone without knowing them for quite some time beforehand is downright insane. And no, I’m not buying that a virgin would jump into that lifestyle from the beginning either. But, the biggest fallacy is that the dominant is completely in control. The author made a valiant effort to show the dynamic accurately, but missed the target by failing to stress that the submissive is actually the one in control. Assuming that it is a safe, sane and consensual relationship in the first place, the dominant cannot do anything without the prior permission of the submissive. The dominant only has power because it is given by the submissive. That message needed to be repeated, and often. It’s irresponsible not to do that in this sort of writing, since it could (and did) have a wide general appeal. I’m not even going to get into the little details that just don’t ring true.

In case you didn’t guess it yet, I’m not writing this from a theoretical point of view. This is a “been there, and done that” for me, and no, I am not answering on whether or not it’s only in my past – my personal life, my marriage, my choices, my business. But, I will say a little bit more about my past. I’ve known several politically conservative couples over the years that consider themselves members of the BDSM community. Honestly, the majority of the couples I knew with dominant men paired with submissive women were conservatives. That is my personal experience, so it is anecdotal at best. But, that doesn’t make it meaningless either. And, my personal introduction to at least part of this world was with two men (not at the same time, of course!) that were conservative.

My primary point is that what people do in their bedrooms used to be at least relatively sacred, as in others respected their privacy. And any intimate matters used to be off limits. That doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. Sometimes it takes the form of people wanting government to help them “save people’s souls” from sin. If anyone doesn’t know my lack of concern for those non-issues by now, they haven’t been paying attention. But what really disturbs me is what appears to be a rampant disease of trying to dig up dirt on other conservatives – out the skeletons in their closets, or otherwise ridicule them. In case you can’t guess, I have nothing but contempt for people that do that sort of thing. That’s saying something, since there was a time when I wasn’t above yanking skeletons from the closets of politicians.

So, here it is – conservatives can be kinky. There is no law against it. There is nothing to be ashamed of if one chooses to do something off the wall in the bedroom, as long as it’s “safe, sane and consensual.” And there is nothing wrong with conservative adults enjoying or creating visual or literary arts that depict those kinky activities. I understand that there are many conservatives that find this sort of thing offensive, and that’s obviously fine as well. It is not fine for conservatives to force each other to view, read about, or participate in kinky sex. That said, like it or not, this is one thing the Libertarians got right – the intimate relationships of life are not meant for public or governmental interference. That’s why we call them “intimate.”

*Special thanks to Kurt Schlichter for being his #caring self, and coming up with the title for this post!

« Older Entries