Brave New World Order?

The following is a guest post written by Jim Wixson of Independence, Oregon:

It’s just about dawn before the execution of the nation we loved.  I have read, watched and listened to so many analyses – with varying claims of authority – but have seen so little fact, lonely as a cork bobbing in the ocean of opinion, that this alone has discouraged me.

So many Believers have assured me that it’s all going to end right, just you wait, Trump knows what he is doing; we’re going to release the kraken (why has it taken so long?), the Supreme Court will save the day – or that a secret weapon is waiting in the wings.  But aside from ONE tabulation (https://hereistheevidence.com), no facts of consequence.   The cited tabulation ran to forty-odd pages of specific, viewable court filings – enough to take a year or more of adjudication.  But these were last moments, and it was clear that nothing would, could be done unless they worked their way to the Supreme court.  i really wanted a miracle to happen, but cannot disengage that still, small voice which said “it ain’t gonna happen.”  Now the Electoral College will announce the fate of Our America – soon to become Their America, my bones tell me.

What went wrong?  How, with Trump’s greatest turnout ever, could the Left steal the Election from under Donald’s – and our noses?  Already, at his inauguration, anyone who gave the matter the slightest thought knew what was going to happen.  Who could be so naive as to believe that the Dems, long famous for stealing elections in the big cities of our country, would change their spots?  Especially in this, their hope, planned, arranged and financed coup d’etat?  King George would buy back the country – and the socialist revolution, so often planned, so frequently floundered, could spring to life out of the ashes of failed coups.  A time of great rejoicing among the ancient subspecies of those who think that they know better than all the rest of us – the snakes in the garden of Liberty.

The Game Watchers, the In-the Knowers who set the odds in great national dramas detected from early on that Donald, though not handicapped by hesitation or self-doubt, was nevertheless out of his league in the national political ring, where connection and sponsorship are everything.  And, shrewd as he may be, understands only cupidity, cannot read men’s hearts and does not know who his friends are, nor have the guile to negotiate nuanced communities of interest – in short, cannot play the Washington Game.

I indulged myself the hope that he – or more credibly, his backers had a plan, had looked down the road and knew how the hustle was played; that he was paying attention to higher stakes than Twitter – a hope based on desperation.  But, in the words of my father, we live in hope and die in despair.  So i fear it will be.

Though many sneer at him for lack of sophistication, he was and is much more centered in the reality that ordinary folks – those concerned where their next dollar would come from, families which could suddenly be stricken by misfortune, illness or loss of a job.  And for jobs themselves, which we have seen melt by millions to offshore manufacturing, illegal workers willing to live lifestyles from which Americans thought they had escaped two centuries ago – due to their great good fortune of being born here, a reverence for hard work, standing on one’s own two feet and not having to apologize to anyone.  To a family of a man and a woman who pledged love and support unto death, and to their own children, who gave life a purpose which continued to the generations beyond, and never lost meaning – the hope and fulfillment of their own lives.  These, and respect for learning, country and God, made a life which never lacked meaning, purpose, duty or satisfaction, when dedication produced result and one could die in contentment of feeling worth in their own liveis and in the hope of something better to follow.

Not content with tearing down marriage and sowing confusion about gender and sexuality, another long-term Progressive goal has long been to tear apart the bonds of a peaceful nation – of the very society which de Tocqueville praised as the best on earth: cooper­ative, productive, self-respecting and peace-loving – and universally respected as such, most sincerely by the millions from all over the world, clamoring to immigrate.  

Since the middle of the nineteenth century the hotly-sought goal of the social engineers, whether of the Right or of the Left, has been to foment class warfare, and to rise to power on the tide of resentment conjured by them.  And this has often been successful – for brief periods of history, back as far as we know.  Certainly in the rise of the Black Shirts, Brown Shirts and then Red Shirts we see the ancient wheel of Revolution turn, always with the same result: envy and resentment turn to anger and aggression, on which the stokers rise to power – and as ever the discontented find that their brave new society, is no more – and in many ways less satisfactory than the one they willingly abandoned.  Which leads to new grievances.  And new rulers, no better – and often worse and more corrupt and self-seeking than those the rebels had rejected.

At which point fresh plotters assemble and scheme what new levers of discontent they might use to once again turn the ancient wheel.

New to this age-old intrigue is internationalism.  Humanity’s last best hope is now tarred as the villain – and the only one, among the nations; America’s detractors do not find a bad word for such hell-holes as North Korea, Venezuela or Zimbabwe.  Instead, the very country which saved Europe from fascism, which vowed to “pay any price, bear any burden…in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty,” now stands in the dock of manufactured world condemnation for whatever it does or does not, while China, the New World Menace is busy expanding its borders, fortifying the China sea, manufacturing viruses and attempting to create economic dependence of the world upon itself – its avowed chief target being this very same United States.

Donald knew this, of course, and was the sole American President who had the intestinal fortitude to openly call attention to and oppose such ill will  Which brought a chorus of cat-calls from an all-too willing, China-appeasing Europe – the attest ploy of New World Order: tear down this nation from the outside as well as inside.

Progressives do not have to think back far to hear their self-proclaimed saviors touting eugenics and supporting social engineering as typified by Lenin’s New Soviet Man – indeed, members of Roosevelt’s self-named Brain Trust praising Benito Mussolini,  And before that, Prohibition and prosecution of drug users.  

Now the New Left is playing the Long Game, having heard so many high-sounding proclamations which led to quick revolution – and noting they all ended where they started, has decided to take refuge in vague but grand-sounding slogans such as Equality (of what?), Environmentalism (carbon tax?) and an Anti-racism which turned out to be only anti-white racism.  And the absurd notion that gender is a male plot.  Just to mention some  of their current pablum.  

But these ever-moving targets are merely an attention-demanding drumbeat of unending discontent, stoked by a perpetual production of Victims, always persuaded to invent new grievances at the hands of guess whom: Whites, would you believe?  And most especially males, particularly those who grew up loving, and not infrequently having to defend, the land of their mothers and fathers.  These are the goats to be slaughtered on their altar of Progress, deserving the wrath of the Owners of Correctness by not voting for their lackeys.

Who could believe all this nonsense?  Well, it turns out that a great many of our college graduates do!  And this for the excellent reason that Progressives have long-since taken Cardinal Newman’s observation to heart, “give me a child by age of six and he’s mine for life.”   Thus their tireless and largely successful program of infiltrating our mainline religious and public educational institutions, where mild Christians were taught to ignore inconvenient parts of the Bible, and primary schools appropriated the role of mothers in teaching impressionable children how to behave and what to think.  With result that the chastised Bourgeoisie hearkened to the siren seductions of Niceness, and Youth warmed to militant appeals for Activism – such as the continuing sideshow in Portland.

We have raised a generation ignorant of history – and particularly of the unique grace of a nation once admired by the world.  

Of students untrained in Thinking – indeed misled to confuse it with Feeling – and graded on Correctness – resulting in a youth untroubled by classical literature, lessons of the past or Reason, honed by exacting argumentation, which had brought us every advantage we enjoyed over the benighted resignation of our human past.

Progressivism has thrived – now shrunken to post-Marxist derridian Deconstruction, where Power is all – and hopes to occupy the throne of the world’s Once-Marvel – realizing Orwell’s nightmare.  I must admit an awe at such an accomplishment; who’d a thunk it?

But special recognition must go to the Evil Genius behind the curtain: George Soros, nee Schwartz, the Man Who Broke the Bank of England.  This financial wizard has gone on to plunder the national bank of Thailand, take advantage of the tsunami in Japan (another billion-plus), and has had many other successes in large nations such as Germany, and many other smaller ones around the world.  It would not be exaggerating to say that he is a one-man money machine.  And since he cannot eat all that wealth and likely has more mansions than he could ever visit, what entertainment does he turn to?

Nation-building has been his modest pastime.  Long active, he was quick to take advantage of dissent in Poland, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union and his native Hungary – and later, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan and the Ukraine.  Emboldened by his successes and convinced that the strategic insertion of money can produce spectacular success, he determined to employ the tool he knew best into the wider world of democratic nations to promote changes inspired by his mentor Karl Popper.  Latter was a fierce opponent of tradition, which he called tribal, and advocated an Open Society of “individuality, criticism and humanitarianism” – perhaps difficult to fault – by “moral universalism” and the challenge of tradition.  

This pudding, when eaten, appears to be a roundhouse attack on any values which had formed a nation, mase its culture distinct and identifiable from other nations.  In our case it translated to, among others, derogation of Christian precepts and the Founding virtues of individuality, expression and the independence of every citizen as inviolable.  We are instead to become creatures of the State and particularly its administrators, to submit humbly to their perceptions and ministrations – and liable to severe chastisement if we did not.  To put it another way, our role is to dutifully obey the truths as revealed to us by this State, as it sees them – in god-like wisdom.  This State consists of our Rulers.

Here is a recipe for Anything Goes – as long as it comes from Above.  And our part is to do as we are told – never mind what we were taught or learned.  Their template of conformity can and does change over time, often unpredictably and mysteriously, as we see.  Continuous is only the terror and vituperation if we object or fail to keep step.  

We are to watch helplessly as our children are stewed in beliefs and actions foreign and repulsive to us – without daring to murmur.

And who are these warders?  Why, just the Chosen of George!  If, say, you are running for office of attorney general in a state, show yourself as willing to be a Good Do Be, you may sidle up to his money truck, busy traveling our once-nation – and Hiring Now.  

All you need do is what told – for instance, not to investigate voting fraud.  Never mind public opinion – you’ll have the job for life.  

If you mind your Ps and Qs.

And keep your eye on George!  The next step after adding America to his trophies is – you guessed it – Britain, Europe and then the World.  George intends to play God – and has said so.  (But our “news” wasn’t listening.)

The only fly in his ointment could be China – it is not for sale.  And its rulers are quite as cagey as he.

Welcome to our Brave New World Order!

Political Naivete

One of the themes of this blog is that we all read what reinforces our beliefs and to the extreme, our journalist class only reports what bolsters their chosen narrative.  You need to ask yourself if you can be well informed if you get your news from the Coastal Media which has been shown to be populated by in excess of 90% people who lean left of center.  You need to ask yourself if you can truly understand issues if you learned at the foot of college professors and high school teachers who have shown you only the view from far left of center (professors) and who care more about their union than their students (teachers).

Ask (and answer honestly) the following:

What has the NYT (any of the Coastal Media) published concerning:

1. The Great Barrington Declaration (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8810977/Coronavirus-Anti-lockdown-petition-calling-herd-immunity-reaches-30-000-signatures.html) of 1000s of scientists asking for a non-political solution to Covid-19;
2. The Brennan notes showing that Obama and Biden were briefed on the facts of the Russian Collusion hoax started by the Hilary Clinton Camp;
3. Why is the NYT coverage of Hunter Biden’s financial situation, source of income, and closeness to the Chinese and Russian/Ukranian governments not covered with anywhere near the zeal as are the similar facts of the lives of each of President Trump’s children;

Why do we only know one side of the Moon? It is all that we are shown.

What has he Done?

My wife and I have raised two sons. We are very proud of both of them. Both are great parents and very thoughtful people.

Our younger son responded recently to a piece that was decidedly pro-Trump that I sent to him ( Victor Davis Hanson – How American Journalism Died ). He is very good about being willing to read and discuss things even when they do not mesh with his thinking. This is very refreshing since most of my ‘progressive’ friends do not wish to discuss politics. They prefer to spout liberal talking points and indulge in character assassination.

He asked a very good question: “Do you really feel that Trump has accomplished a lot?” “I’m genuinely curious, because by my count,” he went on, “even on conservative priorities, he hasn’t done much at all (other than confirm conservative judges).” My immediate reaction to the question is that to not know of Mr. Trump’s many, varied accomplishments requires that you only read sources like the New York Times, Washington Post, etc. who routinely downplay or hardly mention anything contrary to the liberal view of our world.

So here is my answer to “What has Mr. Trump accomplished?”:

1. The Middle East. No previous President has been able to accomplish more in the Middle East than Donald Trump. He hired the right people to negotiate with Middle Eastern states and the result is a blockbuster treaty between Israel and Egypt. The recent Agreements between the UAE and Bahrain and Israel fall not far behind the Egypt-Israel deal. The mainstream media gave it little press. Had this been accomplished under Mr. Obama, it would have led to a second Nobel Peace Prize and more ink than they gave to ObamaCare. Mr. Obama, by the way, never even visited Israel until his second term. That alone telegraphed his lack of sincerity about Middle East peace. Mr. Trump has enforced both U.S. and U.N. sanctions on Iran putting them back in a box to the point where their support of Middle East terrorism is greatly diminished, ISIS is all but defunct, Syria and Libya are both returning to a more normal state.
2. China. Mr. Trump has stood up to the Chinese government who is robbing us of our technology, flooding our streets with fentanyl, using slaves and prisoners to manufacture goods to outcompete us. They continue to add more air pollution than any other nation.
3. Manufacturing. Mr. Trump’s efforts have resulted in the return to the U.S. of over 400,000 manufacturing jobs. Much of this was due to reductions in overbearing rules and regulations not burdening overseas competitors. A lot of the improvement was due to tax reductions included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).
4. NATO. Mr. Trump has caused most European nations to finally live up to their agreements to fund NATO in a more equitable manner.
5. NAFTA. As promised in his campaign for the presidency, Mr. Trump authored a renegotiation of the NAFTA agreement to the advantage of the U.S.A.
6. Southern Border/Illegal Immigration. Mr. Trump’s administration has supported the Border Patrol with completion of hundreds of miles of new and improved border ‘walls’ and fences. He has caused increased enforcement of immigration law.
7. Economy. Mr. Trump has presided over the greatest improvement in our economy, possibly ever, prior to the Covid 19 pandamic.
8. Unemployment. Unemployment has been lower under Mr. Trump’s watch than at any time in the past 50 years.
9. Space Force. The Trump Administration has recognized that Militarization in Space is already a fact of life with the Russians and Chinese badly outspending us in military use and even weaponizing space.
10. Decriminalizing Homosexuality/Conviction of Human Traffickers. The Trump administration has been leading a global drive to decriminalize homosexuality. Human Trafficking convictions have doubled. We have provided free HIV drugs to over 200,000 uninsured patients.
11. Prescription Drug prices. Prescription Drugs have been lowered in cost by actions of the Trump Administration.
12. Energy Self Sufficiency. The U.S. became the world’s largest Energy producer, eclipsing Saudi Arabia and Russia. Much of this was due to lessening burdensome regulations not faced by other producers. A lot of the increased production was due to innovation and the opening of means of transport for oil and natural gas.
13. Climate. Withdrew USA from Paris Climate Accord yet the USA still leads the world in reduction of Carbon Emissions.
14. The Courts. Has seated more conservative judges at all levels.
15. Israel. Moved U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
16. Environmental Protections. Increased Public lands by over 1,000,000 acres and created new National Monuments with the signing of the largest public lands bill in over a decade.

This is an incomplete list of Mr. Trump’s accomplishments. Most amazing to me is that he has done all these things while fighting attempts to impeach him based on fraud, lies, and fantasies. The Russia Collusion hoax, after over two years of investigation, resulted in no proof and which showed to have more conspiracy by the accusers than by Mr. Trump or his people. The abuses of the FISA system alone showed how desperate the Democrats were to overturn the election of 2016.

Mr. Trump’s efforts to clean up bad actors in numerous federal agencies has gained him the undying hatred of those who want things to stay as they are: a country where a Democrat can use a private email server to share classified documents to her benefit and not be brought to justice even after illegally wiping evidence from her hard drives, a country where government agencies can collude to prevent a President from taking office and then attempt to remove him from office by illegally spying on him and his people, a country where the Internal Revenue Service can be used as a tool to suppress conservative organizations……..

I ask myself the question, What motivates Mr. Trump? It must be his ego and his love of his country. The ego seems to be an essential part of the psyche of any major politician. It’s not pretty, but it seems to come with the package – can’t think of any recent exceptions. It can’t be money and power. He had more money prior to becoming President. He had plenty of power without all the problems associated with being President. He gave up a great deal of freedom to do this job. Ask the same question of the Clintons or the Obamas or Mr. Biden or Ms. Harris. All have become wealthier and more powerful since entering politics.

Last, I would ask, What has Mr. Biden done in 40+ years to compare to even one of the above accomplishments of Mr. Trump? And, do you truly believe that Mr. Biden is mentally and physically competent to do the job he hopes to have?

Do My Tax Dollars Subsidize Amazon?

I listen to Armstrong and Getty, a morning talk show, when I can.  Lately, there has been an advertisement on the nationally syndicated show warning that Congress is going to increase U. S. Postal Service Package rates by an amount four times what they are now.  The ad suggests that you should contact Congress and demand they not raise rates.

Among the arguments they give to not raise the rates is that this will hurt both small businesses and individuals in rural areas where they are dependent on USPS package deliveries.

I wondered, what person or group would spend the money for such ads and why?  Color me skeptical, but I can’t imagine any group of rural dwellers or small businesses that would find this such an important issue that they would devote scarce resources to these ads.  I wonder if it is a company like Amazon that is behind such ads.

It has been widely reported that the USPS delivers parcels for Amazon and loses money with every delivery.  With the Post Office losing Millions (Billions?) of dollars each year on carrying parcels it means we, taxpayers, are subsidizing parcel delivery.  Who stands to gain the most from taxpayer funded delivery?  My guess is that the big winner is Amazon.

Contrary to the argument in the advertisement that individuals living in rural areas and small businesses will lose the most if rates rise, I believe local businesses lose the most.  If, due to subsidized shipping, Amazon can offer the same product at the same or better price as your local shop (because they don’t have the bricks and mortar overhead), small businesses, especially in rural areas will not be able to compete.  When local businesses can no longer operate profitably against tax subsidized rivals, rural residents will not have the option to buy locally.

Instead of asking Congress not to raise package rates, why not ask that the USPS be paid fairly by Amazon and others?  Instead, suggest that tax dollars not be used to subsidize favored private enterprises.

See what you Choose to See

We all find and readily believe information and news that supports our beliefs.  That is human nature.  If you love your mother, you see her in the best light.  You see her work at the church, her caring way with your little sister, and her ability to make great meals on a tight budget.  You probably don’t see (or you block out) her alcoholism, her prejudices against those who are not like her, and her terrible taste in music.

Performers play to the audience for whom they perform.  Politicians make promises that fit the audience to whom they are speaking.  News Media outlets tailor their content to fit the demographic to whom they sell their information/news.

Take the New Yorker, for example.  This Manhattan-centric magazine fancies itself to be among the most important sources of news and information in the world.  “Today The New Yorker is considered by many to be the most influential magazine in the world, renowned for its in-depth reporting, political and cultural commentary, fiction, poetry, and humor.”  or so they say on their website https://www.newyorker.com/about/us.  And to prove how proud they are of themselves, they are currently running an ad campaign saying. “The New Yorker, Fighting Fake Stories with Real Ones.”

I’m sure that many, if not most, of their subscribers believe what the New Yorker prints because they want to believe it.  At the very least they accept news and information that only a ‘true believer’ could fail to question.  An article on September 23rd by Tad Friend, “Solve Climate Change?” illustrates this well.  Mr. Friend (dare I assume “he” is a Mr.?) wants you to believe that vegetable based “meat” products, like the Impossible Burger are a significant solution to reducing environmental costs through our eating habits.  I don’t think he makes a very good argument, but am fascinated by the “facts” he uses, without attribution, to tell his “Real Story.”

Did you know that, “One-third of the world’s arable land is used to grow feed for livestock” or that, “Razing forests to graze cattle—an area larger than South America has been cleared in the past quarter century—turns a carbon sink into a carbon spigot.”?  If you are a person who fits the New Yorker’s target demographic you will likely want to believe these two statements and not question them.

If you are open to questioning much of the Global Climate Change Mantra or at least not accepting every argument without question, you might try to understand what Mr. Friend is writing.  I interpret what he has written ( and believe he hopes you will interpret it) to mean that in the past 25 years, humans have deforested an area equal to the size of South America to graze cattle.  The South American land mass is just under 7,000,000 square miles or about 12% of earth’s land mass (easily found from numerous sources).  We have deforested 12% of earth’s land mass, in the last 25 years, for the purpose of cattle grazing?  Does that make sense to you?  We currently use almost one third of earth’s arable land mass to to grow feed for cattle?  Does that make sense to you?

I’m as skeptical of that as I am that the earth will cease to exist in 12 years if I don’t stop using plastic straws and plastic bags.  I think Mr. Friend (and his employers at the New Yorker) have very vivid imaginations.  Some would say they lie through their teeth to serve their far-left globalist agenda.

If you learn that a person tells a lie once, isn’t it incumbent on mature humans to question if that is the only lie that person has told/will tell.  Should you question if much or most of what that person says lacks truth?  That is the what I would assume of articles from the New Yorker.

 

Uncle Sam, the Monopoly Man

There is much debate today about whether our country’s health care system should be nationalized – run by the government.  Like most Libertarians and Conservatives, I think we have ample proof that this is a very bad idea.

To give further input to why I think Government Health Care is a bad idea, I give you the USPS, the United States Postal Service as an example of how poorly government run entities fare when compared with privately operated ones.  The link below (CATO Institute Testimony) is to a fairly long but thorough look at the USPS, its massive economic problems, and some solutions that need to be considered.  Unfortunately, few of the needed reforms will pass the gauntlet of politics.  Just a single item, personnel cost, is very unlikely to be addressed because of the power of unions over the politicians who need to let/require the USPS to reign in personnel costs.

I highly recommend reading “Uncle Sam, the Monopoly Man” (if you can find it – out of print since the ‘70s) which discusses many public goods and services and why we need to consider alternatives.  Almost 50 years ago it identified many of the problems faced by today’s Postal Service and suggested better alternatives.  Yet, here we are in 2019 with a Postal Service on track to lose in excess of $6 Billion this year and projected to lose $125 Billion over the next 10 years.

Even more important, read the CATO Institute testimony to the House Oversight Committee earlier this year – Restructuring the U.S. Postal Service: https://oversight.house.gov/sites/democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/Edwards%20-Cato%20Testimony.pdf

Were you aware that the average USPS employee costs our government over $85,000 per employee while it is just over $76,000 for each UPS Employee (mostly union members) and under $60,000 for each FedEx Employee (non-union)?

And that’s just a start.

How much do you pay the Government?

 

In my view, the implementation of tax withholding from payroll (codified in 1943) was the greatest single scam ever played on the citizens/taxpayers of the United States. By taking taxes from wage earners before they get their pay, the cost of taxes is disassociated from the labor.  People think in terms of ‘net pay’ or ‘spendable income’ not how much they have paid in taxes.

I am convinced that if everyone was paid their wage or salary and within 72 hours was required to write a check or pay cash to the IRS for taxes (that would otherwise have been withheld), most people would be much more aware.  They would be aware of how much it was costing them and they would consider what they are getting for that money.

Today, with our withholding system, very few people can tell you how much they pay annually to fund our government.  If they can, it is likely only once a year when they have just finished filing their tax returns.

This brings me to a suggestion to help make more people aware of the cost of their government.  Move Election day from the first Tuesday in November to the 2nd Sunday (or Saturday) in April.  This does two things.  First, Weekend voting, as is done in most nations, increases turnout.  Liberals say they want more turnout so they would like this.  Second, if people voted with tax preparation fresh in their minds, they might just vote for people with a slightly more fiscally conservative mindset.  Conservatives say they want to cut the cost of government so they would like this.

I would prefer to have the entire withholding system abolished.  However, a system which has been in place for 75 years would take a long time and amazing political capital to dismantle.  I think this suggestion has a better chance of being accomplished and would achieve some of the same goals.

Journalism or Used Car Sales?

 

Like most people in the United States, I’ve been distressed by the current state of political debate in the country.  Much of this was brought to a head last week with the public broadcast of the testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Anyone who watched more than 30 minutes of the ‘show’ could not help but see the circus for what it was: a piece of political theater with two purposes, to raise the public profile of the politician participants and to use the power of the press to derail a judicial confirmation.  Are there any other reasons why these two people needed to be publicly on display?  Had the purpose of the ‘investigation/interview’ been to help determine the validity of Dr. Ford’s allegation, there is no doubt in my mind that the Committee would have been better served to hold the meeting in private.

Used car salesmen have a bad reputation.  Most of that bad reputation is due to the fact that some salesmen hide the flaws in a car and embellish the positive aspects of the cars they sell.  The car salesmen who list all of the flaws and all of the strong points of a car allow the buyer to make an informed decision.  Those who hide the crack in the frame or who pour ‘honey’ into the crank case so the potential buyer can’t hear the flaws in the engine, do a disservice to the buyer for the sole purpose of making a sale that benefits only the salesman.

Today, people whom we call ‘journalists’ have a bad reputation.  Most of that bad reputation (“fake news”) is based on selective reporting of facts and opinions to create an outcome.  Journalists who report just the facts and who do not allow opinion to corrupt a report allow the reader/viewer to make an informed decision.  Those who cherry-pick the facts that they report or who lace their reports with unproven opinion instead of sticking to the facts, do a disservice to the public.

I would argue that last week media on both sides of the debate were in ‘used car sales mode’, not ‘reporter mode’.  Before reading/watching any report of the proceedings, you knew what would be ‘reported’ by any source based on their political leanings.  If you read Fox News, or Town Hall, or TheBlaze.com, you knew in advance that Mr. Kavanaugh’s participation and responses would be shown in a very positive light and that the Democrat Members of the Committee would be shown in a very dim one.  Similarly, if you went to CNN, MSNBC or the Washington Post, you were certain you would find opinion about Mr. Kavanaugh showing him to be a horrible human being and opinion that Dr. Ford was sweet and innocent and brave.  Almost every piece you could read or view could easily be shown to be intended to create feelings, emotions, prejudice, guilt, innocence, etc.  Almost no piece you could find would report facts that in any way proved or disproved that either side was right or wrong.

The media have a huge impact on public opinion and I guess it is naive of me to wish that most of the participants/producers of media content had decided early on to be reporters or journalists instead of the used car sales people that they prove daily to be.  Like many, I would love to know a source of news that is accurate and unbiased.

Snopes, FactCheck.org, etc.

With so much biased news coverage and so much ‘fake news’, it is comforting to know that you can just turn to FactCheck.Org or Snopes.com and get the real truth about  almost anything you read or hear.

You might want to fact check the above paragraph.  If you believe it is true, you would be wise to avoid realtors with bridges on offer in Brooklyn.

Both Snopes and Factcheck are dripping with bias, and, surprise, the bias is ‘progressive’.  I have not seen a single example of either ‘service’ steering you toward a conservative interpretation of the facts.  Both are as reliable as CNN or FoxNews at showing any issue in the brightest light for the side of the debate which they support.

So what should you do?  There is no simple answer that I have found.  You really need to seek out the original document.  This is what Snopes and FactCheck purport to do.  What they do in fact is act like critics.  Think of the film critic who does not like a certain director.  When viewing works from that director, the critic will carefully watch and study the work of the director who he does not like but always with an eye to find any flaw, any error or exaggeration.  He will then use this exaggeration or flaw to condemn the entire work, regardless how good it is otherwise.

A perfect example is the current debate about how aliens who have been apprehended crossing our borders illegally are treated when captured.  The Snopes fact check claim, “The widely debated practice of separating families at the border is mandated by Public Law 107-296, which was passed by Democrats in 2002.” (Here is a link to that page.) Snopes boldly claims that this is “False.”   It is meant to make you believe that what the Border Agents are doing is not legal and is directed by the Trump Administration, not by law.  Specifically, the progressives (like Snopes) want you to believe that Border Agents are acting outside the law,  separating families and tearing babies from the breasts of their mothers to deter others from trying to enter the U.S. illegally.

First, they word the question in such a narrow fashion that makes it very easy to label the claim as “False”.    By suggesting that a single law is the reason for the way Border Agents are deterring aliens, they obscure the fact that most law is the sum total of laws, regulations, orders and court interpretations of those laws (case law).  In this case, by excluding all but this one law, they make the problem seem very simple which it is not.  The detention of illegal border crossers is guided by no fewer than 3 federal statutes (in 1997, 2002, 2008), a number of lawsuits and both district and supreme court appeals (Flores Settlement Agreement, 1997, 9th Circuit, 2014, etc.)  which have modified those statutes.  So by asking if this single law is the reason for separating families, it is analogous to asking if the 14th Amendment forbids consideration of race when hiring a new employee.  It ignores all the law and court cases before and after the Emancipation Proclamation which speak to this issue.

Second, they sneak in the part about “…passed by Democrats in 2002.”  By limiting this to  a single law passed in 2002 (The Homeland Security Act), and, by suggesting it was done by Democrats, Snopes can call it false since the majority of those voting for the law were Republicans.  This, of course, ignores the fact that all but 8 Democrats in the Senate voted for the Bill.  To be fair, in the House, only 88 of the 295 votes for the Bill were from Democrats.  In any case, it could not have passed without the Democrats.  Did Democrats pass the bill?  No.  Could they have prevented passage? Easily.  Democrats had 50 members of the Senate plus one Independent who voted with them.  The Republicans had 49 members.  Had this been spun by someone biased toward the Republicans, they would have ‘fact checked’ and found that the law was passed by the Democrats since they controlled the Senate and final passage of a bill lies with the Senate.

FactCheck, like Snopes wants you to believe that they are independent, non-biased arbiters of truth.  They are not.  To treat them as such is as irresponsible as to believe everything that you read on the internet (except, of course, anything you read at Responsibility-Freedom Demands It).

Fake News – Committed and Omitted

Fake News takes two basic forms, acts of commission and acts of omission by ‘journalists’ (I call them pornalists.  Like porn which radically distorts sex, many so-called ‘journalists’ radically distort the news).

President Trump and many conservatives have been complaining loudly of late about the proliferation of fake news.  By that, they mean that they read too many news reports that are either false or are written from a very biased viewpoint.  Often the media delivers opinion pieces under the guise of actual news.  Much of the highly biased reporting is due to simple laziness by ‘journalists.’   Reporters don’t take the time to investigate any other viewpoint but their own.  Some fake news is written deliberately to create a false or self-serving narrative.   These are ‘fake news’ acts of commission.

This has been a criticism of news media for longer than any of us have been alive, think “yellow journalism”.  In the past, it was not quite as noticeable, when almost every city had two or more news publications.  Then, almost everyone had easy access to media that showed each story as viewed from both the right and the left.

Today, with the consolidation of news media (newspapers, in particular), it seems most areas receive news that has been interpretted and presented only as seen from the left.  Nearly every recent study has shown that an overwhelming percentage of “journalists”  identify as Democrats, progressives or liberals.   Studies and polls routinely show that fewer than 10% would call themselves Republicans.

What is not criticized as often is the acts of omission by the media.  How often do you hear about the good work of people on the right or stories that don’t support the progressive agenda?  Here is a list of news stories that I contend have not been covered by the mainstream (left leaning) media or, at the very least, have been under-reported:

1. Fear in Europe of a huge transfer of investment dollars from the EU to the U.S.A. because of the highly favorable new U.S. Tax law;
2. The current low unemployment rate; 
3. The huge and rapidly growing poverty in California which could be attributed to California’s highly progressive welfare state programs;
4. Until recently, the depravity of the Hollywood Culture;
5. The U.S. emergence once again as a top three oil producer in the world;
6. The fact that Germany in particular, and almost all EU countries are falling far behind their commitments to lower carbon emissions as per the Paris Accord; 
7. The fact that China emits more carbon dioxide than any nation;
8. The current unemployment rate among african-americans is the lowest it has been in over 40 years;
9. In April of 2017, Astronaut Peggy Whitson returned to earth after a record of over 534 days in space, longest for any American but hardly anyone has ever heard her name;
10. Conservative Groups targeted by the IRS reached a settlement with the IRS where they were paid a seven figure amount, that settlement confirming that the ‘weaponizing’ of the FBI against the right was not just a political talking point for the right;
11. etc.

It seems the biggest problem in getting real news rather than ‘fake news’ is that we all tend to get the majority of our news from very few sources.  Most often those sources report news that supports our belief system.  I often find myself discussing politics with people who never read anything but the New York Times and the Washington Post.  More often than not, these people will completely dismiss any reports that do not agree with those two sources.  

Maybe we should all make a new year’s resolution to try harder to see things from the ‘other side.’  It might just make us better informed AND more tolerant of other views.