Prognostication

Photo by Skitterphoto on Pexels.com

Tonight will be one of the dumbest nights in television history.

Tonight networks, television stations, cable news channels, radio stations, and literally everyone else will be trying to predict who will win the election(s).

They will be falling all over themselves trying to get the scoop and declare a winner first. They will make predictions on races all over the country, for lots of different elected positions.

They will, in effect, be meddling in the election.

It happens every year and it is actually kind of disgusting and should be illegal.

East coast voting stations and polling places close (at minimum) three hours earlier than West coast stations and polling places. As such, announcing any “results” of what East coast states are doing or the way they are leaning actually influences what happens on the West coast. If voters on this coast see predictions that tell them the election is going one way or the other, it actually discourages people from voting. Amazingly, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of research on this, but it is safe to say it happens. It’s human nature.

So, keep it under wraps. Stop trying to predict a winner before there are true results. It’s not only irritating, but it’s actually irresponsible and verges on tampering.

But, of course, we won’t see that happen tonight. So, sit back and watch the stupidity. Or not.

Journalism is dead

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

Or at least it is nearly dead. There are still people out there who are doing their best to write and publish from a neutral perspective and this is EXTREMELY rare these days.

Glenn Greenwald isn’t the poster child for complete neutrality, but at least he comes close. While he may be a left-leaning journalist, he hasn’t pulled his punches when it comes to criticizing the left. He has pursued the truth and has exposed some very dark corners in American politics and government. But, that obviously can only go so far. Up to now, he hasn’t seen much in the way of censorship (or at least that is the way he describes it).

But, that has changed. Balanced and honest journalism requires that you see things from both sides and attack both sides when necessary. Yes, that is a little like biting the hand that feeds you, but a true journalist can’t ignore one side of every story. If they choose to do so, the sully the profession (as I am sure you are fully aware that most Americans don’t trust the media any longer).

Greenwald has resigned from the media outlet he helped co-found. Because they wanted to censor an article he wrote on Hunter and Joe Biden, one that was critical of the Democratic darling and the media cover-up of revelations related to business dealings in foreign countries. He is justified in asking questions and form an analysis, apparently that other journalists are even unwilling to think about, because others are not asking the questions and are not willing to be critical.

We have known journalism is dead for a long time. Thus, the distrust of the American media. But this, this is a whole different level of censorship and verges on conspiracy by the left to support a political candidate purely because he is the alternative to a candidate they have tried repeatedly to destroy over the last six years. Their mantra has been and continues to be, “Anyone but HIM!” So much so that they even eat their own when people don’t fall into line with their narrative.

I hope you take a look at the information provided by Greenwald. It is fascinating and eye opening. It is enlightening, but also confirms what many already know. Only now, we know it without a shadow of a doubt.

Suppression

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

Did you see that post from yesterday? The one where I asked people not to vote if…

I am guessing probably not.

Wonder why I ask? Because I believe WordPress is suppressing it.

I can’t think of any other reason why it wouldn’t have gotten at least five times as many views (I don’t ask for much, really). Honestly, wouldn’t people be interested just to see what it is about? I click on stuff to read all the time just because I wanna know what point of view the author is coming from, even if I don’t agree. Am I the only person who does this now? Do you only read the headline and move on without giving it even another thought or shred of curiousity?

As of this morning, it only had TWO views. Of those two views, none of them were from the Reader – those people (roughly, there is a lot of spam) who actually have followed the blog. There are no views on it today yet either.

I can only come to one conclusion…it’s being suppressed because it is telling people not to vote. Well, not exactly, but essentially that is the suggestion if you can’t meet certain qualifications, most of which are pretty straight-forward and common sense.

I guess asking for people who are educated, well informed, and have common sense to vote is wrong.

Interesting. How the politics of free speech play out on social media and other platforms, right?

Please don’t vote…

Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com

…if you take advice from celebrities or athletes on who you should vote for.

…if you only get your news from one source or one perspective.

…if you only follow the party line all the time.

…if your only research is memes about who not to vote for.

…if you don’t do your own research.

…if you only take advice from your family.

…if you can only see “the issues” in regards to yourself.

…if you can’t see or won’t accept an “issue” from more than one perspective.

…if you can’t acknowledge or understand the concerns from an different perspective than your own.

…if your vote is out of spite regarding someone else’s vote.

…if you get your information from any social media platform.

…if your vote is based on information from tv commercials.

…if you you take an “endorsement” from a media outlet as legitimate.

…if you aren’t a citizen or have a legal right to vote.

…if you haven’t payed attention at all but received a ballot in the mail.

…if you didn’t pay attention in school and don’t know how the process works.

…if you don’t value your right enough to get educated about the issues and candidates.

…if you’re too stupid to vote with some intelligence.

Anything you would add to the list?

Authenticity

Social media has a huge problem with authenticity and they actually keep making it worse.

Did you hear that one about Joe Biden and his son Hunter and perhaps some questionable behavior in the past when dealing with foreign governments?

No?

Weird. The article is from a major news outlet with huge readership and is well respected. Apparently a follow-up article is being censored too. Did you see that one?

Well, it is likely that the big tech companies (Twitter and Facebook and Google) are censoring information in order to protect a political candidate they favor. In their words, they justify such behavior out of a campaign to stop “misinformation” to have a chance to “fact check” the story. In doing so, they are actually meddling in the election and doing exactly the behavior they say they are trying to stop.

Double standard much?

There are lots of thoughts on this whole thing (here is a good article that lines it out well) but the thing that sticks out is that the policies these companies claim to use is used selectively. They use it for stories and information they don’t like, but don’t use it when it helps them or hurts someone they don’t like. Application is selective and that’s shady at best.

The best thing would let ALL INFORMATION flow and let the people figure it out for themselves. Censoring some and not others as it fits with your agenda is a bad look.

Neither of these stories showed up on the Google News Feed, except for stories that are commenting about the censorship of the original reporting. Strange? Nope. Google has as much at stake and has made MANY efforts to stem the flow of information on it’s multiple platforms and outlets.

“Houston, we have a problem.”

It will only get worse as their influence grows and they continue to control the flow of information? Remember when there was concern over that whole “net neutrality” and having ISPs and cable companies having control over the flow of traffic? Yeah, this is the same thing but at a different level. That issue involved throttling the actual data (all of it) and this is the throttling of content (all of it, or at least that which they don’t agree with).

Ever felt like your blog isn’t reaching everyone it should? I have often wondered if WordPress isn’t doing the same thing when it comes to posts that they don’t like or agree with. Could it be true? What do you think?

What do you think of the idea of censorship from tech?

Endorsement

Photo by Ashutosh Sonwani on Pexels.com

These have got to stop because they really mean nothing. There is no credibility in giving an endorsement to a political candidate or issue, and what it really comes down to is that it is used as political manipulation of the populace.

Newspapers, news organizations, journalists, news anchors, media outlets, etc., are all at fault. Not a single one offers any legitimacy in their endorsement because it is an opinion. Opinions have no place in the news media. Period.

Sure, it is an “editorial board” that comes up with these endorsements and is in the “opinion” section of the paper (separate from the news) but that doesn’t really matter when it comes to the endorsement. The opinion is put out there for everyone to read and is readily seen as all the definitive answer about who a citizen should vote for. So, do we really expect that a media outlet that leans one way or the other is going to endorse something out line with their political leanings? In most cases, the media is liberal so their endorsements are going to support liberal candidates.

If you are an educated and informed voter, these endorsements should mean absolutely nothing to you. If you pay any attention to them and put any weight in them, well, quite frankly, you’re not as informed as you think you are. You’re just contributing to the reason why the media continues towards a ever quicker decline in credibility.

You should be seeing them as propaganda and nothing more.

When you see something like an endorsement come out for a political candidate or an issue, ignore it. They aren’t adding anything new to the debate. If you do read it, read it with a handful of salt.

Blather

Photo by Pressmaster on Pexels.com

Drivel.

Drone.

Anyone else tired of it?

There seem to be a whole lot of people talking in circles and about nothing, blathering, droning, on and on and on about drivel.

I have co-workers who do it.

I have a governor who does it.

I have family members who do it.

Political candidates are experts at it. Politicians have made a living at it.

The media does it.

Hell, my kids do it.

Anyone else just frickin’ tired of people, life, everything?

I’m over it.

Objectify

What exactly does this mean if the power is created by showing more and more skin?
Photo by cottonbro on Pexels.com

Gonna wade into a social hot topic. A social double standard. Gonna stomp on some toes. Ruffle some feathers. Set the internet on fire.

Let’s be real for a moment.

Women say they don’t want to be “objectified” and yet they do it to themselves.

That’s an obviously broad statement. There are a lot of connotations in uttering it. But, I can’t help but wonder if what is said isn’t what is actually meant when it comes right down to it. Motivations play a big factor in it, I think.

Social media has caused me to wonder what’s true and what isn’t.

Based on what I see, being objectified brings attention, exposure, clicks, follows, etc. How does that happen?

Skin.

Show more skin.

If you are a female and want to be popular online, the less clothing and more skin you show translates to all kinds of the things mentioned above, plus music deals, modeling contracts, sponsorships, acting deals, etc.

Is it right? Absolutely not.

Are they perpetuating objectification? Of course.

Teenagers dancing in skimpy clothing. Women in short skirts, cleavage falling out all over the place, barely there bathing suits…it all attracts attention, which is exactly why it is being done.

Sure, the argument has been made that “they dress for themselves” and “it helps them feel confident about themselves” and “men shouldn’t see them as objects but as people.”

If that were really the case, would it be necessary to post a video of dance moves with very little clothing on? Couldn’t the same dance moves be made in a regular fitting t-shirt and jeans? Couldn’t the song be sung in a hoody and sweatpants? Couldn’t it just be done with less skin?

Quick test here: Do the exact same thing in two different videos – one fully clothed and one will very little on. Let’s just say it is a short Tik Tok video. Which one gets more views? Clicks? Shares? Likes?

Exactly. Point demonstrated. Skin and sex sells. Nevermind the fact that there are parents out there fully exploiting the fact that their daughters are all over the internet with next to nothing on (and encouraging it).

So, am I off my rocker here? I am seeing this differently than I should? Did I miss something? Maybe I’m wrong. After all, I am just a dumb man.

Ulterior

Photo by Kaboompics .com on Pexels.com

Hey, wait a second…

Did you see this over the weekend?

CDC has updated, changed, fixed, (whatever!) the number related to deaths from of Covid.

As we all suspected from the beginning, co-morbidity factors (or other underlying conditions) were actually the true cause of death and not really Covid. In other words, Covid played a small part in the mortality rate but was not the sole factor in a large percentage (94%) of deaths.

So, why is it, again, that we are all in lockdown from this thing? Why is that the media is pushing the fear and doom? Why is that a large portion of our population is cowering in fear after having swallowed the story hook, line, and sinker?

Ever ask why there is so much misinformation about all this stuff?

Ever ask who benefits from all the misinformation about all this stuff?

Think, people, think!

It’s time to do your own thinking. Stop following the party line (whichever one you are in) and think for yourselves. Stop listening to the media. Go to the source whenever possible. When not possible, use media from different (all) points of view. Develop your own picture of what is going on and then think critically about it.

Ask questions. Ask hard questions.

Don’t take anything at face value. There is always more to it than what you see on the surface.

Always.

Naked

silhouette of a man during sunset

Photo by Johannes Plenio on Pexels.com

Got your attention? I thought so.

Anyway, in a little out the ordinary type post, I am going to recommend a book. I don’t often do that. No, I really don’t! I mean, it’s a book, after all.

But, this one is totally worth recommending and I honesty believe it will give you some insight into what is going on in the country at the moment.

The book?

The Naked Communist: Exposing Communism and Restoring Freedom, by W. Cleon Skousen.

This link above is for Amazon, but it is available in other places too. I don’t get any kickbacks for you clicking on that link, so it truly is just something I think is worth the read.

Why?

When you read this book, written first in 1958, in the context of the present (it has been updated for this) you suddenly see what is going on. Actually, it might not be all that sudden since, if you have studied history, you would have recognized the current developments fairly easily.

Social justice movements. Progressivism. Liberalism. Socialism. Democrats (yep, I said it). All of these are a back door to Communism. A Trojan Horse, if you will.

Read this book! Read it with current events in mind. Read it with the past in mind. Read it with the upcoming presidential election in mind.

Seriously.