State of the Union 2019

Jeepers-n-Creepers

Have mud--will travel.
Supporting Member
Nov 5, 2018
332
Texas
I don't watch national news for that reason. It hasn't been objective for years. The "news" now days is nothing but the liberal socialists trying to persuade public opinion.
Indeed, you are surely onto something here:).

And, thank you for providing a conversational springboard by which I might in turn expand upon the "persuasion of public opinion" - solely with the aim of rescuing those being held hostage by the same:).

"Social Architects and/or Engineers" (those with a history in the U.S. - for the sake of this conversation), shifted into figurative OVERDRIVE in January of 2009 (pause and consider what transpired in U.S. history in January of 2009). These shadow-operatives, along with a broad array of other nefarious shadow-operatives, formed what I have coined, since January of 2009, a "Maniacal Machine" - which is hell-bent upon utterly destroying the founding fabric of this once-great nation (i.e., what was left of it, as of January of 2009).

The above Maniacal Machine has not slowed down; it was been running full-speed, like a freight train which has lost its brakes--for 10 years in the running. This figurative machine has been devouring young minds (and not-so-young minds) for a full decade--grossly warping and perverting both Self-Concept and World-Concept - equating to an alarmingly deluded sea of Western minds (young minds, especially).

The success achieved by these social architects and engineers, is not so much in their cunning and craftiness, but in the spirit (key-word) propelling their cunning and craftiness. I am talking about Evil - vs Good. I am more so suggesting therefore, that we cannot discuss D.C. politics to any degree of fruitfulness without first acknowledging the spiritual dynamics behind the politics.

I've been gradually laying a foundation over the past 90 seconds, for the introduction of a figurative tool which will enable the average American mind to survive the times ahead--without blindly marching into the jaws of said "machine" - like sheep to the slaughter.

What is this "tool" of which I speak? It is this: spiritual discernment.

One cannot acknowledge, accept, embrace and employ such the tool, without first acknowledging, accepting and embracing the cultivation of a spiritual life required to fruitful navigate this tool. Until such occurs, one is, as of February of 2019, hobbling about in a toxic state of delusion--inhaling every airborne media spore which has been carefully crafted to meld minds into a Socialist/Communist/Marxist paradigm (i.e., the dumbing-down of the sheep, who are in turn effortlessly channeled into the slaughterhouse).

What Western history books will not reveal to young impressionable minds, is that Socialism, Communism and Marxism were crafted to mask Satanism. Each and every "champion" of Socialism, Communism and Marxism (e.g., Marx himself) throughout history, has been a closet Satanist - which entails by default, the keeping of a personal closet which is adorned with hideous atrocities (murder, child sacrifice, and violent sexual perversion--for starters).

The above formula is quite simple: convince 99% of the population to believe the lie, while the forfeiture of everything they own goes to the elite (the Satanists) 1% - to fund and fuel evils which defy the English language. The latest sampling--front and center--of that which I am seeking to unveil herein, is the current state of Venezuela--provided one can attain a sampling of legitimate news coverage (very rare, at this juncture).

Despite what should be obvious of the picture I have painted above, these "two ships passing in the night" (i.e., those with spiritual discernment and those without), continue to glide right passed one another--deep in the night, and with zero acknowledgment and communication. The reason I so readily allude to this metaphor, is that I used to man the helm of a 728FT ship (when not laterally piloting much smaller landing craft). I have personally witnessed "two ships passing in the night," in a shocking display of ignorance and oversight of and to very sophisticated radar and sonar devices--nearly colliding with one another in a violent and horrendous display of carnage--in thousands of fathoms of water--never to be heard from again (may the previous sentence serve to spawn a mental picture of where the U.S. is presently headed--in the wake of the bulk of its U.S. citizenry presently hobbling about in carefully crafted delusion).

*Note: for those of you who did not sign-up for this class; please take your ease, in knowing that you can Audit the class. As such, you are not required to think, nor are you required to produce evidence of your understanding of any of this material. You are therefore at-liberty to flippantly sip the grossly overpriced caffeinated beverage of your choosing, whilst simultaneously feasting upon a toxic array of audio-visual snippets from SnapChat, Twitter, FaceBook, YouTube, Skype, FaceTime, CNN, Al Jazeera, NPR--and every other medium and vessel of toxic mind-warp.

By way of concluding this 400-Series class entitled, "I'm Sorry, But You've Been Terribly Mislead - 401" - I'll seek to end on a humorous note, in knowing that humor contains a healing balm, which in turn enables one to more readily digest truths which are otherwise difficult to swallow.

My humorous anecdote begins with the introduction, in January of 2009 (hmmm, we're oddly enough back to that critical juncture in U.S. history), with one of the Deep State's most celebrated political puppets, who was coached into regularly repeating the following phrase: "conspiracy theory." This phrase was postured and positioned to define and characterize anyone who would question and/or oppose the Deep State narrative (the "Deep State" being the hidden face of the nefarious social architects and engineers), as one who is a delusional threat to society. This tactic is a highly refined weapon of "projection" - the masking of wrongdoing by convincing onlookers that those innocent of wrongdoing are guilty of the very thing they are questioning in the guilty (e.g., the Clinton's selling millions of dollars in Uranium to the Russians [not to mention classified military data to the Communist Chinese], while at the same time participating in craftily fabricating the laughable notion of "Trump-Russia election collusion").

The Reader: "So where's the humor????"

Here's the humor: Recall the movie series, "Men in Black." The men in black were in a fight against the annihilation of the planet. The other 99% of the population was utterly clueless to this fight, and hobbled about in a state of complete ignorance to the fight. The men in black saw the evil entities at every turn--carefully hidden within the bodies of humans and pets. When any member of society at large was made privy to the fight, their memories were artfully erased by a pocket-pen-sized laser-wand. And in a flash, all memory of the truth was erased (*Note: consider likening the laser-wand to CNN, NPR, Al Jazeera, YouTube, FaceBook, SnapChat, Twitter, FaceTime, etc., and the systematic "flashes" of non-reality which in turn fabricate one's personal reality--albeit delusion). The minds of the masses were erased, because they did not have the capacity to handle such the level of truth. Occasionally, a courageous soul would dare to accept the unconscionable reality, and opt to join the fight--by becoming a man or woman "in black."

Here's a fitting video sampling:

 

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
705
Burnsville, MN, USA
Mass-Media has done a great job in shaping your reality. Good luck with that moving forward.
Hardly, bud. I follow a lot of different news sources and I even keep a pulse on many that I think aren’t very reputable. I follow the facts and I don’t take any news media claims at face value. I trace back the arguments and do the critical thinking for myself. Take a look at any of my posts and you’ll see arguments backed up with sources from many different areas and often the sources themselves aren’t even from news websites, such as my facts behind my arguments on immigration.

If you feel I’m not accurately arguing a point or think I’m citing an bad info or an missing a crucial point to the way I make my conclusion, I’d be happy to listen to any feedback you have.

I’m aware that you can’t trust everything on the news, but that’s nothing new. Fake News has become a buzz word, but when you do the research, you’ll find that news is seldom outright wrong. Instead, you just don’t get the whole story when you follow just one source. Almost every major network has some degree of bias that’s reflected either in what stories they decide to prioritize or in what conclusions their editorials lean towards. However, that’s just more reason for diversifying where you get your news from. It’s the same reason you’d why financial investors always recommend diversifying.
 

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
705
Burnsville, MN, USA
I don't watch national news for that reason. It hasn't been objective for years. The "news" now days is nothing but the liberal socialists trying to persuade public opinion.
National news is vague and they love to fill downtime with talking heads that just spout opinion, but dismissing all major news networks or anything they say entirely isn’t a wise way to proceed. Being aware of others’ bias as well as your own is wise, but follow facts and seeks sources based on their objectivity.
 

KCsTJ

TJ student
Supporting Member
National news is vague and they love to fill downtime with talking heads that just spout opinion, but dismissing all major news networks or anything they say entirely isn’t a wise way to proceed. Being aware of others’ bias as well as your own is wise, but follow facts and seeks sources based on their objectivity.
Well when i do watch the "news" i see a pattern, they show generally the same stories with the same liberal angle.
They used to call this propaganda in Germany.
If you've read "Rules For Radicals" you know all the radical liberal positions. That book is their Bible with a small b. Its their game plan and they stick to it.
I can therefore predict what will be on tonight's news cast: 1. A story on racism 2. A story on police shooting. 3. Story on out of touch conservatives, etc. etc etc.
Surf the liberal networks at news time. Seems they all get their info from one central propaganda source, just my observations and there are many.more.
 
Reactions: Fixer6

bromel

TJ Enthusiast
I was glad to see President Trump draw attention to the new law New York just passed regarding killing babies after they are born.

You won't see this information on any of our "news shows".

Why doesn't our "news media" want to report this killing newborn babies after birth?
I'm not about to get into an abortion debate on this forum—you can believe either side, and I'll fully respect you. But this new law has been reported on significantly, and mostly in bad faith. Contrary to what you're hearing from certain news sources, the law does not legalize late-term abortions carte blanche. The law permits abortions after 24 weeks if a health care professional determines the health or life of the mother is at risk, or the fetus is not viable. Literally no one is in favor of late-term abortions, but reasonable people are in favor of protecting the mother's life in difficult situations.

You can of course reasonably be against this law, but please get the facts correct.
 

KCsTJ

TJ student
Supporting Member
Agree, we dont need an abortion debate here.
I was listening to the author of the New York bill being questioned about the time limit on abortions, on her bill, she said there were none.

I was going by what the author of the Bill testified to herself.
I should have stated my source.
 
Reactions: bromel and JMT

JMT

The Jeep Guy
Supporting Member
Ride of the Month Winner
The US Government is a corrupt, thieving, immature, long in the tooth, bloated, wasteful, ignorant, out of touch run away train! It needs to be stripped down in size and term limits made mandatory!

These buffoons are supposed to be working for us and the betterment and security of our great nation! They cannot even agree upon what shoe they should tie first!

No business would survive with such insanity, distrust and waste. An overhaul is really necessary here, no idea how to make it so, but real changing of the guard and the way they are compensated needs to take place!

Hard to believe with all the knowledge this country has, we are left with the the current steaming pile of government!

I love my country, but it has a long way to go before truly being great again!
I wish there was an example of a great nation on earth falling and becoming great again. I can sympathize with you
 

JMT

The Jeep Guy
Supporting Member
Ride of the Month Winner
Agree, we dont need an abortion debate here.
I was listening to the author of the New York bill being questioned about the time limit on abortions, on her bill, she said there were none.

I was going by what the author of the Bill testified to herself.
I should have stated my source.
The fact a Bill had to be passed is, in itself, telling.
 
Reactions: KCsTJ

Red Dog

Perpetual Student of Life
Supporting Member
Jan 12, 2019
251
Iowa, Trenton's Tiki Hut
I read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and didn’t have to listen to another word obama said. I already knew what he said from Alinsky’s playbook.
I have often heard similar. Part of why I feel I should get my rear in gear and read it.

On a side note, Booker was in town giving a speech Friday just down the alley from where I work. His security detail was slightly cooler than Obama's SS was when he visited the same church. Apparently I looked suspicious pacing while smoking in -30F weather. After showing my usual 3 forms of ID they had a good laugh and we talked Jeeps for a bit. Secret Service guys we just talked shop after a quick frisk (insulting in multiple ways) and one of them asking to bum a smoke.
 
Reactions: KCsTJ and JMT

JMT

The Jeep Guy
Supporting Member
Ride of the Month Winner
Almost every major network has some degree of bias that’s reflected either in what stories they decide to prioritize or in what conclusions their editorials lean towards.
Yes, but it’s worse. All facts are interpreted facts. Interpreted by the journalists. No one can see neutrally. Therefore, what is needed is an infallible source of objectivive interpretation. This can only come from someone who is not entangled by these facts themselves. Probably too philosophical for this forum, but really most of it never gets beyond media bytes and those that do only touch the ethics level, never epistemological or ontological, so the discussions are pretty much useless sharing of opinions.
 
Reactions: KCsTJ and Red Dog

Red Dog

Perpetual Student of Life
Supporting Member
Jan 12, 2019
251
Iowa, Trenton's Tiki Hut
Yes, but it’s worse. All facts are interpreted facts. Interpreted by the journalists. No one can see neutrally. Therefore, what is needed is an infallible source of objectivive interpretation. This can only come from someone who is not entangled by these facts themselves. Probably too philosophical for this forum, but really most of it never gets beyond media bytes and those that do only touch the ethics level, never epistemological or ontological, so the discussions are pretty much useless sharing of opinions.
While it sounds good in theory, true objectivity isn't possible from human sources. Everyone has a bias whether we realize it or not. You're right about most media being sharing of opinions. At least some of them are professional enough to outright state that is what they are doing.
 

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
705
Burnsville, MN, USA
Well when i do watch the "news" i see a pattern, they show generally the same stories with the same liberal angle.
They used to call this propaganda in Germany.
If you've read "Rules For Radicals" you know all the radical liberal positions. That book is their Bible with a small b. Its their game plan and they stick to it.
I can therefore predict what will be on tonight's news cast: 1. A story on racism 2. A story on police shooting. 3. Story on out of touch conservatives, etc. etc etc.
Surf the liberal networks at news time. Seems they all get their info from one central propaganda source, just my observations and there are many.more.
Some of this is just a reflection of society. There's a lot of perspectives that would have been considered liberal a decade or so ago that are not seen that way by most people anymore and news generally follows the way that society reacts to things and reflects that back.

What you see on the news isn't anything dictated by any playbook. Stories on racism are frequent because people are talking about racism more than ever. With the rise of social media, a lot of people have found their voice to speak up on issues that were overlooked by the portion of the population that dominated discussions before.

Stories on police shootings are headlines because of the way that people rallied after the Trayvon Martin case and the stuff that went down in Ferguson. News media didn't follow those stories because they're liberal. They followed those stories because they were major events involving a large portion of the population and reflected a change in the way that people have looked at police shootings.

Not sure exactly what you mean by out of touch conservatives, unless you mean Trump, lol. Right now, it seems that the out of touch people are democrats in Virginia. Still, news networks follow social media and they see what people talk about, so they reflect that. That's how they know what will attract viewers and bring them income.

If you want a more neutral news source that's more focused on reporting the news than interpreting it, just look around. There's some good sites that will give some general direction on networks bias leanings:
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

In general though, your least bias stuff will found either in print or online. Any news network on TV is usually filled with sensationalist crap and talking heads since they all try to fill a 24 hour span by stretching out a small number of headlines. If you want more conservative discussion, AM radio is usually best for that.


Yes, but it’s worse. All facts are interpreted facts. Interpreted by the journalists. No one can see neutrally. Therefore, what is needed is an infallible source of objectivive interpretation. This can only come from someone who is not entangled by these facts themselves. Probably too philosophical for this forum, but really most of it never gets beyond media bytes and those that do only touch the ethics level, never epistemological or ontological, so the discussions are pretty much useless sharing of opinions.
At some point, you have to have a degree of common sense and use trust because you'll never have enough 100% proof behind all facts. I mean, witnesses will lie, documents can be forged, images can be editted, etc. But at some point, you have to trust that the Pyramids exist, even if you've never visited them yourself.

Sometimes the best answer is that a conclusion is unavailable with the current resources available (which is why I don't make assumptions about the Mueller investigation). But when you can find multiple sources of reasonable integrity pointing in the same direction or very high integrity institutions that publish research/statistics, you can find enough information to navigate reality.

Also, there's a pretty decent series on navigating digital information here:
 

Chris

Administrator
Staff Member
Sep 28, 2015
34,467
Salem, Oregon
I can therefore predict what will be on tonight's news cast: 1. A story on racism 2. A story on police shooting. 3. Story on out of touch conservatives, etc. etc etc.
I'd have to agree with you 100% on this. The media is absolutely fixated on anything to do with race or identity politics. It's gotten to the point where predicting the news is easy.

There's a reason for this though, and I can tell you what it is from a marketing standpoint. The hottest, most controversial topics are the ones that rile people up the most. This also equates to the most revenue in terms of ad sales, clicks, etc. When people see an article titled, "White cop shoots black man", or "Toxic masculinity is taking over", they're many times more likely to click on it than they would if it was a title like, "Democrats look to pass new legislation".

There's so much truth to this as well. Having a marketing background, I've ran more Google Ads, social media ads, and other ads than I'd care to admit (for clients).

I can tell you that a controversial ad will outperform a non-controversial add any day of the week, guaranteed. I know this, the higher-ups at the news / media companies know this, and the advertisers know this as well. Use a controversial headline and you'll make more money.

It's as I always say, when it comes down to it, in life, the answer to 99 out of 100 questions is money, plain and simple.
 

Equilibrium31

TJ Enthusiast
Supporting Member
Apr 7, 2018
705
Burnsville, MN, USA
Yea, sensationalistic stuff sells and that is valid if you get your news from CNN or Fox News, but take a look at the more serious news sources and you'll get less click-bait type headlines.

Still, you're bound to see a lot of race-related stuff, because society is wrestling with how to handle race relations right now. In the 60s through the 70s and even early 80s, we had a hell of a time dealing with racism, but it was pretty overt and straight forward. People were openly being racist and laws were deliberately against people because of their race and segregation was still being perpetuated.

Once we got past that, a lot people started to feel like racism was over. Well, except of course for people of color who were still experiencing it, but they didn't organize much around it at that point because it still was much more toned down compared to what it used to be.

Fast forward to around 2014 and that feeling of still being discriminated against was still there, but the wave of civil rights movements was farther and farther away. When the Michael Brown shooting started gaining attention, a lot of those dormant issues with race relations that we'd been sweeping under the rug for a long time have come to a head.

Racism now is in a much different state than it has been historically. Almost no one wants to admit to being a racist anymore, but there's still a lot of lingering effects from racism in the past, such as economic inequality, family trauma, etc. and there's still a lot of racist things happening that have become very subverted and indirect. What are people doing that is actually racist? How should we handle inequality from things that are no longer happening like they have in the past? How do we bridge trust issues between people of color and government/law enforcement after generations of abuse?

This is shit we don't have answers to and it's going to take a long time for people to work through it. To those of us who haven't seen this coming, it feels like people are making excuses and suddenly getting worked up about racist stuff out of nowhere, but this has been a long time coming and it'll probably still take at least another generation before we get anywhere close to the racial equality that we've idealized for so long. So, this kinda stuff is bound to hit headlines as more and more events related to it occur, even though it may seem very irrelevant to a lot of us.
 

Red Dog

Perpetual Student of Life
Supporting Member
Jan 12, 2019
251
Iowa, Trenton's Tiki Hut
Yea, sensationalistic stuff sells and that is valid if you get your news from CNN or Fox News, but take a look at the more serious news sources and you'll get less click-bait type headlines.

Still, you're bound to see a lot of race-related stuff, because society is wrestling with how to handle race relations right now. In the 60s through the 70s and even early 80s, we had a hell of a time dealing with racism, but it was pretty overt and straight forward. People were openly being racist and laws were deliberately against people because of their race and segregation was still being perpetuated.

Once we got past that, a lot people started to feel like racism was over. Well, except of course for people of color who were still experiencing it, but they didn't organize much around it at that point because it still was much more toned down compared to what it used to be.

Fast forward to around 2014 and that feeling of still being discriminated against was still there, but the wave of civil rights movements was farther and farther away. When the Michael Brown shooting started gaining attention, a lot of those dormant issues with race relations that we'd been sweeping under the rug for a long time have come to a head.

Racism now is in a much different state than it has been historically. Almost no one wants to admit to being a racist anymore, but there's still a lot of lingering effects from racism in the past, such as economic inequality, family trauma, etc. and there's still a lot of racist things happening that have become very subverted and indirect. What are people doing that is actually racist? How should we handle inequality from things that are no longer happening like they have in the past? How do we bridge trust issues between people of color and government/law enforcement after generations of abuse?

This is shit we don't have answers to and it's going to take a long time for people to work through it. To those of us who haven't seen this coming, it feels like people are making excuses and suddenly getting worked up about racist stuff out of nowhere, but this has been a long time coming and it'll probably still take at least another generation before we get anywhere close to the racial equality that we've idealized for so long. So, this kinda stuff is bound to hit headlines as more and more events related to it occur, even though it may seem very irrelevant to a lot of us.
Working with/in the media (and not having a very good filter when typing) I'm going to add my 2-cents to this as well as your earlier post (#75).

First off, there is indeed a "playbook". Probably isn't what most people would think, but there are guidelines that the older/traditional/"main stream" outlets go by. @Chris alluded to it when he mentioned "money". The media lives and dies on viewers and ratings. If something gains/maintains them, they run with it as long as possible. Doesn't matter if it is accurate, current, or even relevant. Doesn't matter the outlet, they will frame a story to support what their audience wants/watches. I've noticed this even with "balanced" and "nuanced" outlets. There is always information that is either left out or taken out of context to support the argument being presented (also applies to our forum posts). Many affiliate, local, smaller outlets will use consultants to help "improve" their news coverage. Over all there's about a dozen or so consulting companies advising the majority of the "news" out there (at least on television). Every outlet has a bias and their audience usually follows them for confirmation of their own bias.

Not familiar enough with the various aspects of racism in the country to comment on that in specifics. All I know is discrimination in one form or another has existed in society since humans first started grouping together on the planet. If someone watches enough, they will pick up on the one-sided/double standard coverage most media outlets have in regards to racism. Once again, they all have a bias. Examples that sticks out most to me: the cop in the Twin Cities that shot the gal last year had very little coverage compared to times like Ferguson. Or, the church shooting in Texas where a neighbor shot the church shooter (as soon as it came out that the neighbor used an AR the mainstream outlets stopped talking to him). Also don't want to forget how Twitter unevenly enforces its rules.

Sometimes, and it feels like it is growing more frequent, the media will create an issue in order to keep the ratings going. The movie "Wag the Dog" isn't far off from how things sometimes do happen. Without conflict of some type the media doesn't make money.
 
Reactions: Chris

Chris

Administrator
Staff Member
Sep 28, 2015
34,467
Salem, Oregon
Without conflict of some type the media doesn't make money.
Precisely.

Which is why I'm always telling my friends and family that while the media loves to bash trump for the most part (FOX News being the exception), the higher ups at the network must absolutely LOVE that he is president. With Trump in office, they never, ever run out of conflict or controversial headlines to report on.

Even if it feels stupid and not "newsworthy" (i.e., the whole Stormy Daniels ordeal), he's got to be great for business.

Like I said, what it comes down to is MONEY as always. There's simply no getting around that.

Look deep enough for the answers and I can guarantee you that they almost always trace back to money.