Smoke and Mirrors

Consider the current debates about the future of this country.

On one hand we have one party that says you are pretty much on your own.  Earn what you need or go without.

The other party wants to guarantee a certain level of security to all Americans.

Health Care, Student Debt, Homelessness, Jobs, are areas that should be provided or at least enabled by the Government.

Of course it isn't quite as clear as that, but given the ability to do it, the most die hard Republicans would eliminate all those new deal things like Social Security and bank regulation as well as remove restriction on business owners and landlords about who they can hire or rent to.

Their theory is that economic forces would result in a fair system while motivating everybody to work hard.  They have in fact achieved some notable successes in reducing Union influence and certain social programs.

While few would cite it at least in public, the immortal words of Ebenezer Scrooge rings true about the poor,  “If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.” 

Its pretty clear which vision is more popular so we see significant distractions used to mask the positions.  Certain social issues have been used to garner support even when the economics would indicate otherwise.

Things like immigration, abortion, patriotism, are used to sway voters, even when many of the issues are fabricated.  Take patriotism.  Generally things that are not actually happening or at least not happening very much are presented as big issues.  If some homeowners association won't  allow flags to be displayed its pretty much their issue, yet you will likely see it as an attack on our rights.  

It just isn't.  The very same people who defend a baker's right to refuse service to people want to interfere in a homeowner's association setting rules.  

The inconsistencies are ignored because it's all manipulated in the first place.

They need to use smoke and mirrors to hide the truth.

Truth Be Told

Whenever I find myself listening to the current President talk, I find it hard to believe that it is not a piece of performance art.  He says things over and over that are generally not true and is convinced people will just believe him.

For example he keeps referring to his phone call with the Ukrainian president as a perfect call.  First that means nothing since what is a perfect call.  Second in that call and the abridged transcript, he clearly did some things that were far from perfect like requesting investigations as favors.  Third, we don't have the actual transcript, just an abridged version.

The people who heard that call were alarmed and it led to a whistleblower complaint, the actual transcript being classified and put on a special server and ultimately to this impeachment.

Should he be removed from office for the call?  That is open to debate but the call wasn't perfect.

His comment about the economy are exaggerated and his depiction of where we were under his predecessor are actually ludicrous.  Since the 2008/2009 financial crisis we have seen a fairly consistent recovery, falling unemployment, rising stock prices, improved economics.  Most of that has continued but he has increased the deficit, spent additional millions on defense and hurt farmers and manufacturing as well as some consumers with his tariffs.  Is the economy good.  Yes, generally but it is not perfect or the best ever unless you are one of his rich cronies who has more profits, less environmental requirements and tremendously increased income inequality.

Working people have less benefits, less old age security, less health care and generally reduce salaries as they have found lower paying jobs.

Its perfect for a few and otherwise you struggle to get by.

I gather some people buy into his lies and many others just ignore them since they are afraid of his clout in their primaries.

The media is a large part of the problem as some have become pure propaganda and the others try to balance their reporting when the scales are simply not working.

The attacks on the media are working as our free press have failed being brave.

I just wish the truth was told.

Facts, Alternative Facts?

The start of an impeachment inquiry is a bit like a roll of the dice.

The outcome is uncertain.

What will happen is that testimony and documents will come out and the American public will have better insight into the events.

Of course most people will rely on the media coverage to get their facts so we know that there will be two versions circulating.

Even the media with the bias, and maybe they all have some, may be forced at some point to accept some alternative facts.

It would have to be impossible to dispute and even then it will be spun.

So the next few months may be more of a media trial than anything else.

Facts are becoming more and more malleable in today's world.

The Real Fake News

One of the things that has always been true but seems even more true recently is that some media counts on people just reading the headlines.

The headlines can however be quite misleading, especially when they are inspired by partisan sentiments.

I saw an article today that implied in its headline how a new policy by our current President was going to revitalize the coal industry.  The article itself said no such thing.

Yes the new policy would roll back some environmental restrictions on use of coal in power plants but it also noted that no one wants to invest in coal when cleaner alternatives like natural gas are cheaper.  It went on to point out how coal based plants are still closing at record rates.

So the headline was at best misleading and more likely a political stunt designed to let "headline readers" believe that coal was being revived.  Some of the quotes in the article were attributed to people with close ties to the administration re-election campaign and clearly it was designed to provide a false impression in certain swing states.

There are more and more stories like that, many of which are originated by Fox where the headline is not supported by and sometimes contradicted by the story within.

Do we see similar misrepresentations on the liberal side?  I'm sure some exist, but it really seems much more flagrant on the right.

The solution is to read the articles, they maintain a bit of journalistic integrity there.

Or else believe the real "fake" news.

Historic Meetings

Reading the text of the joint statement issued after the meeting with North Korea you notice how it refers to the meeting as historic a few times.

Now by definition it was historic, it is now part of history, but when you read most historic documents they don't normally talk about how "historic" they are.

Besides this we see very little except we have agreed t stop joint war games with South Korea and the North will work towards denuclearization.

Interestingly, our dontard made a comment that it will be a long process, but once its started its basically over.

Odd how he didn't feel that way about the much more specific Iran agreement, which was the worst deal ever.

I think the difference is more related to the fact that his followers are much more anti-Muslim then anti-Korean.

This may lead to something and its better than lobbing missiles, but it was much better for the image of Kim, who got the war games to stop and has lots of propaganda with meeting the United States as his equal in a country where image is nearly as important as the oppressive force of the regime.

The dontard will also try to use it as propaganda but I just don't see it playing nearly as well.

His performance with our allies is the more historic event, really.