DOES MASS MEDIA LEAD TO MASS HYSTERIA

I write a blog and the only thing massive about my blog is the amount of space the pics I download to put on my blarticles take up on my hard drive. It’s crazy, I know I can delete them but I like to re-use some of them and I like to keep some for posterity, my posterity obviously, not historical posterity, which I’m sure my blog will not be a blip in. But I like to vent and this is my method… blarticling, a combination of blog, article and just plain old blahhh… due to the content and educational substance in it, or lack thereof. It also allows me to put my point of view out there, just in case, when the aliens get here and enslave us, they ask me what were my point of views on certain subjects. Of course I’m talking Martians not illegal aliens, I’m not crazy. It isn’t massive in the same way that a bodega isn’t massive compared to Walmart and if you say what bodega, or maybe you’re saying “what is a bodega”, then I say exactly. Now that I thoroughly confused you, I’m talking about mass media, i.e. Internet, television, radio, newspapers and magazines, ha, I just got that off of the picture. Mass media creating mass hysteria. To think about how important of a factor mass media is you have to travel way back in time, to 2015… wait that doesn’t sound right… let me check the internet.. ahhh, 1215, June 15th, 1215 to be exact. What happened that day, the signing of the Magna Carta, what is a Magna Carta you ask, and you might be, I had to, it’s a document guaranteeing English political liberties that was drafted at Runnymede, a meadow by the River Thames, and signed by King John on June 15, 1215, under pressure from his rebellious barons, or that is what we’re told. Now, why would mass media have anything to do with the signing of the Magna Carta, a legal document that is the basis for our constitutional foundation, because it wasn’t the Barons (just people with money back then) or the land owners or the King that wanted that document, it was the people, what the nobleman (Barons) called the peasants. It was also the French that brought the Magna Carta into fruition, how you might wonder or you may not and just want me to get to the point, the French attacked England and they, the people, told the noble numbnuts that they weren’t going to fight unless they hashed out some details. Those details are all in the Magna Carta but the land owners and Barons, who controlled the printing presses, wrote, in mass media, that it was their idea. They had the least to do with it. Do you think that these rich people all of a sudden had a change a heart and said, man I really want to pay these people a proper wage and I want to live less rich or also known as poorer or do you think that they wanted, all of a sudden, to give the right to the people to bring them to court for anything, no. The deal was struck by, what we’ll call the first organized union (United farmers and peasants of England) and the King, the nobles opposed it until they realized that the first strike was happening and they were about to lose everything. Even though, through mass media (see how its in bold, its important), in history, and because they controlled all the printing presses and the King just said fuck it, write what you want, it was these fucking losers that came out looking like the saviors of England and the creators of the greatest legal document in history, not the sheep herders, pig farmers, cow milkers, ranch hands and merchant navy workers, you know, that people that actually fought. Mass media flipped the script. People and King bad, Barons and land owners good, I think was the headline. Some historians might disagree, but wtf do they know, they weren’t there, they just know what they read. And who wrote it…

I’m not telling you not to read newspapers or watch TV, I’m just suggesting that everything that you read might not be exactly true. Mass media is an important weapon against tyranny but even they have some biases. All media nowadays have an attached label. Those labels are liberal and conservative, just like the old days. They go mass hysteria on certain subjects that favors their particular interest and go soft on what doesn’t. Media is important but its more important to be truthful, which very few are.

My favorite mass media, movies. Since the Depp v Heard case, I didn’t watch it and it really shouldn’t have been televised, it seems that they are getting a lot of criticism. I’m not saying that the actors are a reliable source for politics but movies have a simple message, and its that good should triumph over evil. That is the message that is sent. It doesn’t inform me on current affairs, I get a lot of skewed views from every other mass media so I don’t want it from them. It doesn’t tell me that I need to donate to rich people, I get that at church and in emails when an election is about to happen. It just has a simple message, good should triumph over bad. The problem is deciding who is good and who is bad. But that’s something I can figure out on my own. This isn’t to say that the actors are good or bad people, I don’t know them so I don’t know but the mass media message is preferable over stories I read on actual news outlets. Hollywood has somewhat of an important job. Imagine if every movie was about one particular race being better than another, like it was in Hi Hitler’s regime. That would be demoralizing. They all said Hi Hitler and that lousy motherfucker never said hi back. What a prick. A simple acknowledgement would have been nice. Hi or hail? What were they saying to him?

Anyway, mass media, if they choose sides can be a problem. For instance, not one media outlet has ever been truthful about how those mass shootings really occurred, a “thumbs down” for them but everyone knows. That creates mass hysteria. You have to be careful when there’s only good stories and nothing negative about anyone or groups of anyones and vice versa. That goes for all things run by people. That isn’t realistic. We’re all human therefore we all make human mistakes. That’s Police, Federal or State, politicians, corporations, everything.

Now my favorite places to get the news are places where debates can be had. The Daily Show was excellent for that. John Oliver, though he does lean one way, he does make logical and common sense arguments at times. And Bill Maher, even though, sometimes, I would like to see more opposing views on his show. I like content that makes me think, even if I always don’t agree.

ITS NOT GUNS, ITS TECHNOLOGY

Another mass shooting at a school and everyone is up in arms about…hmmm.. arms. I don’t know what to think here. I don’t think that the kid was a happy kid, turned 18… bought a gun and that polymer blend turned him into a mass killer as soon it touched his skin. I’ll let the scientists confirm that theory. In a world where technology has surpassed our ability to reason or make sane decisions, I think that technology is more to blame then a piece of metal.

In a country where insta is the sought after remedy, insta-famous, insta-rich, insta-strong (steroids), insta-popular, insta-sex appeal (phones), the building blocks of hard work and work ethic is quickly diminishing, quickly eroding the fabric of a civil society. People want everything and they want it delivered the next day by Amazon. There is no sex appeal in working for what you want anymore, its only sexy if you can get it quickly. It used to be that family and education were the important things, now, with the progression of technology, family and education are no where to be seen, only the next tik tok challenge is important. Or being the next big influencer. What people don’t get is that even those people had to work hard to get where they are and depended on family. Family, education and hard work are no longer a priority and the government doesn’t help because they no longer feel like protecting those family values and in some instances they are the ones that defile those ideologies with their high tech solutions to having to be liked. Their lack of self control bleeds over to society, who sees them as how to achieve things, right. All these TV shows that portray government officials as these moral and respectful people, only to be let down, sometimes, by the real version. (not all of them, there are still some that are admirable)

I’m not saying that gun control isn’t right, I don’t know why you need a fully automatic weapon, they don’t even go fully auto in war, we’re taught short bursts. but maybe a return to praising work ethic and keeping families together. This country leads industrialized world countries in divorces, incarcerations and mass shootings. That can’t be a coincidence. Maybe keeping families together should be more important than who tweets what.

There’s the government conspiracy portion of this story, MKUltra and what Justice Thurgood Marshall called mind control techniques and technology coupled with pseudo psycho doodads and thingamajigs not to forget the mumbo jumbo and hooohaaas watchamacallits, but I won’t get into it. It will just make my head hurt. I’ll wait to comment on that when they run out of lithium and the electrical grid goes offline.

ELON….

For a immensely smart guy, he made one mistake… he let his intentions about how he was leaning politically be known way to soon. Politics is very tricky to navigate. They, the politicians, are very paranoid, thin skinned and most lack a sense of humor….. (most lack a sense of humor, the ones that don’t usually are outliers, not to be mistaken for lying out loud, and they are usually considered the best Presidents we had, i.e. Lincoln, heard he was a real hoot, Clinton, Obama, both Roosevelts and Ike. They didn’t necessarily have to be George Carlin, just watched his biopic on HBO, would not have made a great President but he knew that, that’s what made him great, but they could take a joke, while some could deliver them) given that our current political system resembles something like Ukraine, a battlefield, then a consortium for compromise ……so, imagine my surprise, when the most influential man in America voices his opinion on politics, this early. Now, I’m not passing judgement on their morality, the politicians, just on how politics and its political warfare that coincides with reputation ruining repudiation, if you piss off the wrong people, can get under your skin. (That’s a shitload of commas, more to come)

It took no time whatsoever to try and reduce how influential Elon is (he should think about going to the one name like Prince and Madonna and … is it Ye). Politics is extremely divisive….. The story that leaked seems and feels like a lot of bullshit, $250K from a multibillionaire… something is not right about that. I read the story and it’s kinda funny because I always get my massages with my underwear on and they ask me to take them off, could be because those brown stains that came with the underwear. I don’t know. That timing of the leaked story is a doozy. When Elon, or EF Musk or maybe Elon Hutton, you get it, speaks… people listen, not his fault, but with great twitter accounts comes great responsibility, who knows why. It shouldn’t be but it is and, well, this is where we’re at now in history.

Reputations are a lot like my stained underwear, that’s it…no clever quote behind it. Alright, maybe I should finish it, no one person’s is clean. And here’s a quote from another smart guy, lol, driving these atheists crazy, let that one person who has never had a stained underwear throw out the first stone. Something like that. In other words, and back to what I think of Elon’s situation, maybe it’s true but I’ll bet my last clean pair of fruit of looms that it ain’t, at least not the way they’re portraying it.

ABORTION GETS A KICK IN THE STOMACH

With abortion seemingly on 9 of a 10 count, people have taken the streets to try and save the Roe v. Wade decision. The conservative court put on its fight gear and is getting ready to take on the protestors, not to mention putting up fences around the building, which, nowadays, seems like a recurring occurrence. Right????, now do those fences designate a land border and can we be deported to crazy America from normal America if we are caught inside those fences. Reminds me of the movie Escape from New York, where they fenced off NYC and people that committed crimes were deported to NYC America from Normal America. While this is all very exciting, I’m old and like the law, in terms of legalities and illegalities, it does beckon another question, are they saying abortions are illegal or are they saying that States can ban the medical procedure, because abortions, by all intent and purpose, is just a medical procedure. Do the States have the right to ban a medical procedure? And does that mean my State can ban treatments or medical procedures for, lets say, incurable diseases or maladies that would be too expensive and put that money into helping the poor, building infrastructure, bettering schools and or maybe making roller coasters all the while forcing people with these diseases and maladies to go to other states to get help and relieving my state of money that would be spent on helping the final moments of the citizens that helped their state to become a better place. Is that right? Can States say which medical procedures are legal and which are illegal without it being a national ban?

Now, I’m not taking sides on the legality of abortion, I’m wondering if the different States can, that’s all. I don’t know that allowing the different States to make decisions on what can be considered a legal medical procedure and what can’t is a smart idea. If one State allows abortions then all states should, unless abortions are deemed illegal across the board, which is where this could be heading. While that is a loss for one political side, ultimately, it will be their biggest win, that’s just my prediction. My only concern is this two Americas scenario that keeps popping up, which seems to putting a strain on the unity of this country… man, where are those damn Martians when you need them, is becoming violent with protests and insurrections instead of just waiting for the day to vote and casting your ballot, like it should be. This country, I guess a lot like a lot of other countries, seems to be in constant conflict because they fear that they might just be happy if they weren’t and who wants that. It would be nice if it just was over a sports team because politics is extremely divisive, but you can’t always get what you want.

In my opinion, abortions will eventually be codified into law, because most people are in favor of it. Abortions are more of a moral question, especially with the older crowd, I’m not calling the Justices old, then a legal one, that’s why I’m surprised by the supposed decision. Small victories can lead to big losses. Again, I can be wrong. Nevertheless, I don’t think it’s a reason to picket, riot or protest (not their homes, by all means run amok outside the Court), but if you feel that strongly about it, it’s a great reason to vote. Here’s an interesting stastitc:

Demographics of abortion

A 2014 survey of 8,380 U.S. women who had abortions shows how their characteristics compare to the general population of U.S. women ages 15 to 44.

Age group

Under 20 – 11.9%

20 to 24 – 33.6%

25 to 29 – 26.5%

30 to 34 – 15.9%

35 to 39 – 9.1%

40 or older – 3.1%

Race/ethnicity

White – 38.7%

Black – 27.6%

Hispanic – 24.8%

Asian/Pacific Islander – 5.5%

Other – 3.4%

Educational attainment

No high school diploma – 8.9%

High school graduate/GED – 27.0%

Some college/associate degree – 40.9%

College graduate – 23.1%

Number of prior births

0 – 40.7%

1 – 26.2%

2 or more – 33.1%

Religious affiliation

Mainline Protestant – 17.2%

Evangelical Protestant – 12.8%

Roman Catholic – 23.7%

Other – 8.2%

None – 38.0%

In other sidebar news… it’s sort of a pun…. Does anyone else believe that the leak could of came from anywhere, either side for varying reasons. I’m going with it was done on purpose with all in agreement to gauge public reaction. It could be…. you never know.

SHARED NEWS: MIKE TYSON PUNCHES MAN ON FLIGHT

Reports of former Heavyweight champion getting into an altercation on a flight have gone viral. With the video attached to the disruption, it didn’t look pretty. After watching the video, I did notice a couple of things. The person filming the video seems to be egging his drunk friend on. The intoxicated guy was being a little belligerent according to on lookers. There was mention of money on the recording. And the video cuts out and comes back, being careful not to show too much of the drunk person’s behavior. Finally, the person filming ends with a quote saying all he wanted was an autograph, most likely meaning that the intoxicated individual was not leaving Tyson alone when asked. It looks like an attempt to entice a person of wealth into a confrontation for an eventual payout. Lucky for that guy that Tyson was a boxer and not some crazy guy. Most people make a big deal about people that are trained in boxing and MMA. The fact is that the more dangerous people are the drunk guys that don’t know how to fight because they start throwing objects and start using more deadlier items. Tyson punched the guy and by all accounts it seems like it might have been self defense, but he only used his hands and not in a lethal way. It’s people that use weapons like knives and guns because they won’t use their fists when necessary that create the bigger problem.

IMO: ANYONE IN THE COUNTRY IN 1992 THAT HAS BECOME A CITIZEN CAN BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

LOL… this is hilarious. Legally, anyone in the country in 1992, as long as they were a citizen, can be President. Being born here would not matter.

Let us look at what the article says….

 Article II, Section 1 clause 5 declares:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

The last time that the constitution was amended and adopted by all the states was in 1992. With no time limit on ratification, the Twenty-seventh Amendment was ratified in May 7, 1992, when Michigan approved it. This, effectively, it could be affectively… who knows… places the time for article 2 section 1 as 5/07/1992. While that is the literal translation of the law and, let us be honest, it really wouldn’t affect many people that are willing to run for President, it does create that loophole. So, if you were a resident of this country in 1992, you did have to be a citizen but not a natural born citizen, and you wanted to run for President, you could, that is until the Supreme Court tells you that you can’t.

So funny… Legally, Arnold could have run for President… that’s Schwarzenegger not Palmer.

Of course this is my opinion and I still eat cereal with a fork, it’s funner that way. But, if you add amendments to a document than that document wasn’t finalized, or you wouldn’t have to add those amendments. And every time you add one, you have to then say…ok, this is the final version and we adopt it as our constitution. LOL… monkey wrenches all over the place.

The founding fathers didn’t put a date as to the adoption of the constitution and maybe they did that on purpose, had they said the adoption of this constitution on so and so date, then that would be different, but they didn’t and I think they didn’t on purpose.

HAPPY EASTER

I would like to wish everyone a Happy Easter… I might think you are sick bastards but I’m pretty sure the lord…. also thinks so, but he is a lot more understanding and forgiving…. So Happy Easter and I hope not to see some of you in the afterlife, I’m not equipped for that much heat… you know who you are.

WORD OF THE DAY

What do u mean by Echo?

1 : the repetition of a sound that is caused by reflection of sound waves. 2 : the sound that is due to reflection of sound waves.

Slang

1. To have the same event occur again in similar fashion so as to confuse the situation

Example

To manipulate someone into doing something that someone else did to protect themselves and then point the finger at that someone.

To cast a stone in a glass house and then convince, manipulate or otherwise threaten someone else to do it so they can get out of trouble by saying it was the other person

FACT OF THE DAY

What percentage of presidents were lawyers?

While about 60 percent of all U.S. presidents since Independence have been lawyers, just four of the last 10 presidents have been lawyers. In the mid-19th century, around 80 percent of the U.S. Congress were lawyers.

Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 25 were lawyers. Of the 55 framers of the Constitution, 32 were lawyers.

How important is it to have effective counsel or even to be able to retain counsel, in a country designed by lawyers, it’s extremely important. The old adage by the greatest President to ever serve- ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID: A man who represents himself, has a fool for a client.

The importance of effective counsel can not be over stated, but in recent times, that principle has been slowly eroded to where even any overt interference just gets shrugged off. This is where the word Elite comes into play. Only the elite can get effective counsel. Everyone else has become a second class citizen but they still want your tax money.