Fact Checking the Fact Checker

As the influence over viewers’ opinions declines, the efforts by liberal news outlets to disguise their bias and hold onto their power over public opinion increases. Perhaps the most popular of these bias disguises is the use of segment titles; such as ‘fact check’ or ‘truth check.’ These segments typically open with a statement as if it were a fact and proceed to present their ‘evidence’ to either support or discredit their opening statement. Most of these segments end with a graphic illustrating some sort of rating such as stars or Pinocchio noses or some such device. With the analysis completed and given credibility by the rating system, the host typically signs off using their most distinguished voice and signature phrase.

A recent example is from the Denver Fox affiliate. The segment was titled “Truth Check: Fact checking Bernie Sanders’ latest Colorado ad.” True to the template the host opens by stating the purpose of the segment is to pursue the truth of the content of a political ad of Bernie Sanders in which he makes several derogatory statements about the President. As viewers we are supposed to believe we are being told the underlying truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth…

But there is a very real difference between truth and truthful. A detailed explanation of these differences can be read here.

The Fox affiliate ‘analysis’ of Mr. Sanders’ claim that the Trump presidency is the most corrupt in history begins by acknowledging that Trump was impeached. That of course is true. But the reporter ignores the truth that the real corruption of the impeachment was by those who first created a false narrative, lied to a federal court to process their attack on the President and then ignored every precedent of law to push through a vote on articles which didn’t even include a law allegedly broken. And of course the vote was totally political. After more than 2 years and over $30 million taxpayers’ dollars spent investigating, there in fact was no corruption whatsoever associated with the President.

Then after acknowledging that Mr. Sanders’ statement is subjective and can’t technically be proven, the host adds that several associates of the President’s face prison time. But not one of those associates was ever even accused of any crime associated with the President. The segment goes on about some pardons and throws in a name as if there was any association of those convictions to the President.

The “Truth Check” of this segment is that its dishonesty can be discovered if the whole truth can be revealed.

Education Crisis in the House

With the media intent on covering the activity in Washington surrounding the conflict between the President and the Democratic Party, we are being given an opportunity to witness our government leaders unfiltered as they take their turns in the spotlight. But is this a good thing for many of them?

Remember the House Armed Services Committee hearing in 2010 concerning the U.S. military installation on the island of Guam? Hank Johnson (D,GA) said to Admiral Robert F. Willard, Commander of U.S. Pacific Command, “My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize”.

That comment would have been comical if Johnson had not proceeded it by commenting about the overall dimensions of the island and then stating he didn’t know what those worked out to so he ask the admiral if he recalled how many square miles there were to Guam.

Johnson’s moronic comments made entertaining media for a few days; much like his comments about imagining a world without balloons during a debate over renewal of funding for defense department helium. But while he continues to win reelection and serve in the house, he is no longer alone in making a fool of himself by trying to sound intelligent while arguing in support of destructive, corrupt or simply stupid new government programs. So sad!

Regardless of your position for or against the President, if you have the ability to read and understand above elementary school level, you have to be concerned for the quality of our government after 50 years of decline of U.S. education. During these past few days, the number of representatives who very clearly demonstrated their lack of understanding of the Constitution was seriously disturbing. These are our government leaders. Yet they speak with such poor grammar they would be admonished by every one of my long since retired middle school teachers; including shop teacher Mr. Rose.

One representative addressing Obstruction of Congress was trying to sound intelligent by using the standard practice of speaking slowly and occasionally pausing as if to be thinking ahead. What she was attempting to explain was how the Constitution identifies the 3 branches of government as “co-equal”. Her comments tell us she has no understanding of the meaning of the English language word “equal”. Additionally, she demonstrated no knowledge of the history of the United States regarding the relationships the three branches have had for over 200 years. And most importantly she isn’t aware of the constitutional process for resolving disputes. Her ignorant rhetoric is widely accepted as intelligent on one side of the aisle that divides the House into two main party groups. So sad!

The proof of the depth of such widespread ignorance is in the fact that during this three-and-a-half year drama the majority party leadership have chosen to refuse to join the President in asking the third branch to rule one way or another. Although these inter-branch disputes have historically been resolved by the constitutionally outlined process, this Congress simply decided they were more “equal” than the Administration, therefore whatever Congress ordered, the Administration must do. Otherwise – according to one political party – the President is Obstructing Congress. So wrong and so sad!

footnote: For those who dislike the President, this article is only intending to point out the ignorance on display in the process. It is constitutionally within the powers of Congress to impeach a President for any “crime” they should choose. The problem in this case is that there is no such crime as “obstruction of Congress” by either the judicial or administration branches. They are co-equal by design – for a reason!

Grateful for Impeachment?

We should be thankful for the impeachment process. Without the light of attention shining into the dark chambers of those who have created a fourth and powerful branch of government, we may not have discovered the serious threat to freedom of these unaccountables. Moreover, we are only now beginning to understand the power to control so much of our government and our lives these bureaucrats have created for themselves.

Because of the availability of so many media outlets, it is extremely difficult to understand the extent of ignorance by so many Americans about what has happened and is happening in Washington, DC. with regards to the, so far, non-violent attempt to overthrow our constitutional representative democracy. The impeachment activity is not the issue. The issue is: now that more and more of us are aware of the degree to which these bureaucrats have incorporated themselves and the extreme efforts they will undertake to protect their power, how do we “drain the swamp” ?

No question that the selective broadcasting of only the anti-Trump speeches in the hearings by so much of the media is partially responsible for the plague of ignorance affecting nearly half the population. No doubt the impeachment will continue to be reported as the lead story by much of the old established media. But when the process is finished, regardless of the outcome, if the subversive forces responsible are not exposed and held accountable, the peaceful transfer of power in America by the will of the people will be the ultimate loss.

We know the facts about how impeachment came about. We know the truth about some of those responsible; but not all!

Whether your team wins or loses, there is nothing to celebrate if the “swamp” isn’t drained.

Timeline to the 2nd Civil War

Before the rise of the Romans, scholars of the Etruscan period recognized a pattern of human behavior wherein a major crisis occurred coincidentally with the end of the lifespan of a generation. This time span of roughly 80 years was named saeculum. As we read the now infamous and quite comical Democratic Party – invitation only – Articles of Impeachment, it might help to identify this activity as the end of another saeculum in America’s history.

We are now roughly 80 years from the crisis of World War Two. That great crisis was roughly 80 years from the 1st Civil War, which itself was roughly 80 years from the American Revolution. Are you beginning to see the pattern now?

Former state Senator Greg Brophy recently presented his thoughts at a GOP breakfast on the importance of the 2020 election by comparing it to the 1864 election of Lincoln. While we are not yet engaged in armed conflict as was the case in 1863, it is undeniable that the political, social and desired economical paths for the United States has the country as divided as it was in 1860.

The very idea that more than 4000 people liked this obvious display of hatred for anything indicative of success and free market competition illustrates the depth of division in America today.

Before Strauss and Howe wrote Generations in 1991, Ronald Reagan warned us that freedom is always only one generation away from extinction. Since America is the last stronghold of freedom on Earth, if socialism emerges as victorious over freedom from the currently simmering crisis here, freedom will face total extinction around the world.

If life has only 12 years left due to man-made climate change, some might not care to engage in the preservation of freedom. But those us who have experienced the value of freedom may choose to fight to be free to live out our last few years in pursuit of happiness.

Climate Change and Science Change

The science of Ecological Economics is explained in a 2003 paper titled “Post-Normal Science”1 by S.Funtowicz and J.Ravetz for the International Society for Ecological Economics. The paper is available online at the Society’s web site. The modern debate over climate change has seen a clash between hard and soft science. Politicians who control the distribution of trillions of dollars often need a ‘scientific’ opinion on which to base these lucrative expenditures. Thus the use of science as a tool for political advantage became popular; after all, if scientists who are too often funded by the politicians, could demonstrate a crisis existed, who could argue against funding the research and development for a solution.

In 2003 the biggest socioeconomic and health crisis available world wide was identified as global warming. While expanding military conflicts across the middle-east dominated headline news, investment opportunities in solutions to combat global warming were gaining the attention of globalists with their eyes on the nearly unlimited combined wealth of the industrialized nations. Unlike lucrative but risky investments in military conflicts, the climate will always be changing and thus an industry built on fighting to stop it will be never ending.

The most famous investor in the ‘green industry’ is also the most famous alarmist, Al Gore. Gore made headlines in 2006 with the release of a film based on his global warming slide show. The New York Times reported “Mr. Gore has seen support for his views rising within the business community: Investment in renewable energy sources like wind and solar is skyrocketing…” as government subsidies increased in these industries, “their costs plummet,”2

Gore’s sales pitch was simple; invest in green energy industries or suffer the painful consequences of global warming killing off life on Earth as we know it. His predictions of the complete melting of the Arctic ice cap flooding coastal cities as well as polar bears becoming extinct in only 10 more years created headlines and a cult-like following. Thanks to his green investing, Gore’s net worth grew to exceed an estimated $200 million. 3

But after more than a decade with not one single prediction Gore had ever made about global warming coming to pass, Gore joined the chorus of those who renamed their cause from global warming to climate change. Clearly, since no one could deny the climate was ever changing, the “inconvenient truth”4 of man-caused global warming would be an easier sell.

The United Nations created a panel to direct the UN’s efforts (a.k.a. expenditures and regulations) and regularly published data gathered by government organizations and universities to confirm the predictions that global warming was a reality. But in late 2009, it was discovered that the temperatures being reported were higher than the temperatures actually being recorded. The Arctic Ice was increasing. The polar bear population counts were increasing at a rate that saw the counts double in 10 years instead of the bears becoming extinct. Then. in a scandalous discovery, data supporting global warming occurring at an alarming rate was proven to be fake.5 Global Warming had not been increasing at the alarming rate identified by “post-normal” scientists who were a key factor of the ecological economics of climate crisis.

The U.S. agencies charged with gathering ‘proof’ of the threat to humanity were named in the 2015 State of the Union address by President Obama. He said that climate change poses a greater threat to Americans than even terrorism.

“I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they’re not scientists; that we don’t have enough information to act,” Mr. Obama said in the speech. “Well, I’m not a scientist, either. But you know what –- I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA,…”6

However, when NASA and NOAA and NSIDC were all discovered to have adjusted their data7,8 to fit the need of the politicians’ rhetoric, the ‘scientists’ on which Obama was counting to justify more taxpayer money to be given to stop man-made climate change were discredited to an almost irreparable level.

It is often reported that there is a consensus of scientists about the causes and solutions for climate change. Such science by consensus would have seemed unimaginable just a few decades ago. But the abandonment of the traditional scientific methodology in lieu of the new science of ecological economics has become the preferred method for advancing political agendas and gaining power and wealth.

When President Obama made the claim that climate change was the greatest threat to future generations, he was not totally wrong. Climate change has always caused life on Earth to evolve, even go extinct. But barring an event of catastrophic proportions such as another meteor impact, the changes to life have historically occurred over thousands and millions of years, not a decade or two as is now mandated by the standards in the new federally backed common core education program. Starting with elementary standards, erasing the teaching of traditional scientific method and accepting ecological economics as a discipline of science is arguably more dangerous for our immediate future generations than any of the other ‘man-made’ threats seeking solutions by government handing over taxpayer money to ‘post-normal’ scientists and political donors.

Footnotes:

  1. http://leopold.asu.edu/sustainability/sites/default/files/Norton,%20Post%20Normal%20Science,%20Funtowicz_1.pdf
  2. http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/16/al-gore-tries-to-rebrand-his-global-warming-alarmism/#ixzz4KFzljvv5

  3. The Daily Caller news foundation 03/16/2016

  4. the title of a film produced in 2006 based on Al Gore’s predictions of the destruction by man-caused global warming.

  5. Article: the TelegraphThe fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever”

    published Feb 7, 2015 by Christopher Booker

  6. President Barack Obama – State of the Union Address – Jan 20, 2015

  7. “Global Warming ‘Fabricated’ by NASA and NOAA” – James Delinpole. July 2, 2016 – http://principia-scientific.org/?s=NOAA+scandal

  8. “NSIDC Busted!” Stephen Goddard, posted April 23, 2016 – https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2016/04/23/nsidc-busted/

The Survey says…U.S. #2 – in Ignorance

Since 2009 nearly every indicator of a nation’s health has shown the U.S. is in decline compared to other major nations. It seems the “change” that was promised in the great campaign of 2008 has come about. But is unimaginable debt passed on to a generation less able to compete in the world economy the change the world’s second most ignorant voters were expecting?

The third largest market research firm in the world, IPSOS, says

the U.S. is ranked the second most ignorant country in the world in our population’s understanding of two areas that should be a free market democracy’s strong points, voting patterns and unemployment rates.

Meanwhile the organization that ranks educational systems among 65 developed nations has once again reported further decline in rank for U.S. student performance. The most recent results now place our high school students out of the top 20 in all three areas tested; math, science, and reading. Math is about to fall out of the top 30 as it now stands at 29th. The 4 point drop in math since 2009 is pale compared to the 10 point drop in reading.

While it is the popular cry of the teachers’ union, lack of money is proven as not the problem since the U.S. spends more per student than most of the countries scoring higher. If that were not proof enough, consider the horrific performance of New York Schools where the spending per student is among the highest in the world. Mark Naison of the Fordham University Urban Studies Program presents a case that the “culture of testing” in the U.S. is fueling an emphasis on rote memorization instead of critical thinking. That opinion is evidenced by the recent sentencing to prison of several Georgia teachers and administrators for changing tests scores to reflect better performance of students and teachers.

This year begins a widening of the infamous Common Core Curriculum and PARC testing. More emphasis on testing to evaluate teacher performance – not student knowledge. It might be said that Common Core should be named “Communist” Core, but since the U.S. ranks lower than Russia and even the Slovak Republic, that title might be confused as a compliment.

We are now at the start of the race for the next President. According to Google the people searching for background information about Hillary Clinton aren’t looking for details about her long history of escaping criminal prosecution for activities from the Rose Law Firm to the FBI files mysteriously found in her office. Her Benghazi cover-up wasn’t even making the grade for background information.

It seems that even at #2, IPSOS may be underestimating voter ignorance. Maybe we can be ranked #1 yet.

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑