Five General Rules on Disinformation or Biased News

 My humble advice:

1.  If you read through a forty-line story and there's only marginally two lines of pure fact...the odds are that there's a fair amount of 'sway' or disinformation in the piece.

2.  If 'anonymous' sources are the primary structure of the article/news....it's best to just discard it.

3.  If they tell you right away that their data has been fact-checked....like in paragraph two, then it's probably wise to ask who the fact-checker is, and their background or past.

4.  Typically, the headline of a disinformation piece is signaling you ahead of time.....so look over the headline carefully.

5.  Finally, if the article is written to help someone or some group, or to harm someone/some group.....the odds are heavily in favor of it being disinformation. 

The Biden Dilemma Over Illegal Immigration

 If you go and review CNN or any of the normal news networks....the number of illegal migrants in the US is somewhere between 10 and 20 million (it's generally the number that the US government will sign up to and agree on).

So the real question here....if Biden's policy to offer amnesty occurs, and suddenly the real number turns out to be 30 to 35 million?  That type of revelation would put the whole government and migrant focus into a different prospective.  Some would ask....how did fifteen-odd million people just hide from all this data collection, and others would ask.....what type of work were these people doing to hide from state and federal officials.  

All of this to occur by the end of 2021?  Probably.

If the numbers stay in the ten to twenty-million range?  The situation can just continue on.  If it gets up around 25-to-30 million?  Just settle back to be entertained, and once you get to around 35 million....things will get real interesting. 

Is Mitch McConnell Nuts?

 Around six weeks ago, Senator McConnell made a blunt statement....Trump was finished....Trump was not helpful....the party needs to move on....etc.  It was obvious then that the Kentucky Senator was finished with relations with Trump.

So in the past forty-eight hours....the same guy comes out and says he will support Trump in 2024 if he wins at the convention.  

Nuts?  On my humble scale....Mitch is somewhere around a 9-to-9.5 on the nuts scale.  

If Trump emerges in 2024 and wins at the convention....I expect Mitch to be one of about forty Republicans who are deemed as unhelpful and given zero access to Trump's inner circle.  

What really happened here?  I would suggest around fifty-percent of Republican Senators have been around DC so much.....that they really don't grasp what has occurred in the nation over the past forty years.  

These are people who need to pack up a camper, and spend six weeks traveling around the nation....getting a clear understanding of what changed, and how they (the Senators) no longer fit into reality. 

Woke = Sin?

 When you drill down into all of this woke-business....what it really comes down to....is that you feel some type of sin, and some type of guilt.  At that point, if you were a religious guy truly feeling a sin-trip....you'd ask for forgiveness, and get all religious-ified.  

Well....normal people would.

Assholes?  Skeptics?  Jerks?  Pricks?  No....you could dump a ton of sin and guilt on them, and they frankly don't care.  They'd even laugh in your face.

The more you review this entire discussion over woke.....it just looks like some 15th century Catholic Church 'drill', and you confess everything to feel good.  The skeptics and jerks?  They are just grinning....they've committed no sin and feel no regret/pity/sorrow.  

What eventually happened around the 1520s/1530s?  They lost around fifty-percent of their 'team' because of Martin Luther and his exodus from the church.  The woke crowd will eventually find the Martin Luther character confronting them, and a anti-woke crowd will appear. 

Biden and the Nukes Chatter

 I'm kinda surprised by the amount of general coverage over the Democratic Party suggestion to President Biden, to give up sole discretion over nuclear warfare, and allow a 'committee' to process the situation and leave the President out of the situation.

There are generally five issues here if you think about it:

1.  This idea comes out of thin air, and no journalist can say where this suddenly developed.  

2.  If you said a committee of five were created for this 'purpose'....you'd also require each of the five to have Secret Service protection around the clock, and have a attaché-case (the codes) guy always within close proximity to the committee members.

3.  The fact that all five members might not be in the same room, same building or same city when the threat occurs?  It begs the question how they would react, or 'vote'.  What if you had one of the five on some camping trip in rural Idaho, and the emergency came up....would the guy even be able to vote 'nuke' or would you just sit on a 2-2 situation for nuke use?  

4.  Picking people for this purpose?  If the President is so untrustworthily for the job presently....then you can't let him select the five committee members.  Then who would select them?  The House/Senate? 

5.  Why would you limit this committee thing to only nuclear weapons?  Once you open up this discussion.....you could have fifty different jobs that the President typically does.....run by committees.  We could have a whole 4th element of the government....just called 'Committees'...which function and the President would just be there to hand pens out, attend funerals, make speeches, wave at people from the White House, and do interviews on comedy shows.

The more they openly discuss this....the more likely there's a whole list of things that President Biden probably can't do in his present state of mind, and it just begs the question....when exactly did folks wake up to this?

My suspicion?  I think after VP Harris called around to foreign folks in the last two weeks....they all voiced some secret report that they'd read....that President Biden isn't all there mentally, and they want some assurance that things will be managed in a safe way.  

It's just a funny discussion and you wonder if President Biden himself realizes the game being played.  

Footnote:  If I ran this situation, I'd arrange a 7-day shift situation and have five House/Senate members flown to some secretive underground bunker, with no booze, no TV, etc.  You pull a seven day shift....'nuke-team-duty'.  I'd make this as dull and boring as possible....requiring Republicans and Democrats to mingle for seven days straight.  

Seven Blunt Truths

 1.  Colin Kapernick had one brief entry point in 2017 to clean up his act and return to the NFL.  From 2018 on, he had zero value.  

2.  Around 10 to 20 percent of NBA fans have permanently left and will never watch another game for the rest of their lives.

3.  The million or so migrants set to enter the US in 2021?  They will find little to no excess employment going on.  When the Biden situation occurs with illegals in the US get their visa.....then get told to move on because their illegal job no longer exists....that will be the open door for the new migrants to get an illegal job....as long as they avoid the visa deal.

4.  Was John Kerry meeting with Iranian officials prior to Biden assuming office?  Yeah....it appears that way (same deal as Flynn got into trouble for).

5.  Some folks are actually talking potential conflict arising from Turkey and Iran.  That would be a shocker.

6.  Some Americans went to France recently and were asking if France was grateful for Americans liberating them in WW II?  Kinda silly....99-percent of those who were affected....are dead.  For five-percent of the population....there's some shock because they've never been told that they were invaded, or that someone had to kick the German's ass....to liberate France.

7. There's talk that a $10 an hour wage deal will come up now....instead of the $15 talked about last month, for the minimum wage.  

I've Tried to Make Sense

 I picked up this recent 'chat-topic'....training classes to influence white folks to pretend to be 'less' white.

So, the jest of this training gimmick revolves around ten things:

1.  You ought to be less oppressive.

2.  You ought to be less arrogant.

3.  You ought to be less sure of yourself.

4.  You ought to be less agreeable with other white folks.  

5.  You ought to be less defensive.

6.  You ought to be less ignorant.

7.  You need to be more humble.

8.  You need to listen to everyone....even stupid people.

9.  You need to believe people....even if they are wrong.

10.  Finally, you need to have less concern, less enthusiasm, less focus, and less interest in general topics.

The list here...are simply talking points for a trainer to set up a seminar (likely to be three or four hours) and get you into some mindset that you can be trained to be.....well.....'LESS'.  

I sat and thought about my habits.

Generally, the minute I identify you as stupid or lacking common sense....I hit my personal 'mute-button' and from that point on...whatever you say....I'm not going to pay attention to it.  Nothing personal on skin-color or skin-condition or even education-level (I do it to PhD folks as well).....it's an automatic gut-feeling that comes over me (kinda like being in a grassy yard and seeing four snakes hanging out at one end).

Generally, trying to suggest to me over x-topics that I need to feel less focus or interest....I'll switch to a persuasion situation, and convince you in two minutes that you might not have my interest in mind.  

Generally, telling me to trust ALL people....just won't happen.  I'm a born skeptic and once you start on some Chevy pick-ups are all five-star vehicles....my trust level dissipates real quick.  I can think of about 5,000 different arguments you could start up on full and absolute trust, and I'd just push back against that level of thinking.

Generally, if you measured me up on humbleness....I'd near a '9'.  Most people I've ever worked with....probably were a '7' or above.  If you were a royal a-hole fellow, there's pretty good odds that I didn't do much to help you, or buy your product, or see your discussion advancing too far.

Generally, on being ignorant of things (say the top 100k in the world of topic)....I read an awful lot....ask a lot of questions, and would suggest that there might be a few things that I am absolutely ignorant on (raccoon breeding cycles, basic transmission repair, Star Wars characters, Catholic demon chatter, romance novels, vegan foods, Japanese beers, benefits of meth, Japanese cartoons, and barn-building).  But when you open this discussion of being ignorant....what exactly are you referring to?

Generally, on being less defensive....if you are suggesting that you say we need to do something, and I must accept your conditions....well, no....it won't work that way.  Again, what exactly are you suggesting to be less defensive about?

Generally, I base discussions on the logic in the matter, and facts....I don't care what skin you have or don't have....you need to base some discussion item upon on logic and facts.  If you can't use either....it's not a discussion, and we don't need to worry about mutual agreement.

Generally, if you are asking me to be less sure of myself....how did you arrive at that level of thinking?  Are we just flipping a coin and every other flip....I need to be wrong, even if I am right?

Generally, if you are asking me to be less arrogant....what's the odds that you yourself.....are displaying arrogant behavior?  Ten percent?  Fifty percent?

Finally, this less oppressive chatter....if you suggesting I accept a marginal service or third-world political system, or a educational level that you'd expect in Paraguay....then I'm probably going to oppress you a good bit.  It's the same, if you walked into a restaurant and paid for forty dollars for a marginal dinner with a can of some soda.....you'd be fairly oppressive about the situation.  

All of this leads me to one general feeling....there's some less-than-smart individuals who are fairly screwed-up in life and figuring there's got to be some way to level the playing field and bring people down to their level.  Frankly, that's probably not going to happen. 

Yeah, I did go and spend some time thinking over this discussion, and I tried to make sense out of it, but it fails the 'logic-test'.  Added to this....Asians and Latinos will just start laughing if you convey they also need to be re-trained and follow this process.