Lying Media

Proof that the MSM is completely corrupt and compromised. I guarantee that much more money/favors exchanged hands than what is reported here.

Soros owns them

I have long said that modern advertising, going back over 100 years, has prepared the minds of the public to swallow whole, any and all lies fed to them.  A big reason we are where we are is due to "marketing" and "public relations."  The KFF and Climate Fraud are culminations of decades of deceit.

Here is further confirmation of what I have said. I did not know of this man, but he is simply one of a number of such scoundrels. A typical progressive, who holds everyone else in contempt. Better he had been strangled in his crib.

Plato has nothing on us  

It is interesting this piece out, as last week I came to the conclusion that, these days, virtually every mass message coming out nationally, from whatever quarter, is dishonest at its base. They are not meant to inform, enlighten, ennoble, help or entertain. They are meant to sell something, be that something an idea, product of service. As such, the messages always make the "product" appear better than it actually is.  

I believe it is only possible to encounter honesty, at least get close to it, on an individual-to-individual or small community basis.  

That may well be the case, but today.....

I should also clarify my position. I am not only referring to advertising. I include government announcements, the news media, public affairs announcements, press releases, academic papers, the weather report, everything that covers broad swaths of "information" and the nation.  I am sure I have left some out. Virtually all have an angle.  Virtually all, have a hidden or dishonest agenda they wish to push. 

Perhaps my definition of "dishonest" is too broad. But by dishonest, I mean even spiels which play on one's emotions and prejudices as was done by that sack of shit Bernays.  I know how to manipulate people, I hate it. That is one reason I would not ever again wish to head a company. To lead people, you must manipulate them. 

In the case of advertising, the question naturally arises as to whether the advertisements create culture or reflect it.

Whatever the case may be, there is no doubt that advertising amplifies whatever cultural trends there are. But given how modern big-money advertising is so heavily research- and focus-group-based, I think they ride the wave rather than create it. Of course, active indoctrination does occur. But such a thing is mostly done in education, the media, and government.

So we probably see reflected back to us in advertising what we are. The same arguable applies to politicians. We may curse them for being glib, corrupt, liars. But we voted this type of person into office and continue to. I've said for a long time (decades) that the problem starts with the voters.

That's very true. The elephant in the room whenever we talk about this topic is Dalrymple's book, Life at the Bottom. Much like Mark Steyn's America Alone, these books give a direct and condensed view of reality as we are shoveling it upon ourselves.

It is so. There has always been a lower class (as defined by habits and behavior, not income). And there will always be. Only lately (if ever?) has everyone above these bottom-feeder classes begun to ape that behavior. That is truly astonishing to me.

No man is an island. But to "fit in" with the current culture, you have to believe, and aid and abet, some enormously stupid and deceitful things. I am alienated from my culture...and that's a good thing. It's like saying your immune system is protecting you from a virus.

The only hope for people to be reasonably happy, healthy, and productive is to disengage from popular Western culture. The side benefit is you no longer have to eat lies, morning, noon, and night.



I doubt that there is more than one person in a hundred who is reasonably able to discern fact from fiction...or even wants to, which is half the problem.

Yes, I think he summed it up well in that last paragraph.

I need to first finish A Dead Man in Trieste, but I've just checked that Sayers book out of the online library. That one quote is quite reminiscent of P. G. Wodehouse.

As an aside, the Trieste book is described as "a light historical novel that starts slow" and I'd agree with that thus far. A British consul goes missing in Trieste. A Special Branch agent is sent to find out what happened to him. And I'll give the writer credit so far for keeping the plot simple and plausible. The tendency is to throw in a bazillion characters, all with some motivation to kill the guy, etc. But what we have 1/5 of the way into this is a dead mystery set in a quite exotic Trieste.



I do believe it has softened us up in regards to distinguishing between truth and lies. Perhaps similarly, and more importantly, it's not so much that we can't distinguish. It's that we don't care to, or it's not a priority. A Consumer Culture cares only for a never-ending smorgasbord of new conveniences and distractions.

I still insist (not that anyone has said otherwise) that the way to understand our culture is via Hans Christian Andersen's The Princess and the Pea:



Call it Snowflake Culture or whatever. But we've become more and more used to a soft life. And we are told if we feel any peas under the mattress, it is because there is "inequality" or some racist fellow out there is making life hard for us.

I had lunch with a business associate yesterday who I know pretty well. He's generally conservative-ish leaning kinda-sorta. (He's a hunter and a gun nut.) He's also coached women's soccer in high school and he told me the story of a girl who was "transitioning" to be a man and wished to play on the boy's soccer team.

This is Oregon, so keep that in mind. He was all fine with that, in a true Libertarian capitulation sort of way. "If that's what she wants, who am I to disagree or bar her way?" And that would be fine, as far as it goes. But that's never as far as it goes.

Because the point is, this isn't just about them. These are people demanding that the rest of us take part in and accommodate their delusions or else. I do not believe these are sweet, innocent, broken-wing sparrows just trying to mend their lives. I believe they are a kind of religious zealot – or participant in a mad cult, at the very least. As much as people want to frame the question as "Ms. Baker just wants to use Crest toothpaste instead of Colgate. Who am I to bother to disagree?"

Last I noticed, I wasn't required to pretend that someone's teeth were whiter if they started using Crest. But if one announces oneself as "transgender," then there are suddenly umpteen requirements thrust upon the non-participants in this person's cult-of-delusion.

If you apply nothing but choice and market forces to a society, you're going to soon have boys pretending to be girls in the women's locker room. There must be a moral principle and authority higher than just Consumer Culture. If not, well, you see where we are going. We are taking the bodies of healthy boys and girls (or men and women) and allowing them to undergo ghastly surgeries that I don't think Josef Mengele would have conceived of. All in the name of "choice."

Absolutely. These pervs don't stay to themselves, they don't leave the rest of us alone, they proselytize, particularly the young.  

They are damned by their own actions or their own illness and they know it. This drives them even crazier and they become fanatics. Like all religious fanatics, they demand everyone else conform to and pronounce their theology. Failing that, non-believers can be banished to some desert island or, even better, recycled. 

This is why one cannot simply say, "Who am I to question this or that?" I prefer to live in a community which is clean and one can stroll around without fear, as opposed to one full of garbage, filth and the insane wandering the streets. 

Let me sum up the above for those in Rio Linda:

The party line is that these "transgender" kids are now free to express themselves. I think the more reasonable explanation is that they are not well-adjusted – twisted by the very ideologies offered up as their salvation (the general Leftist/liberal Zeitgeist).

If we just give in to them, I think we help to create little monsters who are neither good for themselves nor anyone else. And being "nice" is for moral cowards. It used to be that imparting at least some moral instruction was considered the duty of adults. Now adults run to be forever-children as (in particular, for men) the authority of adults is now all but a joke and if children "decide" that they want to change from a boy to a girl, the state steps in and may even hide this "transition" from the parents.

A good Catholic friend of mine once summed up my philosophy: "Brad, you mean to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." I had to chuckle at that at the time (15 years ago or so). But it expresses precisely one of our main problems we see so clearly today. We have defined anything that doesn't cater to our every whim, fancy, or prejudice as "distress," and something to be earnestly avoided. We need a "safe space" when we are "triggered" thusly. To counter, correct, or conflict with someone's ideas, no matter how bizarre those ideas are, is considered an assault on them.

Again, this isn't me intellectualizing from an armchair. The evidence for this is plain and voluminous. If you don't say "no" to a bully or a brat, you get even worse behavior. And as much as the "transgender" are cast as freedom-fighters, the only thing they are battling is their own nature...a fight they can never truly win, no matter how many drugs they take or how many body parts they lop off.