I HATE THE MEDIA

      Donald Trump, the President-in-Exile, once said that the American News Media is a "national disgrace." It truly is that. The overwhelming majority of the news outlets today are so completely under the thumb of Corporate special interests whose relationship with lawmakers and regulators is so seamless that we may as well have a State Ministry of Propaganda and Culture. Like our elections, however, the Oligarchy prefers maintaining an illusion of choice; even offering us Controlled Opposition outlets. There really is no choice. Just as our last 'Red Wave' Congress gifted Obama with a repeal of the Anti-Propaganda Act of 1948; our current crop of RINOs is working overtime to hand the Biden/Harris Junta the so-called Restrict Act to control our sources of information even further. 

    The main purpose of the contemporary American Media is to create distraction, spread propaganda, and sow fear and division. Yes, there are occasionally accurate stories in the press: I'm certain that even during the Third Reich one could get reliable information about road conditions, weather forecasts, and sports scores. But they also got an agenda sold to them and that's essentially what we get too. Basically, what today's news comes down to is marketing; selling ideas that increase the power and profit of those interests controlling the press. 

   The Media's coverage of crime stories is a case in point of how subtly this agenda-promotion is played out. "If it bleeds, it leads," the motto of cynical editors everywhere, gives Americans the impression that violent crime is ubiquitous---even though by the UN's own numbers, only two US cities even make the list of top 25 most violent cities. That's not to say that crime isn't a problem in the US; but mostly our problems stem from the less-glamorous violent bum jungles and organized gangs committing property crimes and assaults (which our politicians of both parties do nothing about); and that suicides and narcotics overdoses are responsible for most of the non-natural or non-disease related deaths here. The Whacko Left Wing's response is to defund the police and legalize vagrancy, euthanasia, and drugs: the Right's response is to pretend that such problems only happen in 'Blue States.' 

   The Mainstream Media also makes it a point to bury details of stories when they reflect badly on the Junta's constituents. We've all seen it: whenever some horrific crime is perpetrated by a minority, his identity is withheld until trolls have flooded every comment section blaming it on a white male Christian Trump-supporter. When a White does commit it; they post his picture but censor the Internet of all of his social media accounts---because the majority of the time, it's some Left-Wing kook or homo activist responsible. The trolls achieve the same effect.

   Lately the MSM has been running the same interference for the Gay Mafia. The fact that that demographic has throughout history has had disproportional representation among violent criminals (especially towards women and children) is why dead White males considered it an antisocial mental disorder. The Media would just as soon that we forgot some of that science and passively accept the New Normal. 

   A case in point happened in Connecticut lately. In spite of considerable bumbling from local law enforcement, one of America's longest-standing unidentified homicide victims got her name back; thanks largely to the efforts of her sister who had been searching for her missing sibling.

   The MSM story concluded by saying that "investigators are still searching for Patricia Newsom’s killer." What they conveniently leave out is that they've had a suspect since her body was found in 1975: a convicted killer named Glenn Askeborn who died in prison last year. There was considerable circumstantial evidence tying Askeborn to the crime; and since Patricia has been identified, even more corroborating evidence has surfaced. This BTW, includes the recent discovery that Patricia ran away from a girls' home with a friend---whose identity and current whereabouts are also unknown.  

   Why did Askeborn's name drop from the story? Well, it happens that he was an out and proud member of the LGBTQ Community. He was in fact a troon who disguised as a female and went by the name of 'Samantha Glenner.' Just like the recent transsexual Nashville shooter---whose 'manifesto' has never been made public---certain interests would rather sweep such details under the rug. 

   Disgusting as this kind of journalistic chicanery is, it's certainly not the first time that editors (and even police agencies) have scrambled all of their resources to keep any mention of 'orientation' out of the official story. In fact, it's not even the first time it's happened in a high-profile Cold Case. 

   When discussing the MSM, we're probably not telling anybody anything new. Leftist activists are always going to do what they habitually do: stoop to the lowest levels to promote their sick agendas. However, this brings us to a real problem.

   What about the 'Conservative' Media?

    Yesterday, most of my newsfeed was flooded with story after story about the horrible mass-murder in San Jacinto, Texas. It's not that it wasn't a major news story: the troubling thing from my perspective was that nearly every headline from a 'Conservative' source took great pains to point out that the suspect was an immigrant. In fact, just like the Liberal Media goes out of its way to magnify any incident of criminality committed by anyone even tangentially connected to the political Right while downplaying any criminality among their own base; it seems that the Controlled Opposition 'Conservative' Press has adopted the same tactic. The San Jacinto Case is an extreme example, but it's not at all uncommon that any crime committed by an immigrant makes the news on the Right, in spite of the fact that the native-born population far exceeds immigrants in terms of criminal behavior. 

   Texas Governor Greg Abbott, whose subservience to the Alt-Right agenda is so pronounced that he's recently offered a pardon to a convicted murderer upon demands from that sector, recently threw further gasoline on the fire by bringing both the victims' and the suspect's immigration status into the debate. How is this any different from the Left's exploitation of violence to agitate for gun control?

    The sad fact is that it's no different. Those of us who grew up in the Reagan Era may recall that the Conservative Media of the day once consisted of erudite and dignified figures like William F. Buckley, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman, and Louis Rukeyser who challenged the fallacies of the Left in open debate and routinely toppled their arguments. In spite of a hostile news media during the 1980s, Ronald Reagan managed to carry 45 and 49 states respectively in two elections. He didn't accomplish this by trying to own the libtards by mimicking their sleazy behavior; nor by pandering to whack-jobs who think that they're part of a super-race and that White Sharia is an acceptable form of government. 

    Unfortunately, too, trying to explain any of this to the Postmodern NPC Right is about as fruitless as trying to explain the stupidity of Left-Wing pundits to an average Liberal. I know, I've tried. Gauge the intelligence and general character of the 21st Century Right by these kinds of responses:

    

   We're reading in 'thoughts' like these the end result of years of dumbing-down the Conservative Media to the level of the Liberal MSM. If they actually had any sort of education, they would realize that the aforementioned President Reagan signed an Amnesty Law into effect in 1987. "In many ways, amnesty was a success story — it gave millions of people the legal status they required to have a better life. It even turned a $100 million profit for the government (through the fees it charged applicants). And while immigration restrictionists still claim that amnesty encouraged more undocumented immigrants to come, studies show the opposite: amnesty produced a decline in the number of illegal entries into the country."

    "Studies show that those who legalized saw their wages go up by 20%, they were also more likely to get a higher education and become homeowners," according to a follow-up survey done by the El Paso Times.

   Republican Senator Alan Simpson, who sponsored the legislation, wrote: “The work to be done is to avoid seeing this nation populated with a furtive illegal subclass of human beings who are afraid to go to the cops, afraid to go to a hospital…or afraid to go to their employer. If we do not choose to have immigration reform in the near future, the alternative will not just be the status quo. No, the alternative instead will be an increased public intolerance — a failure of compassion, if you will — toward all forms of immigration and types of entrants.” Imagine a Republican Senator saying anything like that today. But that's what Conservatism used to sound like.

   This is why the Conservative movement of today is failing. Both in its methods and its message, it has become indistinguishable from the Far Left; except that the Right seems to aspire to be more ruthlessly vicious rulers and more accomplished liars than their so-called opposition. “When it comes to the most important things in life, you should toss civility aside and fight for what’s right with everything you have,” as Rabbi Dr. Ari Lamm, another yo-yo who passes for an intellectual among today's Right, opined in the Moonie-run media outlet, Newsweek. Well, we see how well that strategy has worked since Reagan's time.