Joe Rogan and Cancel Culture: Freedom for Some But Not All

It seems like the establishment media, especially social media, has gone into overdrive to try and manufacture a media non-event into something resembling a "story". I'm talking about, of course, this "tempest in a teacup" over podcast host Joe Rogan remarks on Spotify which some on the Left disapproved of.  The result is the predictable backlash of the Cancel Culture's "PC" clique. 

The hubbub started a few weeks ago with Rogan making a statement opposing mandates and masks. That's his personal opinion. Rogan is also something of a "shock jock" who enjoys stirring the pot. Now (right on cue), videos from 2017 are popping up where Rogan was making light of the politically correct minefields whites have to tap dance through while others get a pass. Again, his personal opinions.

The latest is from Andrew Yang. He originally came out and agreed that Rogan, while somewhat crude, wasn't a racist.  Now, he's caved to pressure from a relative handful of Left Wing nuts (he's apparently of being called names), has reversed his position and has decided that Rogan is racist after all.

As some of you may remember, Yang, who is of Taiwanese ancestry, is a former Democratic presidential candidate. He's also a businessman and founder of a political action committee, the Forward Party which promotes a non-partisan approach to politics. Supposedly Yang also knows Rogan, and has admitted that Rogan regularly interacts and works with blacks. Yang even said that he had never known of any racist issues, but that was evidently before caving.

As an aside, the Forward party claims its "Not Left Not Right" and its goal is to create a new third party and breaking the rule of the Corporate owned Democrat/Republican duopoly.  It supports Rank Choice Voting, something called "Human Centered Capitalism", "Fact-Based Governance", a Universal Base Income, and a government based on "Grace and Tolerance" since people are fallible. Apparently they're indecisive when too.

Others, some of whom having overestimated their clout, have opted to leave Spotify include Neil Young, Graham Nash, Stephen Stills, Joni Mitchell, Nils Lofgren, India Arie, and author Brene' Brown as part of a "protest" that either Joe Rogan goes or they go. So far, it looks like Rogan is remaining. However, Spotify is now adding a "disclaimer" , warning listeners that Rogan's podcast may include "triggering" language. I guess that means having your blanky at the ready. 

For his part, Joe Rogan has denied being "racist" but has agreed to soften his usual acidic shows for the benefit of...who exactly? Joe's audience is mainly pretty conservative. Not that many "light weight" types listen to his podcasts, but I suspect there's a few trying to bait him, but whatever.  He's also repeatedly spoken out against Biden's mask mandate, as well as mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations.

Frankly, I'm not much of a fan of Joe. I've never found his podcast particularly entertaining. I get the impression that he's trying to fill Rush Limbaugh's shoes while using a Howard Stern or Don Imus format (both of whom also got into trouble over a racial remark). But, if so, that might explain all the manufactured ado over essentially nothing.  Of course, nowadays, it doesn't take much to set people off on some hissy fit.

 Lord knows that people aren't suppose to speak their mind or have independent thoughts outside the collective.  The Establishment Media, after all, provides the dicta to what's news and what's not or what we're suppose to think and say.  It tells us who to like or vote for, what is or isn't important, how to feel or look, and ultimately, what's socially acceptable or not.  In short, it conveys the ideals and attitudes that we are suppose to adhere to.

The Establishment Media is what's responsible for the current social and political climate in America. It rides roughshod over the herd mentality it creates.  It serves as the mouthpiece of the ruling Oligarchy on behalf of the Corporatocracy which has replaced our Republic. Cancel Culture is its bastardized offshoot, along with political correctness, "wokeness", and instant offendedness de jure.

As a political writer, the majority of my work is posted online. I've learned that if we stray too much from the accepted script (aka "guidelines") or "cancelled", which included being shadow blocked (something I know well), suspended or removed from our host site. They also restrict how often our posts are cycled through. We're also trolled, chastised, censured by self-important "fact finders" or called names (just like on a playground except they hide behind their keyboards).  It's all part of the "Cancel Culture".  

 Don't fret about Joe though. People like Rogan or Stern may take a hit, but they've got a pretty good management team that plays the game well. In fact, the so-called "controversy" typically boost their audience.  People love to live vicariously through others into today's media driven society.  

That's why we love watching shows like "The View", "The Bachelor", "90 Days and Counting", and other "reality shows" .  Face it, we've devolved into a voyeur society. We rather watch other people do what we wish we could do. That's, in part, the premise behind "The Running Man" and "The Hunger Games".

We wish we had the guts to stand up or speak out against "the system", but we prefer the comfort and safety of our couches while stuffing our faces and yelling at the television. As close as some get to standing up is playing video games where they exist in a virtual world with no consequences for our actions...or mistakes and almost always emerge as the hero.  That too is part of the Cancel Culture.

This fantasy world has been created for us as a way to vent off anger, frustration, and gives us a false sense of having "accomplished" something (they also comprise the core of so-called "fact finders"). We play a video games or watch a movies to emerge ourselves into some plot or character who saves the world or whatever. Meanwhile, the Corporate beast goes merrily on its way, having defused itself of any real threats to its control.  Who needs freedom when you can have "virtual freedom"?

There's a great line in the movie, "The Longest Day", in which Richard Burton's RAF fighter pilot character, Flying Officer David Campbell, says "the thing that's always worried me about being one of the few is the way we keep getting fewer". There's a great deal of truth in that statement. Those of us who do speak out often find ourselves isolated by the powers that be. When I first started writing articles back in 2004, there was about a two dozen of us locally. Now, there's just one...me. Nationally, it's the same story.

Some who posted on sites like YouTube found themselves blocked, censored, and defunded; sometimes even before their video was even posted!  In some cases, their video library was even deleted. For a few determined individuals, they've found other platforms to host their videos, albeit taking a hit in audience numbers and income. However, hundreds, if not thousands, folded out of frustration.

A few continued to write, post videos, do podcasts or radio shows have cut back on content. They no longer freely say what they want to say. They're afraid of being harassed, stalked, defunded, or being "cancelled" again. Several changed their formats to something other than political.  

That's the "self-cancelling" portion of the Cancel Culture, which is perhaps the most insidious since it forces you to second guess or silence yourself. You're no longer able to "speak your truth" out of fear. You have effectively imprisoned yourself to the delight of the ruling Oligarchy and it's "woke" minions.

Speaking of truth, the Cancel Culture has a funny way of defining theirs. However, hypocrisy seems key. If someone is white, Asian, Hispanic, male or non-feminist female says or does something it disapproves of, that individual must immediately apologize or face retribution. They must express the deepest remorse, seek forgiveness, and make some sort of restitution.

Case in point, if someone makes a comment or joke about race, they're usually suspended, if not fired. Same goes for comments not supportive of BLM, feminism, or LGBTQ.  However, comments and jokes about whites, Asians, Hispanics, or straights are okay. But understand this is a one way street.

Fairness and equality should allow everyone or no one to make similar comments or jokes about other groups, but this isn't about fairness or equality. It never has been. It's about creating two classes. One of the "oppressed" and one of the "oppressor". Don't believe me? Pay attention the next time you watch a standup comedian or almost any of the comedies on TV.

As the great Mel Brooks said, political correctness is "the death of comedy". Once, openly laughed at bigots, racism and racists on all sides. Now we're afraid too. The comic genius added that because of political correctness, movies like "Blazing Saddles" or "Young Frankenstein" couldn't be made today (or the "Blues Brothers" or "Smokey and the Bandit") Yet, we have movies like "White Chicks" featuring two black men in drag as white blonde girls.

Nick Cannon, host of "The Mask Singer" and several other shows on MTV, made an anti-white and an anti-Jewish comment. He was fired. However, after he offered an apology (of sorts) for his anti-Jewish remarks, he was rehired. Whoopi Goldberg was recently suspended for two weeks for making anti-Jewish and anti-Holocaust comments. Anyone else would have been fired.  On the other hand, look at what happened to Mel Gibson for making similar remarks. The guy is still an outcast in Hollywood.

Lastly, while we're still on the topic of double standards, let's take the 2021 miniseries "Anne Boleyn". While there have been other movies about ill-fated Queen of England, what makes this one stand out is that "Anne" is played by a black actress, Jodie Turner-Smith.  While she is a very accomplished actress, should she be playing the Queen of England? (disclaimer: Anne Boleyn and her sister Mary are ancestors of mine. Their origin was Norman, an admixture of Norse and Northern Frank, and Celt).

What about the British TV series "Merlin", which is about the great wizard, King Arthur and his court where Queen Guinevere is played by Angel Colby, another talented black actress. No one said anything, but was that acceptable?  The Arthurian story is central to the self-identity of the British. It's part of their national character as much as Helen of Troy and Achilles are for the Greeks or Siegfried is to the Germans.

Let's put it another way. What if an Asian actress played Tina Turner? Is that politically correct or should the Cancel Culture overrule artistic license? Could a Hispanic portray Martin Luther King ? Would everyone be okay if a white guy played Michael Jackson or Barack Obama?  How about a black guy playing Bruce Lee or Cesar Chavez? And in the realm of "fat chance", what do you think would happen if transgender actor of any race was to play Jesus, Moses, Buddha, or Muhammad? Yikes!  As an aside, Jews would be least likely to object over someone gay portraying Moses.  Ironic isn't it?

Where political correctness should have stepped in (but didn't exist at the time) was in the making of Westerns where Europeans were made up to play Native Americans and Mexicans, especially given that there were ample Native American and Hispanic actors available! Same goes for actors doing blackface (except in 1993, when Whoopi Goldberg's honey at the time, Ted Danson, did a roast for Whoopi in blackface.  Hollywood said that was okay).  Now, political corrected has gone too far the other way.

Fear is a powerful weapon. It causes self-doubt and silence. It's the "mind-killer" as Frank Herbert, author of the "Dune" series, wrote. On some occasions it forces people to turn on others...and themselves...by joining with the mob to silence others. There's a Faustian security in numbers. There's also intimidation too, which is the slimy underbelly of the Cancel Culture.

The Cancel Culture thrives on fear. It's power is there. It seeks to hide the truth. Political correctness would have no objections anyone of another race portraying someone of European origin, but not the reverse. The Cancel Culture would ensure that no one spoke out or objected less that be censured, fired, or purged. It has confused the etiquette of free speech with the right of free speech; of being respectful, and in its place imposed denial of free speech. It's the same type of fear mongering the Nazis spread during the 1930's and 40s. It's the same too as the McCarthy Era "Red Scare".

When it comes to expressing one's opinion about a topic, particularly something like Covid or vaccines, what gives the Cancel Culture the moral right to slap anyone down and tell them they don't have the right of free speech? The Founding Fathers didn't include an addendum to the 1st Amendment saying that we had freedom of speech and expression except when someone else disagrees with the mob.

If the politically correct "woke" individuals and groups behind the Cancel Culture truly want to celebrate and embrace diversity as they claim, they need to first start with diversity of thought and opinion. They need to move beyond the superficial like gender and skin color and look to ideas.

Cancel Culture is the unholy spawn of Political Correctness brought into being by the emotionally insecure and intellectually coddled. It attempts to hide the very things it advocates, namely openness and diversity. It strives to protect the artificial bubble of "wokeness", which acts as security blanket using forced compliance, intimidation and censorship in the name of "freedom of speech" for some, but not for all.  Somewhere Stalin, Mao, and Hitler are smiling.

 I don't know that I'd agree with Joe Rogan anymore than I would Whoopi Goldberg, Nick Cannon, Mel Gibson, or anyone else who has faced censure.  But I do know that I would, as the 18th Century French philosopher, Voltaire, reputedly said,  "I may not agree with what you said, I will fight to death for your right to say it". It's time to put an end to doublespeak of closed minded "wokeness", incorrect political correctness, suspend Cancel Culture and get on with freedom of expression and diversity of ideas.

If you want to know more, please take a look at the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free!

 

What Racial Slurs Did Joe Rogan Say? Viral Videos RevealPodcasters Past Remarks

Andrew Yang apologizes for saying Joe Rogan isn't racist because he works with Black people

Who has quit Spotify? A list of who have left over Joe Rogan

Neil Young quit Spotify because of Joe Rogan. These artistshave followed his leave

The Forward Party

 

Celebrities who got fired from their TV shows over racismclaims

Nick Cannon fired after calling white people, Jews 'evil savages, closer to animals' in racist podcast rant

Mel Brooks Says 'Blazing Saddles' Would Never Get Made Today Because Political Correctness 'Is the Death of Comedy'

 

  

Impeachment and Life After Trump: "To Whom It May Concern in Anywhere America"

 

Like him or hate him, you have to admit that Donald Trump was never boring. From his sold out speeches in stadiums throughout the country, to his press conferences and verbal jousts with so-called "journalists", to his tweets, we never knew what he was going to say.

However, it was mostly the later, his tweets, which were the most incendiary. Though they were typically directed to his supporters, he would use the platform to go after those who attacked him directly or indirectly. It became a way to express his opinions in a candid and often unfiltered way. 

On January 6th, massive numbers of pro-Trump and ordinary conservatives from around the country descended on Washington DC to express their anger at what they saw as a blatantly rigged election and failed government. But it was much more than that. They were tired of the condescending attitude of members of Congress (both parties) and open bias of the media.

They had endured eight years of mockery and ridicule under the Obama Administration and a full four years of barely concealed contempt and smugness from the Speaker of the House on down. It was just as bad in the Senate. It was all over the news and on social media nearly every minute of every day. It was integrated into magazines, books, music, TV shows, radio, and movies.

Now that the nation had a new (and some who believed an illegitimate) President suddenly calling for "unity" and "coming together" with that the Status Quo back in charge was too much.  So, they planned, organized, and came together in a open and highly visible expression of their own contempt for a system which failed them; which belittled them.

Anyone who bothered to look out their window could see what was happening. There was no doubt that the Establishment was peeing down its collective leg. They were terrified. Hiding in locked rooms, in closets, under tables. They couldn't imagine the American People were actually coming together and saying "enough!". It's the one thing they least expected. It was also the one thing they feared the most.

Trump tweeted out words of support and encouragement. This was what he had fought for over the last four years. Never did his tweets call on the protesters to vandalize, loot, or deface property the way Antifa or BLM had done the preceding year. Never did he urge the protestors to break windows or even enter House or Senate chambers. And, he never encouraged the violence which unfolded.

Yes, a number of the protestors were armed. It was no secret. It was out in the open for all to see. But not surprisingly, their message was lost on the elites. What could all those gun toting protestors carrying American flags and pro-Trump banners want except to tar and feather members of Congress? 

 But the message was clear to the most casual viewer. They were there to impress on Washington that the American People have a right to carry arms. It's called the Second Amendment. It's right up there with the First Amendment---the right to freedom of speech, expression, religion, and to assemble.

 It didn't mean they were there for violence. It was to remind Congress that the People have those rights and will protect them if need be. Of course, how do you explain this to those who sincerely believe they have a pre-ordained right to rule---not govern--- but rule? The concept was beyond their understanding.  But something went wrong. What? The answer is that there were multiple mistakes.

The first mistake was the media. The only ones there that day was the corporate media which has spent every moment over the last four years trying to divide this country, be it Left vs. Right vs.the Center; black vs. white vs. brown vs. yellow vs. everyone else; men vs. women; straights vs. gays, and so on. Division, as artificial as it may be, drives ratings and ratings equal advertising which is money. Divided we can be controlled and manipulated. Together we can't.

The corporate media is the eyes, ears, and mouthpiece of the Status Quo; the Establishment. If you watched any of the "reporting". They were stunned to find conservative blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans in with the crowds. They were equally stymied to see gun totting women and yes, even gays there as part of the protest. It didn't fit the narrative they've been feeding us. The solution was, as always, to misdirect out attention, manipulate the image, and obscure the message.

What was missing was the eyes, ears, and voice of the protestors. Who was their media advocate? The answer was no body (you can't really include Fox News anymore). Image is perception. Perception becomes reality. It controls the narrative, and the organizers left it to the corporate media to dictate what that would be.

The second mistake was not knowing the crowd. I don't how the organizers set about getting the message out, but they did a good job in getting people there. But there was a large gathering of Antifa and BLM just a few blocks away for their own event, which could have easily spun out of control had the two groups clashed. 

Some allege that Antifa infiltrators were the ones breaking windows and spray painting walls,  but there's no hard proof of that (vandalism is a hallmark of Antifa as America and the world witnessed last year).  For those unaware, Antifa is a Far Left anarchist group. They are not directly associated with the Democrats per se. While the name is shorthand for "Anti-Fascist" they tend to behave similar to Nazi Brownshirts and Mussolini's Blackshirts, both  fascist organizations, and the Maoist Red Front.

Several members of the pro-Trump crowd tried to point out these interlopers and separate them from other protestors (they were mostly successful). However, the damage was done, both figuratively and literally. Without a supportive media there to record it as it happened, it created the image the radical Left wanted and the Status Quo hoped for.

The third mistake was Trump himself. The election was over, and whether the results were right or rigged, the corporate media was portraying the outcome as factual.  Trump resisted. He was upset and angry, and he struck out. Never let your emotions guide your actions. He should have known that as a businessman. But, unintentionally, it was his tweets which were his undoing.

President Trump had long used social media to bypass blatantly biased news outlets so much so that they spent as much time on his tweets and posts as they did on his actual statements. Following the election, his media bursts became sharper.

However, on January 6th, Trump tweeted messages like "stay strong" and "fight like hell" to his supporters . While his intent was to provide moral encouragement, the message was distorted. It was filtered through a corporate media seething with hatred for the President and his supporters. It was portrayed in a matter not intended. It was portrayed as to encourage violence and mayhem.

In all likelihood, I suspect that neither Trump or his staff were fully aware of what was actually happening outside. After all, they had been hurried into secure rooms, safe from any potential harm. Any information they received from outside was likely old, incomplete, or possibly inaccurate.

Given Trump's history, his cell phone should have been "secured". Without full knowledge of events, anything more than a "be safe" or "keep it peaceful" message was bound to do more harm than good, and, as we all know, it did. 

Ultimately, one protester, Ashli Babbitt, was shot dead by Capital Police. One police officer died while engaging protestors. Three others died from natural causes, and several were injured. Papers inside House and Senate chambers were strewn everywhere. Even Pelosi's podium was stolen! Windows were broken, laptops went missing, along with some general vandalism as mentioned previously.

The Establishment was pissed. It was time for revenge, and it came swift starting with social media suspending a setting President's accounts and cutting off any direct and unfiltered communication with the American public. There was also a crackdown on Conservative sites as well, including pressuring other social media sites to comply with their new guidelines or risk being deplatformed.

Speaker of House Nancy Pelosi was publically beside herself in anger that citizens had invaded the "People's House" while they were doing "the People's business" without permission. Ugh! We can't have the common rabble running around Congress. Who do these peasants think they are? It's not like Congress actually represents them or anything right?

So, Trump is gone. Biden is President, but that's not the end of the story. Trump is to be the first American President to be impeached twice, which could create a Constitutional crisis of sorts. Can someone be prosecuted for what happened while in office after they've left? We know they can be removed from office while still in office, but what if they're no longer in office?

It's likely the matter will eventually find its way before the Supreme Court, assuming the High Court will even hear the matter. After all, the point of impeachment is to censure the individual for "high crimes and misdemeanors" and, secondly, to remove them from office if necessary. In our history, only three presidents have been impeached, Andrew Jackson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump.  But what about Richard Nixon? Why could he be important?

President Nixon was never impeached for his role in the Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up which included a kidnapping, wiretapping, destruction of evidence, and lying to Congress. However, the House was proceeding with impeachment hearings when Nixon resigned (had he not, he would have likely been impeached and possibly removed from office).

Nevertheless, Nixon was never tried although others were, and some went to jail for their roles. As far as ole "Tricky Dick" Nixon was concerned, the matter was dropped. Nixon didn't lose any of his perks of having been president either. Trump is accused of far less.

It seems to me Nixon comes the closest to Trump's current situation. Nixon avoided impeachment by resigning, nevertheless the stigma remained. As Trump is no longer President, there is no reason to impeach him. His removal from office came as a result of the election. Like Nixon (and even Clinton), the stigma of the first impeachment will itself likely keep him from ever seeking public office again.

But unlike Nixon or Clinton, this isn't about a break in or lying to Congress about getting blowjobs in the Oval Office. It's political, which means its personal. Donald Trump was an outsider who upset the plans of the Status Quo by defeating Hillary Clinton. He then set about exposing the corruption of Establishment, which included both parties, big business, and the media. That was unacceptable. This is about sending a message addressed "To Whom It May Concern in Anywhere America".

That message is a simple one. They will not ever allow another outsider. They will never again be publicly exposed for who they are. They are self-ordained to rule by virtue of their wealth and connections. They are not "one of us". They are our betters. They, and they alone know what's best for us. Our job is to keep quiet and do as we're told. Set back and enjoy the "bread and circuses".

The game is rigged. It's fixed. As George Carlin said, "It's a big club and you ain't in it".  Everything you or I suspected is likely not just true, but worse than we imagined. Once we accept this simple truth, regardless of which wing of the vulture we're under, the better we're going to be. Why? Because knowing the truth isn't the same as accepting it. Once it's accepted, you can act on it. You can start doing something about it.

 

 

These Are The 5 People Who Died in the Capital Riot

Watergate Scandal

George Carlin: It's a big club and you ain't in it

 

 

Censorship on Social Media: When 'Unity' Means 'Conformity'

 

A few days ago I found myself rather surprised. I belong to a national non-partisan political group which focuses on finding solutions to the many problems facing us. In fact, I've been a member of the group since they began, which is about ten years ago (I belong to a number of similar groups).

Someone posted a statement which was along the lines of going along with Biden's statement that now, since he was president, we should focus on "unity". Well, in theory that sounds pretty good, except for the eight years of Obama, those on the Right as well as those in the Center were ridiculed (remember Hillary referring to Trump supporters as "deplorables"?).

Then there was the four years of vicious attacks on President Trump that went on around the clock every day of the week. Every broadcast started, and most ended with, an attack on Trump or his supporters.  The Establishment Republicans were often just as nasty as the Establishment Democrats.

I thought to myself that there was no way in hell that the Democrats would have allowed the same treatment of Obama.  The corporate media did its utmost to ignore, bury, or twist the facts when it came to Hillary, be it her alleged "pay-to-play" schemes, Benghazi, unauthorized selling of weapons or strategic resources to Muslim terrorist groups, her illegal storing of emails, lying to Congress, or the Russians, and so on.

So, I responded to the comment by saying that after enduring years of abuse, I couldn't imagine Trump or his supporters were suddenly going to hug and play nice now that Biden was President. I added that respect was a two way street and that we should expect some sort of payback.

Much to my surprise, my comment was deleted! What did I possibly say to warrant my comment being removed? It was polite. It didn't attack anyone. It wasn't vulgar (my comments never are). I couldn't imagine that it was offensive in any way. I even had  several "likes" and "hearts". So, I reached out to the site administrators. Their response was to refer me to the site's guidelines.

I looked over them and found nothing out of line, so I asked them to look at my comment and enlighten me as to my great sin. What was so offensive about saying that I didn't expect Trump's supporters were likely to kiss and make nice? Did I "offend" someone because I said respect was a two way street?  

The site administrators, after several hours, agreed to reinstate my comment but warned me to be more "sensitive" but never explained my crime. I noticed another comment, one which I hadn't responded to, in which the author stated that the site appears to be becoming more Left oriented instead of non-partisan and asked if anyone else was noticing the same thing had also been removed.  Again, polite.

Then it dawned on me. It appears that my unknown co-conspirator and myself had inadvertently challenged the newly imposed acceptable narrative. Specifically, now that Biden and the Status Quo are back in charge, order will prevail. Dissent, however innocent, would not be allowed.

Those deemed as malcontents, or worse, as "domestic terrorists" will "unify" and "comply". Resistance is futile. For our accidental faux pas, we were merely censured this time. I suppose if this was Communist China I would be off to some prison sweatshop working on overpriced sneakers by now!  

A few day later I read a online post which I found incredulous. According to the poster, Katie Couric, a television and online journalist, had stated that Trump supporters needed to be "deprogrammed" from the "Trump cult". Really? And apparently her sentiments were echoed by other Establishment Democrats. I immediately had visions of Soviet era dissidents being hauled off to mental hospitals to be "reeducated".

 Those who recanted after months or years of being drugged and often tortured, were allowed back into society (with certain restrictions...naturally). Those who didn't conform were usually left to rot in these pseudo-mental hospital prisons.

For those who never conformed to their "reeducation" or "deprogramming" were generally taken to some cold dank dark room (like an abandoned shower in a basement) or an empty field and shot in the back of the head (the favorite form of execution by the KGB and totalitarian regimes everywhere).   

I couldn't believe that someone like Katie Couric, a Television Hall of Fame honoree, would utter such a remark, so I checked out it for myself. I was surprised on two points. One, that Katie actually said it, and secondly that the comment hadn't been purged by now.  If a conservative reporter had said that about Obama and his supporters, they'd be unceremoniously booted out of the TV Hall of Fame.

Then I thought "why not?".  After all, the major social media platforms have all denied the President of the United States access to the public via their sites, so why wouldn't other sites feel justified to deny the likes of me an opportunity to express my opinion, even if it was civil? Since the election, the same social media sites have aggressively gone after other sites to force them to comply to the new narrative of what's acceptable and what isn't.

So called "fact checkers", who, in the era before "political correctness", would have been called what they are---censors---are not so much there to verify facts as to "correct" opinions; what George Orwell called in his seminal book "1984" as "right think" by the Thought police .  The only acceptable speech "1984" was "duckspeak" which was defined as the "automatic" verbal support of the party line (I'm sure ole George is up there, somewhere, shouting  "I told you so!").   

Sadly, we may be entering an era of "duckspeak" as the Oligarchs behind the ruling Corporatocracy tighten their control on society. Already, not just critics or free thinkers being forced off platforms across the board, be it actual Conservatives or the Far Right (aka "Alt Right"), but so are those in Center (which is the majority of Americans), as well as those on the Far Left.

 Yes, even the extreme Left are being bumped from platforms in an attempt to silence their criticism of the Establishment Left, aka the Democrat Party.  We are being hemmed in by the Status Quo whereby the only accepted political thought lies between the Establishment Right and the Establishment Left. All other forms of political discourse are being silenced. We will support either the Democrat or Republican parties. No one else is allowed to speak, nor will they be heard.

Libertarians, Greens, and other third parties are viewed as outsiders. Independents, the nation's largest political bloc, are all but ignored; treated as if they are partisans who haven't made up their minds yet and not as individuals who've stopped drinking the Kool-Aid and rejected both wings of the same old corporate vulture. Independents, who are mostly Centerists, are also feared by the Status Quo since they are the ones most likely to be free thinkers; to do their own research and act accordingly. That's unacceptable.

Together, they are kept off the ballots, out of the debates, and most of all poor; receiving little to no donations which is the life blood of politics, especially since the passage of Citizens United which has reduced politics to a game between corporations.  In effect, all but silencing other schools of political thought the way they're now doing to ordinary individuals. How's that for conformity...err... "unity"?

What happened on January 6th in Washington is what the Status Quo fears the most. I'm not talking about breaking windows, stealing Pelosi's podium, or "the people" being in the "People's House" waving American or pro-American flags and banners without permission. I'm talking about being outraged and not holding back, not just at individual politicians or the two political mafia-like cliques, but at the corporations propping the dry rotted edifice of Congress up.

 We have to demand---not beseech on bended knee--change. That means term limits, ending partisan gerrymandering, rank choice voting, ending Citizens United, citizen ballot initiatives, and opening up elections to Independents and third parties by creating a level political playing field. We cannot have a real democratic Republic unless we allow every political persuasion to have a voice.

We need to create independent citizen boards not beholden to moneyed interests (such as electing citizens to zoning or utility commission boards). We, the ordinary taxpayers of this country, should have the final say when it comes to tax increases, rate or fee increases, and increases in salaries of elected officials. Otherwise, they will find a way to take every last dollar we have.

Politicians have long shown they can't be trusted with our money. We know it. It's even a common joke centuries old, and yet we tolerate it. Why?  As the commercial says, "it's my money and I want it now". It's our money and we should have the final say how it's spent. Our money. Our voice.

We need to find ways to challenge the Status Quo and let them know their behavior is not acceptable. It could be showing up at their staged media events, writing letters to editors (many newspapers have stopped printing any opposing views), but we still need to do it to let them know we won't acquiesce. We won't go away.

We need to support non-partisan and third party candidates, radio shows, authors, and blogs like this one (some bloggers charge for access to their articles. I don't. I only ask that you pass my articles along to as many people as possible. My sole desire is to get as many people as possible to think for themselves).  I'm sure there are a thousand ways to fight back. Pick one...or two...or three... just get busy!

Our Founding Fathers warned us about partisanship and political parties. They believed the parties would first divide us and then, finally, separate us from political power.  Well, they were right. Right now, many of our cherished rights bequeath to us in the Bill of Rights are under aggressive attack.

While all are important, none are more important in my opinion than the First Amendment and our right to freedom of speech and expression; our right to peacefully assemble or to seek redress of our grievances (and there are many) from the government (btw, it doesn't say or imply a corporate right to redress, but to our right---the people)  along the right to believe (or not) as we choose. We're seeing a full on press to curtail the right to express our opinions by denying us a platform and by censoring us.

The government no longer listens to us because they no longer fear us. Partisan gerrymandering has all but ensures that the party holding a seat will keep that seat. Campaigns are beyond the financial reach of the vast majority of Americans, thanks to Citizens United, and without term limits, they can stay in office for indefinitely regardless of the job they're doing (or, more aptly, not doing).

America has all but lost faith in the electoral process due to rigged elections and illegal election engineering; approximately 40% routinely stay home. That's due, in part, because we have no faith in the cardboard cutouts running for office. Campaign commercials routinely lie and distort.

Candidates will lie (especially incumbents). We have to challenge their claims, but we have to do our homework first and share it with others. Alternative parties and candidates are ridiculed or excluded altogether. We have to insist on election reform. Until they agree, stop voting for incumbents.

When social media platforms censor us, we need to fight back. Delete the censor's comments. Repost. Repost and keep reposting. Individually we're weak. Together we are unstoppable.  When they delete comments (like they did mine), challenge it. Make them prove their point. Of course, keep it civil and polite. Don't want to give them any excuses. That's what they're looking for. 

Lastly, don't give up. Don't back down. Don't give in. Don't back out. This is our fight as Americans to lose.

 

Meghan McCain responds to Katie Couric: "I don't need to be deprogrammed"

Katie Couric accused Trump's "Cult" members after saying they needed to  "deprogram"