About Me

Name: ernestfimbrez
Email: ernestfimbrez@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

Both sides of the aisle have led us to this point

I read all this conservative thought, much of it makes good sense and rings of truth.
All of the arguments and reasons and possibilities with remedies that would be the answer to how to bring our nation back to what is should be. But I still see what has been the reason why we have come to this point of no return. From a country of people with a lifetime promised to us as individuals to rise, or fall in the freedom of our efforts in how we lead our lives, to the feeling of a prelude of a
foreboding sense of a coming malaise and a gradual but consistant grip of control those in authority are imposing on us. How could it have come to this? As a middle aged observer of life I have seen how in the approximately past forty years a pattern of media influence towards a general agenda, along with a curious compliance towards that agenda by our political leaders on both sides of the aisle, the left and the right has occured. From the Nixon 'Watergate Crisis' to the present, there has been no real opposition to whatever the liberal media has determined what is relevant in what should be perceived as important in what we as a people should believe. The established republican conservative right seemed to have lost any strength of conviction or competence in how they dealt with any issue that came to the public conciousness. In social morality, or national or international policy. They seemed to fall back to a delaying tactic mentality instead of strong opposition. As if they knew the agendas dictates were inevitable. Even in electoral victories somehow they seemed to go along with this gradual progressive agenda. Remember the contract with America with Gingrich in '94? How did that work out. Even Reagans administration went along with the Mariel immigration fiasco and the national deficit he created. The point is we have been shifted to where we are now by both established parties that have been running our country. As long as we continue to fall for this tag team effort, we have no chance. It may already be too late. If we, as a nation would stand up today and make the changes that would be neccessary, we may see the emergency powers invoked on us that have been set up with the complicity of both said sides of this ruling class. But if we continue to go along and chose our side, the side they give us to chose, either way we will lose. We must throw out both sides and put into power those that have us, the American people and Constitutional way of government as a priority in how we determine our future. American independents like Ron Paul were the only candidates who spoke of our nation as the priority in their message in the last election. Unlike the dems and repubs, who thought of us more as global 'citizens' or 'leaders' in their messages. They have been in power long enough to leave a massive trail of evidence to show us that this is where they intend to lead us. Is this where we honestly want to go? If we continue to follow them how long will it be before we no longer have a choice?
When I read of these 'conservative' supporters speaking of republican resurgence and comebacks, I shake my head. You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, unfortunately, thats all it takes.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Red Zone roundup for Nov. 17, 2009

This last week of pigskin was a mixed bag. The Pac 10 seems to be wide open. Oregon winning is not a sure thing in Arizona. The 'Cats are solid at home, with a decent recent history against the Patos. (Thats Ducks in spanish). If the Patos wear their PC white robe-like unis, I'm taking the points against them. And I've seen too many Big Games to trust the favorite just because the other team is struggling. I wouldn't be surprised to see Cal spank the Cardinal. Although I would not trust them enough. Whoever comes out on top in this conference I trust will beat whoever the Big 10 sends to the Rose Bowl. I don't see enough offense in Iowa or Ohio state, the most likely teams to win that conference. Texas has shown to have a vicious defense. The best run stuffers in the country. Well maybe Alabama has had a tougher schedule. But against a top defense, they struggle to move the ball. At this point I would take the Longhorns with their lights out defense and upper tier QB over the Tide or the Gators. I don't think Tebo has the vertical game he would need nor the brute strength to last four quarters running on Texas. But there are a couple of other teams that might have the talent to contend. TCU has shown itself as a possibility. Cincinnati has lapsed somewhat on the defensive side and their QB question isn't helping. I can't think of any other team that I would consider at a level to contend for number one.
As for the pros, its time for the serious playoff runs to start.
Teams that started out hot,(Broncos, Jets, Falcons,)are scuffling. Without Orton, I think Denver is done. Ryan may be sinking into a sophomore jinx, and Sanchez looks like he may be in over his head.
And teams that started out slow seem to be coming around. Are the Chargers,Patriots and Panthers making their annual run?
In the AFC, its looks like the only real difference in the playoff picture will be the Bengals in the north. You gotta like a team with a good pass rush and upper tier QB. Thats how the Giants won two seasons ago.
In the NFC we see the Cardinals showing signs of a running game. With a big game QB like Warner, look out. With the Vikes in the north, Santos,(thats Saints in spanish)in the south and Cards in the west,its seems the east has taken the role of weak sister. Even if the Cowboys take charge in that division, they seem too inconsistent to be taken seriously.
And as for my Niners, they just got lucky they played a team with a head case QB like Cutler. Otherwise they would be repeating their season from the last several years. As much as I want Singletary to succeed, I still think getting rid of a offensive coordinator with the credentials of Martz was a mistake. Right now I would just settle for a .500 season.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Unwritten Law will soon be written

The unwritten law has steadily been closing its viselike grip on us as a collective people. It doesn't need to be in the books to be effective. It uses the power of public perception that has been implemented by the change agents in authoriy and the mainstream media to cow the masses into compliance. A compliance characterized by the silence and lack of restistance to its dictates and penalties imposed on those who violate their sense of the new standard we should all follow if not embrace. Anyone who still thinks the right to free speech, the right to free assembly and association, or anything that implies the actual protection guaranteed by our Constitution is finding out or will soon find out otherwise. To lose your position, or job, or opportunity at anything you would strive for to achieve in this new society ruled by the unwritten law is now becoming more entrenched.
Just ask Rush Limbaugh, who lost his chance to become part of the NFL as an owner.
Anyone who has listened to him over any length of time knows his interest in the NFL was sincere. Or Lou Dobbs and Arizona sheriff Joseph Arpaio, who still thought they had a right to keep the 'illegal' part of illegal immigration in focus. And Sarah Palin and Ron Paul, who made the mistake of running for office with the interest of American citizens above the gobal
citizen concept embraced by our current White House occupant. Or Carrie Prejean, who gave them the wrong answer to their question.
In every part of our society we see the unwritten law doing its work.
In the NFL again we see Oakland Raider coach Tom Cable being tag teamed by the unwritten law. Violence in any degree or circumstance will not be tolerated, if they can't get him indicted they dig into the past to find any way to remove this neanderthal. How about Larry Johnson (formerly) of the Kansas City Chiefs who said a forbidden word twice within earshot of the media. Good luck in finding work. Even though there are several teams in need of a still effective player, don't hold your breath Larry. These people were all guilty of violating key aspects of this law.
These are just visible incidents of the unwritten law taking hold of our country.
We already know that the academic and entertainment worlds have been for decades solidly entrenched in this law. We are now seeing the overall fabric of our society being enveloped into it. And the worst part is it is not being challenged by anyone. And because we are silent history has shown that soon this unwritten law will easily
become written law.(See most of Europe and Canada).
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Redzone roundup for Nov 9, 2009

another week of college and NFL in the books. One thing that is unusual is the lack of bad weather that would affect the quality of play on the field. Thats a plus. I don't like to watch or speculate on who's gonna win on those types of games.
Among the top college teams we haven't seen the super dominant team that destroys any and all comers. Teams like Florida and Alabama don't move the ball at will against the stronger defensive teams. The Big Ten has disappeared into a black hole with the top teams lacking effective offenses. At least not effective against a decent defense. The season started out so well for Rich Rod and Charley Weiss. Now it looks like Ohio State is the only team in that conference to be worthy of a top twenty ranking. Dark horse teams like Cincinnati and TCU seem to be waiting in the wings to be among the elites, at least for this year. And the schizo Pac 10 is hopeless. With USC being exposed, and Cal no longer relevant there is a power void.
Oregon is cursed by their insistence on wearing those PC greenleaf uniforms that make them look like the supporting cast to a Celtic Woman show. I've watched both games (Boise, Stanford) in which they looked bad. Even the posers on the sidlines looked uncomfortable. If Texas loses a game then the BCS playoff picture would be blown wide open. Otherwise my enthusiasm for the coming playoffs are somewhat subdued for this year. Maybe its the parity among the teams that seem to becoming apparent. The huge spreads of the past are not being covered. Maybe the number of up and coming teams is diluting the picture as a whole. Too many teams seem to take away the focus. Kind of like the music scene. With the tens of thousands of artists available via the internet, its hard to keep structured. Who is among the elite? who is good? Who belongs among those the mainstream says should be there?
Anyway I will close my college roundup on a kind of sad note.
I saw that Nevada beatdown of SJSU coming a mile away. Anytime you see a team with over 300 ypg rushing playing a team that gives up over 250 ypg, you know whats going to happen. (Check NIllinois-E.Mich). I say it was sad because as a kid growing up SJSU was my hometeam. Over the years the Spartans have continued to try to build up their program to national prominence. Or at least to the level of Fresno st.
Unfortunately the geographics have and will continue to make it impossible.
San Jose CA isn't like Lincoln Neb. If it was a deliberate agenda to make the SF bay area an international area, it worked. The majority of the population of the area,(and school) are not from this country. So football to them is either irrelevant or of the round ball variety. Not many top athletes seeing being recruited by SJSU as a goal. The school interest isn't what it used to be. I can remember back in the day when the games against Stanford had us buzzed. I can remember seeing Dave Chaney riding his bike down Santa Clara st and people greeting him as he rode by. At least Stanford has world class school credentials so they can
still attract some talent.
As for the pros, I see Dallas is looking like serious playoff team. A team with a pass rush and capable QB is always a good thing to have. It would be interesting to see if QBs who can get you there but falter in the big ones can finally get over that psychological hump. Like Romo or McNabb. As for the Giants it looks like their done. But its still early. Too early to tell who will be in the playoffs much less the SB. Maybe we will see new blood. Like Houston, or Cincinnati or even Denver. Well maybe not Denver. The NFL does seem more interesting this year as far as playoff considerations. But just be careful on what you say on and off the field.
Nowadays if you say the socially forbidden key words you will be gone. That seems to have become the unwritten law. Being not very nice or mean to anyone or anything is against the unwritten law. I guess it won't be long before that unwritten law becomes written. They might as well. It's already been accepted by the masses.
Sorry I forgot this is supposed to be a sports blog. To bad the NFL had to get political on us.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

PC Hammer nails down NFL into 'compliance'

The politically correct mainstream hammer has successfully cowed the NFL establishment into submission much in the same way the Hollywood establishment has been controlled for the past four plus decades. The Hollywood entertainment establishment is dominated by executives and performers (actors and musicians) who hold a strong leftist-liberal world view and make it clear that anyone who holds any other set of beliefs or values are not welcome. If you are an unknown it would be the kiss of death for your career aspirations if you do not fall in line.
These elites command compensation many times over the total lifetime earning sum of the vast majority of the general population. For just one movie. And they feel it’s their inherent right to constantly educate and direct us, the masses, to follow their views. After all, they are the enlightened elite and we are just the masses. In league with the mainstream media, this has been the reality of what our society has been and has become and is heading to a more complete assimilation in most if not all aspects of our society.
From entertainment, (music, movies, television, the arts), to education, (public schools, universities), to government. Liberal "progressive" programs and policies have been and are being implemented by both mainstream political parties.
And the web has been woven around us in a way that the masses choose not to notice.
As long as the media presents it all in such a way that we perceive it as mainstream, most of us will swim along in that direction.
Now we find another entertainment field being wrapped up and delivered to this beast.
The NFL has too easily sacrificed any integrity it may have claimed to have had and has instead shown a moral cowardice in how they chose to deal with the situation involving the bid by Rush Limbaugh to obtain partial ownership of the NFL team the St. Louis Rams.
As soon as it became publicly known, the professional race ‘victim’ groups such as Al Sharpton’s started working their craft. Individual performers within this entertainment field, namely certain black NFL athletes started making public statements declaring that they would not play on any team that Limbaugh was part of and talked of holding group discussions with other black athletes to consider their options. It didn’t take long for the leagues exec’s to see what might be looming in the immediate horizon. Anyone paying attention can see that they chose to make a preemptive strike to make certain there would be no disruptive actions among the ranks of their performers, namely the black athletes who made their sentiments known.
NFL commissioner Roger Goddell, publicly stated that the NFL would resist Limbaugh’s bid for ownership and cited previous statements made by Limbaugh regarding black NFL quarterback Donovan McNabb. These statements were considered to be ‘racist’ in nature and Goddell stated that the most important factor in his decision was his regard for his athletes.
This action would seem to have been the quick and convenient way to eliminate a potentially disruptive situation. Most of those swimming in the mainstream would agree and move on.
Those in the sports talk show industry began the campaign to denigrate Limbaugh and dismiss the entire scenario as a deliberate stunt started by him just to boost his ratings.
I listened to much of their talk from the start of this situation. Ironically at the start of this controversy some of those talk show hosts were actually defending Limbaugh and his right to free speech and right to seek ownership. But within three days most of those talking heads had miraculously closed ranks and nothing but negativity was said about Limbaugh. They accepted statements of ‘race baiting’ made by callers. They called him divisive. They said it was just ‘business’. Nothing else was relevant. Limbaugh was bad for business. Most of the mainstream sports talk radio talking heads were in lockstep. From ESPN to Mike and Mike, to the Herd nation, to Collin and Van Pelt. They all knew better than to say anything else. They know where their bread is buttered. They know they live in a fantasy world where they make six to seven figures a year to sit behind a microphone and pontificate and think of clever clichés and lines to say, and they think they make a difference. The sports media is very powerful. It is filled with little men (and sidekick women who laugh a lot) who talk to about games and events of no real importance in real life. They think listeners don’t notice their hypocrisy and how easily they changed their rhetoric and closed ranks on command. Some did stand their ground, but ninety percent of them bent over with a smile.
But back to the Limbaugh situation. So the NFL and the media think they have put this behind them. What were the real ramifications and potential consequences that were set in motion by the actions of the NFL execs?
There are many among us who are not mainstream swimmers who see what was done by the NFL as an act of appeasement to its performers, namely those certain black athletes and outside agitators who made their feelings known. This is the primary reason. Any other reason offered by the sports radio talking heads or anyone else is a smokescreen. Goddell decided to act as Limbaugh’s judge, jury and executioner just to appease his players.
Not exactly the American way, more like back room junta negotiations.
Do the players have a legitimate beef?
How many of these guys do you think really know the entire context of what went on with Limbaugh and what he said about McNabb or what in general is his overall message.
Do you think they listened to his entire statement or just what the mainstream media presented to them to hear? In this day and age of Twitter capacity minded people do you honestly think that these Limbaugh haters really know the full context of his message? Realistically speaking you know these people have a minimal capacity to care about and comprehend a full debate of issues. All they need is a sentence or two to give them their core beliefs. This is the classic mainstream mindset and the media knows that and knows how to present their news and information in that way. Simplistically put, Limbaugh or anyone else who says things we don’t like is evil. Period.
And what did Limbaugh say about McNabb? Does anyone bother to try to remember that time period when this happened? Several years back when Limbaugh held a position as NFL commentator there was an agenda being pushed by the media to put more black executives and black coaches and black quarterbacks into the NFL. Do you remember? Because of those efforts there are policies now in place to make mandatory interviews to black applicants in any head coaching job vacancy. This is basically affirmative action legislation imposed on the NFL.
So who started the issue? Who opened up that can of worms. Did Limbaugh just of nowhere decide to start ranting against black quarterbacks? No. He countered the media agenda pushers with a reply. A counter reply to those who started the issue by demanding placement of blacks into those positions based on race and not necessarily on ability or qualifications.
Anyone who follows football knows that McNabb is a quarterback of exceptional ability. He can be a force on the field. At times he has no peer on the field. But at times he has been erratic and emotionally sensitive and injury prone. When Limbaugh made his commentary he would have been better served to have presented it in that way. But overall his commentary was not without some substance. His point was not necessarily just about McNabb. His point was about how long would the NFL want teams to allow black quarterbacks who are not effective to continue to play and not be benched. Would the black quarterback be given more time to prove himself on the field than a quarterback of another race? Is that what the NFL would want or direct teams to allow? Overall this is a question of being qualified, not just being given the job as an affirmative action ploy. That was the real point that he was trying to make. If the player is qualified, or not, race should not be a consideration
Do people remember that? No of course not. Most of the mainstream swimmers won’t bother to make the effort. All they remember is Limbaugh, racist!
But the NFL doesn’t care. They just want this to go away. But will it? Was it good business sense by the NFL execs to just cave to the PC Hammer?
What they did was give the power to their performers to dictate who was welcome in the NFL and who is not. Much in the way the Hollywood establishment is controlled by its performers, now the NFL is similar. Now these athletes can demand that you the fan must follow and support what they want and if you have beliefs and values that they don’t like you must shut up and comply to their will. But at the same time you must continue to shell out your income and support them and the compensation they receive that allows them to live like royalty and elites. Much like the Hollywood elites. And some of them threaten not to play.
So what happens if the economy continues to slide and most of us who make less than six figures a year find it harder to shell out three to five hundred bucks a pop to go to a game?
And now, instead of a refuge from the harsh realities of life, the event you go to escape and enjoy you now must knuckle under to another elite group element of the PC Hammer. How many among the masses will just go along? Much like the Hollywood fan drones.
There will be some who will stifle their conscience and bow to their will. The nail that sticks out will be hammered down.
But somehow I think that a lot of NFL fans are not like the Hollywood drones. I think a large percentage of us are more grounded in reality and have a sense of values rooted in what is right and what is wrong. We do not have a high regard for or fear this hammer. Nor of anyone who would use the power of this hammer against us. And maybe we might reevaluate our regard for the NFL. Since their highest priority is for their athletes, (as stated by Commissioner Goddell), they make it clear the concerns or opinions of what the fans might have on the ownership issue or anything else does not matter.
We could just watch the games and movies on television. And if the attendance numbers in these entertainment venues decline, maybe their performers might realize their of dependence on us, the masses for their continued privileged lives of luxury. And those with enough sense might adjust their hat sizes down accordingly.
The liberal media wants to continue to agitate and race bait and make demands because they know they never have to answer for the messes they create. They created this issue. They wanted to impose a mandatory percentage of black quarterbacks, qualified or not. Were their efforts justified by the evidence on the field?
Let’s see. There’s Tavaris Jackson in Minnesota. How did that work out? Or Vince Young, who maybe needs another three years to develop. And just give JaMarcus another two years in Oakland. He’s still young! Or how many points is Jason Campbell putting up? Or did Leftwich get it done? Or was Seattle happy with Seneca’s relief effort?
As an NFL observer for the last 45 years, I can count the number of effective long term black quarterbacks on one hand. Overall, not a good track record for the race quota activist cause. Is what I’m writing racist? This is factual evidence on the field. Facts that we have been forcefully conditioned to overlook. Or talk about in public. The media can raise their issues and claims. But if you’re foolish enough to respond against them, you will be pounded down by the Hammer. Just ask Rush Limbaugh.





Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How to write (or duplicate) a hit song

http://uplaya.com/about_hss/hsstech                                                                                                                                                    As an aspiring musician I eagerly submitted a couple of my tracks onto a music site called uplaya.com. My tracks were automatically submitted to computer analysis to determine their 'hit' potential. I was dismayed to find out both tracks were given a score of less than half way between zero and ten. Ten being the maximum potential level. With a 4.8 average, I was in the 'try again' category.
As I read the site's criteria for determining hit potential, I found that the computer scanned 'patented algorithms' and mixes of patterns to compare my tracks with past and current hits. And how they fit into current markets. There you go!
Thats how to write a hit song. In simple language you try to make your music sound like whats 'hot' today. What is hot today? Memorable melodic lines like 'paparozzi' or po po pokerface or ella ella eh eh, or maybe the thunder thighs that go with it is whats more memorable.
Or lyrics of meaningful substance like 'boom boom pow'? Or is it just the visual circus clown effect presented onstage by the slackeyed pees. Oops, did I just commit a socially incorrect crime by daring to be critical of any artist?
Or do music 'critics' today just apply esoteric interpetations to escape saying anything negative about what they hear. Much like movie critics do with bad movies.
In todays music mainstream to say anything negative even if its true would be the kiss of death for anyone to be foolish enough to try.
What ever happened to melodic lines and progressions and instrumentation as being the criteria for music of substance. Are people so conditioned that they will accept what is being passed off as 'music' today as standard patterns of sound
made to support visual presentations? Has the visual become more important than what you hear? Are you listening to what you are seeing?
The next time you watch VH1 top twenty, try closing your eyes and just listen.
Is what you hear what you would consider music worthy of being called a hit?
Or do you need to open your eyes to 'hear' the song.
I still believe there are enough people who can discern music of substance without having to watch as they listen. And appreciate and want to hear something original or unique and different.
Thats what keeps musicians trying to create. Not just emulate current formulas for commercial success.
I'm old enough to remember when this was reality. I'm grateful the Beatles or Led Zeppelin didn't follow current 'algorithms' and mixes of parameters.
I still watch VH1 top twenty. But I enjoy it more by muting the sound.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

State of music today continued

 

If you have read any of my previous writings you know what my opinion of what the state of todays mainstream music is today. Back in the day what you heard was the most important aspect of music, nothing else mattered. How you looked as an artist was not important. There was no visual. And if there was, it was in support of what you heard. If you watch some of todays infomercials about CDs being promoted of the songs that came out of the in the sixties and seventies, you see artists with faces made for radio, not visually appealing. But their music was real. And sincere. And unique in a way that captured our imagination. And those of us who are old enough to remember can still feel the emotions we felt back then when that certain song was released. We didn't need any visual stimulation to make us feel the song.
Real music of substance. With real people who created this music.
Not the visually bombastic
plastic idols who undulate and prance and pose with a message that is meant to make you watch.
Watch whatever the mainstream music powerbrokers have created for you to follow.
And the music itself is secondary. The music is created to support the visual. And usually shallow and forgetable. And these powerbrokers will present to you the listening audience the top artists to follow. Those that they present to you will be the ones that will be on top. Because they know that the majority will not question what it is that is presented to them. They have learned what the Madison Avenue advertising professionals have known for decades. How to
condition the masses to accept what is presented to them through social acceptance and peer pressure. If you think a song isn't really good, your are not going to say it outloud for fear of standing out. No one else is saying anything. They just go along with the consensus. And you will not dare go against them. So people have become to accept whatever is presented to them. There are few songs today and in recent music history that people will remember or care about in the future. The gagas or the pees, or the ella, ella,ella, or the she wolfs that are supposed to be the 'top music of substance' of today will be in the trashheaps of forgetable throwaways in the near future. Or of most of the 'talking to a beat' genre that has been forced on us for the last decade. Or the PC weenie lyrical tracks of progressive ideals and social justice themes, just flashes of polish that fade due to lack of real musical substance.
When the 'pees' performed at the opening NFL game on Thursday Sept. 12, they sounded like a junior hi school showcase both in what performed and how they performed. Back in the day they would have been blasted. But today not a word. Today whatever is presented is accepted. I guess the difference between then and now is the degree in how the general population has been conditioned. I can't help but feel it is a lost cause to dissent.
I remember not too long ago some obscure politician say "where is the outrage"?
When I saw there was none I begin to understand. As in life and so in music it can be deleted.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Take your vaccination series, or else!

 

How could we have come to this point? The average person will go ahead and let themselves be subjected to a vaccine shot or a series of shots, because your new leaders are hammering the message into their subconcious, if you have any concerns or doubts something is wrong with you.
You are of the fringe radical element, or a racist, or maybe even a potential terrorist!
What is it about people that will compell them to continue to believe in a structure that has progressively shown in the last several decades a pattern of leading us as a population into a type of society that is obviously controlled and regulated by those that have taken it upon themselves to decide how and what is to be believed and done in everything in life. From what we think, and eat and drink, to what we accept in what the gatekeepers decide to implement in what is 'correct' in our social fabric and being. What our children are taught, the drugs (legal) we take, the restrictions we accept that give these 'authorites' more and more control of our lives.
Does the average person feel that being perceived as part of the mainstream is more important than anything else? Even to the point of allowing our country into falling into a state of control by those in charge? Human nature is such that the more you allow those in power the more control they will seek. This has been true throughout history. And we have seen that those in power (with the compliance of a sympathetic mainstream media) have shown a growing disregard and contempt for the dissent the general population has recently, (and finally), began to demonstrate to them.
Will this ruling elite actually heed the growing demonstrative reactions and concerns of the
masses or will they disregard it and allow the disciplinary and punitive aspects they have set up to be imposed on us ?
Will we start to see American citizens who will not 'comply' be subjected to consequences that will mirror the kind of government rule we saw in the Soviet gulags and Eastern Europe regimes of the cold war era?
How could it have come to this? Is it that we are so naive and willfully ignorant our society as a whole has allowed the ruling elite to bring us to this point?
As five year olds we totally depended and relied on authority, (parents, teachers, grownups in general). As teenagers we thought we knew it all and we rebelled and mistrusted that same authority. But in between, as eight year olds, (third graders), we thought we knew alot but we still depended and believed in those in charge. (authority). We still believed the grownups had our best interest in mind. It seems that the mainstream has shown a third grader mentality in living their lives. As adults, they can generally take care of their personal lives in a responsible and rational adult manner, but when it comes to keeping a realistic vigilance on those in authority, (like our founding fathers urged us to do), they reverted to a third grader mentality. And we have become an easy prey to those in charge who seem to have an agenda that may sooner rather than later bring us to a rude awakening.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What ABOUT Michael Savage?

What is it about Michael Savage that makes the mainstream gatekeepers pretend he doesn't exist? Or if anything he is portayed as someone to be shunned and loathed by people of 'proper sensibility'.
If the average person was to hear his name mentioned they automatically dismiss him as one to be reviled. Even the so called established "conservative" hierachy deliberately give him no recognition. And others countries of the developed first world  such as England ban him from entering their country. They group him with international terrorists and skinhead racists.
Is this man so dangerous and sinister that these measures must be taken? Is he so evil that all stops must be pulled to contain him?
Although his facial features do have a certain Machiavellian expression, he is not really physically imposing. He is a bit beyond his prime. He has no criminal record. As far as we know, he hasn't commited any homicides or strong-arm assaults. So what is it?
The fact that his influence among a substantial amount of people, (eight to fifteen million dedicated listeners to his radio talk show) is not recognized by the mainstream press is questionable in itself. Does the mainstream press take it upon themselves to designate who or what is relevant in social discourse? Does it depend on what agenda they believe should be advanced, or stifled? Are they depending on the mainstream masses to remain willfully ignorant and settle for whatever the official line is they declare?
It seems this is what has been the modus operandi for the last several decades. And it seems to be effective. We are now at a point in time where people like Savage (and us) could be effectively muzzled. And the mainstream masses remain in their comatose state. Not exactly a state of bliss. The economic state has affected them. But they still fail to recognize the overall assault that coming at us from all sides. And one of those sides is to eliminate the type of dissent that comes from Savage and those like him.
The 'problem' with Savage is that he says things that many of us can see and are thinking and are conditioned by political correctness not to dare say out loud. But he does. How dare him.
His unique ability to islolate and articulate key insights into issues is what made him successful.
But in todays sensibility this is verboten. So in the eyes of the mainstream gatekeepers, he and others like him have to go.
Those like Hanitty and Limbaugh, Beck and O'Reilly take great care to prevent from going beyond certain parameters in their so called 'conservative' rants. Bottom line is they make certain they retain their conservative 'mainstream' status. Because to go beyond that parameter is to be pegged as a fringe radical, and you lose your mainstream audience, credibility and earning potential. Savage, if necessary crosses any and all lines. In truth and reality there shouldn't be any lines. Truth has no limits or boundaries.
There are some failings in Savage's message. Understandibly, he is strongly against the affirmative action policies that have been implimented since the late sixties.
Policies that have deliberately discriminated against white males. No argument on this end.
But when he starts into his 'white male uprising' rants it gives fuel to his detractors claim of 'racist' and he overlooks the vast number of non whites who see themselves as American in
belief of the Constitution and love of our country. (Like me). We as non white males feel excluded.
And it gives license to many whites who see only race and act and think and react as such.
Not good for people like me. Between the minorities who cling to race in their reasoning, (and too many do), and the majority of whites who also cling to race in their reasoning, Americans like me, (of brown descent), or black, or yellow or whatever, have no where to go.
Overall, I still believe in Michael Savage. Or anyone else who will still publicly stand up for our country. But I question if we have enough people like him to stand up to those who are determined to finish us off.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Are Americans conditioned to accept a new state of mind?

I can remember when as a youngster growing up, the concept that was encouraged upon us was to strive to achieve an unlimited potential. That the American dream was that any one individual can achieve the highest levels in what you can dream. Whether it was in the sense of accomplishment in what you learn or what you earn or how you make a difference. The sky was the limit. People took it for granted that their children's station in life would exceed their own. This was the hope of American families beginning with the Depression era. After the second world war it seemed that this would always be our reality and birthright as Americans. As an observer on life in general,
I began to notice a subtle change in the mid nineties. The mainstream media consenus started telling us how selfish we were as Americans to be enjoying
such a high standard of living compared to the rest of the world. And throughout the remainder of the decade to the present we have been hammered with this message over and over again in so many different ways.
And the message seems to be working. With our youth who parrot the phrases of their 'change agent' academic instructors about how we are guilty of killing the
planet and the guilt and shame of our disporportionate use of our natural resources. And how the rest of the world so sternly disapproves of us as a nation. The youth of today now seem to embrace the 'less is more' mindset.
Riding a bicycle, communal style living and a vegan diet seems to be the desired choice. And accepting a lower wage and standard of living in the name of diversity and celebrating multiculturalism. And the reality of a
changing demographics in their own country. We see those coming in who really don't share our beliefs. And because we're bringing them in so fast
they don't really have to. And we can't help but notice most choose not to.
The idea of our standing of citizens as a birthright in our country is bad. How dare you think such a thing. And the rest of us. We choose not to see. We just go along with our own lives pretending like everything will be fine. As long as you don't look too hard. Or raise your voice. And you go along and choose the side they give you to choose.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »