Whatever Happened to Aleppo?

“Follow the money.”

It’s a short phrase with a lot of impact. If you keep it in the back of your mind, it will help answer a lot of questions.

Why does healthcare cost so much? Follow the money.

Who benefits from this particular legislation? Follow the money.

Why all the vitriol over this person or issue? Follow the money.

I’m hearing a lot of conversation over free speech, hate speech, social media, fake news, and election impact. How many times is Mark Zuckerberg going to stand before a government to explain what he is doing in these areas? And, to be honest, why should he?

Follow the money.

This goes back many, many years, but for the sake of this post, let’s keep it to the more recent past.

In 2016, Donald Trump beat the “favorite”, Hillary Clinton, in the race for President. According to the talking heads of the “major” media outlets, this should NOT have happened. And since it did, there MUST have been some kind of interference in the election process. We’ve blamed the Russians for meddling. We’ve blamed “fake news” for meddling. And we’ve blamed social media for allowing all of this meddling to take place.

And it’s bullsh*t. Follow the money.

The Clinton campaign spent about $72 million on television ads and about $16 million on digital ads. The Trump campaign spent about $39 million on television ads and about $29 million on digital ads. Oh, and according to talking heads, the Russians spent about $100,000 (that’s thousand - not million) on Facebook ads.

Now, let’s look at the impact. Apparently, $100,000 of Russian ads had MORE impact on the election than the Clinton $16 million and the Trump $29 million. Does that make sense to you? And since Facebook “allowed” those ads, it must be Zuckerberg’s fault. Thus his CSPAN performances.

So, if the impact of Russia was, in reality, NOT the impact the Democrats (and some Republicans) are saying, what’s all the crying about?

Follow the money.

Who traditionally benefits the most from political advertising dollars? The “mainstream” media: newspapers, television, and direct mail. Who has the potential to LOSE the most IF social media proves to have the most impact over elections? The same “mainstream” media. So, who do you think are holding the Democrat and Republican parties feet to the flames? You guessed it: the “mainstream” media.

There is a reciprocal relationship here. The Democrats and Republicans spend MILLIONS on advertising and the same outlets provide untold HOURS of FREE advertising by talking incessantly about them on their "news" shows. (Which is another reason third-party candidates are shut out. More on that later.)

Here’s a question: Why the concern over “fake news” being spread on social media, when traditional campaign advertising is FULL of lies, slander, and false statements (which, conveniently, is considered “protected speech” for politicians)?

The answer is simple. If more impact can be had via social media without the spend (only $45 million for digital vs. $111 million for televised), why would anybody spend so much over the “mainstream” media outlets? Thus the “war” on free speech, and the rise of what is considered “hate speech”.

The Bird loves political ads as much as we do!

There will come a time when the traditional media outlets will find themselves with a voice and no ears listening to it. It’s already happening. Back during the campaign, there was a third-party candidate that was taking a major chunk of the voting block by the ear. That was Libertarian Party member Gary Johnson. Now, as we know, there can only be two parties that you can vote between: Democrat and Republican. They not only get your tax dollars to run their campaigns, but they also control who can be in the televised debates, who shows up in polls (and what is reported by the “mainstream” media about those poll results), and who ultimately can show up on the ballot.

During a “mainstream” media interview, Gary Johnson was asked about what he thought about Aleppo. He famously responded, “What’s Aleppo?”

He quickly became a laughing stock - with that response being played over and over and over again. Now, when the interviewer clarified that it was a city in Syria, Johnson replied with a well-thought out and intelligent response. Didn’t matter. They got him.

What that little slice of baloney showed was Johnson had a good grasp on the goings on in the Middle East, but did NOT look to the “mainstream” media for his briefings. Shame on him! You know what? Until that interview, I had never heard of Aleppo either. Thus the reason the game is called “TriviaL Pursuit”.

Whatever happened to Aleppo? I don’t remember really hearing much about it after that. Syria, yes. The Middle East, yes. But Aleppo? Nada.

You have to understand, the Democrats, Republicans, and the “Fourth Estate” believe that YOU, the general populous, are nothing more than slow-minded children that need to be told what to think, how to think, and what is important. You need to be protected from yourself. You can’t make decisions on your own. The great trio will guide you to Nirvana (the transcendent state, not the rock band). They can’t have you making decisions, or worse yet, having intelligent conversations, over the major issues (in other words, “candidates”) on your own.

So, follow the money. As Tony Montana said, “In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women.” (“Scarface”)

Or the votes.

© Emittravel 2018

I'm No Political Pundit, But . . .

The 2016 Presidential Election is “finally" over. I put “finally" in quotes, because according to my Twitter feed, it ain’t over yet.

As of today, November 13, 2016, Donald Trump won the election with 290 electoral votes, to Hillary Clinton’s 228. Now, according to the U.S. Constitution, Donald Trump won. But, according to my liberal friends, Hillary Clinton won because she got the most popular votes. They think that the Electoral College should either go away, or that the Electoral College should ignore the states and vote for Hillary Clinton on December 19.

Now, I’m not going to go into a long dissertation on why we have the Electoral College. I may save that for a “It’s Broke . . . Time to Fix It" article. Or, you can just go ahead and read the U.S. Constitution. What I do want to do is hopefully give everyone something to grasp that is positive, and allow everyone to finally move on.

To start, let me remind you that I voted for Gary Johnson. You can go back through some of my recent posts to get an overall picture of why. Let’s just say if you think I voted to spite the parties, you are wrong. If you think I threw my vote away, you are also wrong. If you think that my vote gave your opposing candidate the win, you can stop thinking: you are also wrong.

The reason I voted for Gary Johnson was that, based on his policies and record, I believed he was the best person for the JOB we the people were hiring for. And that’s it in a nutshell.

I say that to make sure you understand that I am NOT a Trump supporter, and I am NOT a Clinton supporter. I’m a registered Independent, so I don’t have a party line to hoe.

I’d like to say this was the nastiest election ever, but from what I’ve read, our earlier Presidential candidates were barrel-scum flingers. And that’s far before our lifetimes. So, nasty elections are nothing new in our history. It’s unfortunate that this process cannot be handled with the same decorum as the Office of the President is supposed to present.

(Maybe that should be a criteria for winning?)

As far as Clinton winning the popular vote is concerned, let’s look at the numbers. More than 40% of registered voters did not participate in this election. You can scream voter intimidation if you want, but the truth is, many people that I talked to felt that neither “major" candidate was worth voting for. (Most people had no idea about any third-party candidates, since their 24/7 news channels gave them so little free advertising, compared to the Republicans and Democrats.) Many people - over 40% - decided not to vote. THAT is a major declaration by the people. Either run a candidate that they would hire for the JOB, or they aren’t voting. Not voting is as much a statement as voting.

As far as voter intimidation is concerned, I’ve never seen it. I’ve been voting in elections since 1984 and I’ve never seen it. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. I’m almost positive it does. If the elections of old were as nasty as this one was, I’m sure voter intimidation took place. I am saying that I’ve never seen it. Maybe that means I’ve lived in areas that are just too wholesome for the practice, or more likely, I’ve lived in areas where the electorate is considered of no value. But this election was filled with screams of Trump supporters intimidating voters. I remember cries over alleged Black Panthers intimidating voters in the previous two elections. So, it either is happening, or the concept gets a lot of press.

So, subtracting the over 40% of voters not participating, the remaining popular votes were almost evenly divided between Clinton and Trump. Clinton DID receive the mathematical majority of popular votes. But since NEITHER candidate was able to break the 48% mark, you need to accept that Clinton was .2% (that’s point two percent) LESS UNPOPULAR than Trump. That’s not a majority, that’s splitting hairs. And if you are making the popular vote your argument, maybe you should just stop.

As a side: If Clinton had won the Electoral College but lost the Popular vote by the same .2%, would liberals be shouting that Trump should have won? Maybe it’s time to stop whining.

As far as the people who did vote for Trump: The media has been harping most of this election that he is a bigot, womanizing, pig (amongst many other derogatory adjectives). Because of this, the same descriptors have been placed upon those who voted for him. This needs to stop, people. Do you honestly believe that the majority of people who voted FOR Trump are bigots? I’m sure you do see in the media (social and otherwise) instances showing this to be true, but like the “man on the street" portions of late night TV shows, those are selected instances for impact. NOT the norm.

I saw two maps of the country showing you what it would look like if certain groups had voted. One was hysterical. It represented what it would look like if 3-year olds had voted (completely covered in crayon scribbles). Look for that one. It was the best!

The other map showed the actual results of this election by counties. The majority of Clinton voters were in urban counties, whereas the majority of Trump voters were in rural counties. Now, the media likes to divide that between educated and uneducated. I like to look at it as if those in urban counties live in their own bubbles. Why? Because maybe, just maybe, those in rural counties cared more about the fact that many are either without jobs (never returned to the workforce since the last recession), or are under employed (making less money, or working in jobs that pay less than they had), than whether or not a trans-gendered person used a certain bathroom (if you look at the stories in the media over the last four years or so, the emphasis on such stories was abnormally high). And it’s not that rural folks are bigots against transgenders, it’s that when it comes to their lives, those folks are a minority of a minority of the population.

Maybe, just maybe, those in the rural communities were tired of being left out.

I say this to tell you that I’ve never talked to ANYONE who said they voted for Trump BECAUSE they were bigots. If you think that is the reason why people vote in elections, maybe you need to go and talk to someone . . . professionally.

So to close:

Donald Trump has been elected President of the United States. If you were electing a President, you have nothing to worry about. If you were electing a King, be afraid. Be very afraid.

©Emittravel 2016

What Are You Afraid Of?

God, I hate being right all the time. Well, to be perfectly honest, as a married man, I'm just happy to be right once in a while. And in this instance, I can say I nailed it!

What am I talking about? The Democrats and Republicans got their way: The first Presidential debate will not include anyone else outside of the Democrat and Republican candidates. If you read my last blog, “Repeat After Me", you'd know I predicted this.

(If you haven't read my last blog, please take a moment and do just that. This one is kind of a continuation of that one.)

The Presidential Debate Commission (run by the RNC and DNC) concluded that since no other candidates running for President reached 15% in an average of five polls, only Trump and Clinton would be on the debate stage.

Those five polls were “ABC-Washington Post", “CBS-New York Times", “CNN-Opinion Research Corporation", “Fox News", and “NBC-Wall Street Journal".

Instead of repeating myself concerning “polligana", I thought I'd give you a brief education on how polls are conducted. By the way, isn't it funny that the five polls were conducted by the very news organizations that have been trumpeting "bacon" over and over?

Have you ever heard, in reference to a poll, things like “likely female voters aged 22 – 34”? When you do, pay attention. What that means is that the poll information is skewed towards a certain outcome.

When doing a poll, you first come up with a list of numbers to call. You then take that list and “scrub" it to show only those individuals most likely to respond in a certain way. For instance, “people in voting blocks that previously were heavily Democrat or Republican; voter registrations that are either Democrat or Republican – NOT Independent; within a certain age group – like college students or senior citizens; and subscribe to either cable or satellite television".

And yes, that type of information on you is tracked!

The questions asked during a poll are designed to draw a certain response. “Are you a registered voter?” “How likely are you to vote in this election?” “Do you watch CNN, Fox, or MSNBC news?” “Are you more likely to vote for Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, or a third-party (unnamed) candidate?”

(I'm almost sure that the five polls listed above by the Presidential Debate Commission mentioned Johnson and Stein by name, but again, when the choice is bacon or some other breakfast meat . . . I say "almost sure" because I never seem to be one of those called!)

After the polls, the results are also scrubbed to present the results desired.

By the way, this happens all the time. Do you know why there are scientists that either agree or disagree with man-made climate change? Because they look either at the same data differently, or they look at data that is ignored by the other scientists.

So, because no other candidate was “bacon", and didn't get to 15% averaged in five specific polls, only the Republican and Democrat candidates' views on issues will be heard at the debate. Does that make sense?

Here's a better criteria: A candidate needs to be on the ballot in ALL 50 states. That means a candidate must meet the specific criteria each state determines in order to be on that state's ballot. That means dedicated staff and VOLUNTEERS that can get that done. But that wouldn't work, because the RNC and DNC can't control the outcome. And it's all about control.

I'm a registered Independent voter. I'm not a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green Party, or any other designation. And I'm not alone. Over 50% of registered voters are Independent. Think about that. If Independents were ONLY 50% of registered voters, that would mean that LESS THAN 50% are either Republicans or Democrats – COMBINED! Does it make sense to you that the MINORITY parties should be in control of the conversation (the debates)?

To quote Gary Johnson: “We're on the ballot in all 50 states. We're polling higher than Perot did in '92. We're breaking 3rd party fundraising records.”

I say that candidates like Johnson DESERVE to have their opinions heard.

To you Republicans and Democrats I ask, concerning the Presidential debates, "What are you afraid of?"

©Emittravel 2016

Repeat After Me

Have you ever heard the story about bacon? Not Kevin Bacon, though, as a person only separated from him by six degrees, I kinda have a man crush on him. (And to be honest, who doesn't?) I'm talking about the salty, delicious, only-good-when-crisp, making a cheap piece of meat expensive by being wrapped in it, and (literal) heart breaker, bacon.

When the folks who make their living selling bacon wanted to increase sales, they took a poll by contacting doctors and asking them “Is it better to eat a hearty breakfast in the morning, or eat nothing?” As would be expected, most doctors said that eating a hearty breakfast was better. The bacon folks reported the results as “Most doctors polled said that a hearty breakfast was good for you, and a hearty breakfast includes bacon.” This got repeated over and over. Then later, when taking a second poll asking people whether or not it was good to eat bacon, most said “yes", because they heard that it was, over and over and over. And this was reported as news. And now you know, as the late Paul Harvey would say, the rest of the story. Bacon is the number one selling breakfast meat.

That is what is sometimes referred to as “polligana". Where polls are used to create “news" and sway public opinion by the very act of repetition.

In a recent interview, former Governor and Presidential candidate Gary Johnson was asked what he would do about Aleppo. His response? “What is Aleppo?”

First off, I want to say that I appreciate the honesty of Johnson. I seriously doubt Clinton or Trump would say they didn't know something. They would spew some political speak that answers the question by not answering it.

(Clinton said "You can look on the map and find Aleppo." Which was a clever thing to say once someone explained to HER what "Aleppo" was!)

This little piece of the interview (stopped JUST before he gave his actual answer - once being told Aleppo was the hotbed of what is happening in Syria) was played over and over in the media and social media networks.

Let me tell you, I'm not uninformed. But by that I don't mean I'm glued to the talking heads on cable news 24/7. Nor does that mean I spend every waking moment reading the same stories copied ad infinitum in every internet news media source. But what it does mean is that I know what is going on in Syria.

But until this interview, I had NEVER heard the word “Aleppo".

Now, if the question to Johnson was what he would do about Syria, he would not have skipped a beat and answered the question. (And you should check out that response – it is a GOOD one!)

Why the obscure question? To trip him up. And that is the only reason to ask the question in that manner.

Well, one other reason: to sway public opinion.

And there is a very good reason to want to sway public opinion against Gary Johnson. You see, according to a poll (yeah, yeah, I know), 62% of Americans want Gary Johnson in the debates. According to the Presidential Debate Commission, he needs to be at 15% in national polls. So, he's in, right? Wrong.

Most of the polls since the primaries started only included two parties: the Republicans and the Democrats (and, now that the primaries are over, only two candidates: Clinton and Trump). There has been very few that mentioned any so-called “third-party" candidates. So, based on repetition, the most bacon-like names are Clinton and Trump. So, when a third or fourth name is tossed in the mix, the number of people selecting someone that is not “bacon" is very few.

Until recently, the Presidential Debate Commission had never needed to explain what that precious 15% meant. Now they say it is an average of 15% based on five polls.

Why is this significant? Because the Presidential Debate Commission is made up of members of the RNC and the DNC. This 15% came about as a protection against any third-party candidate (like Ross Perot) who can “muck up the waters".

The only thing Republicans and Democrats care for is protecting their own. And that is it. Like I've said before, they don't give a rat's ass about what is best for the country, only for what is best for maintaining power. Ever hear of bipartisanship? That is where both Republicans and Democrats get together to cause the least amount of damage to themselves. And where the government is concerned, there is no such thing as nonpartisanship.

So, keeping any voices out that might shake up the bacon bits needs to be quashed. And that happens by repetition. And that happens by having those in the media repeat the desired opinions over and over and over. And those are the desired opinions of the Republicans and Democrats.

I say to hell with the "rules" of the Presidential Debate Commission, and let OTHER voices be heard!

Because we know EXACTLY what they are afraid of.

©Emittravel 2016

Stuff My Brain Says #78

Have you heard of these 2016 Presidential candidates:

Hillary Clinton (Democrat Party)
Donald Trump (Republican Party)
Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party)
Jill Stein (Green Party)

Well, I'm sure you've heard of the first two. The second two? Maybe. What I want to point out is that all four have something in common:

Clinton / Kaine
Trump / Pence
Johnson / Weld
Stein / Baraka

Did you guess it? Okay, one more hint:

This decision is considered the most important, first decision a candidate will make.

Give up?

They have all violated the Constitution of the United States.

By that I mean that they have each picked their "running mate". And that is unconstitutional.

According to the 12th Amendment, both the President AND the Vice President are elected separately. In the late 1960s that changed. Correction: the methodology changed; the Constitution was not. Which means that whenever a Presidential candidate announces their running mate, they have violated the Constitution.

Which is really confusing considering the following:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Nothing like starting off with a lie…

(For a more in-depth explanation, check out: "It's Broke. Time to fix it. Article #9".)

©Emittravel 2016