Hyperborea

Unlike the hip-hop group Public Enemy who said, “Don’t Believe the Hype”, Americans - and much of the world for that matter - bent over backwards when it came to the presidency of Barack Obama.

Before you start thinking this is going to be an anti-Obama / pro-Trump piece, relax; I voted for Gary Johnson. And no, I didn’t give the election to Donald Trump by denying Hillary Clinton the election. I’m from Cuyahoga County (Cleveland, OH), and this county went Clinton. My vote wouldn’t have changed anything, even if I would have voted for Trump.

What I want to talk about is “hype”.

I recently posted on Twitter: “Now that Obama's time is over, can we all get back to NOT worshipping 1/3 of the government? #reality”.

Actually, even prior to President Obama, there has been an almost obvious worship of the Office of the President. What we forget is that the President is only 1/3 of the government (remember the Legislative and Judicial branches?) and that his/her power is limited.

Because of that worship, the election process has turned from looking for the best person to hold this temp job, to looking for a messiah to deliver us from all our ills. And that, my friends, is our fault.

“If you hadn't elevated the office of POTUS to king/lord/savior of the world, the transition to someone you dislike would be MUCH easier.” - me

President Obama was not a terrible president. Nor was he the best. At most I’d call him mediocre. He went in with the best of intentions, but found out that the Washington establishment was a little too thick in the skull to listen to “reason”. Unfortunately, the American people and even the rest of the world, were looking for Hyperborea and figured he would be the One to lead us to it.

Remember, there was so much hype around President Obama, that the Nobel Committee bestowed on him the Nobel Peace Prize - not for anything he had done, but for the POTENTIAL of what he would do.

And President Obama fed the hype: “...I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.”

It was believed that because of President Obama, a.k.a. “The first black President”:

the racial divide would dissolve, the economy would thrive, and the world would reach an age of peace (a.k.a. “Aquarius”). Instead, though there was a statistical decrease, there was an increase in reports of blacks being shot by white police officers;

the unemployment rate was the lowest it’s been since before the recession - if you, like the media and the White House, discount the large number of individuals either working at jobs paying far less than before the recession, or are no longer eligible to receive unemployment and therefore no longer counted;

and the American military was fighting more war fronts than the peak of the Bush/Cheney war machine years.

I wonder if the Nobel Committee wants their money back.

And now? We have Donald Trump. We don’t need the media to hype him; he is doing that plenty well on his own. Will he be a good President? For the sake of the country, I hope so. At worst, I can only hope he is also mediocre.

I think it would be best if we and the Office of the President followed the words of Christina Aguilera: "I don't want to believe my own hype."

©Emittravel 2017

Subterfuge Rejecters

"Conspiracy Theorists". Whenever that term is bantered about, images of people wearing aluminum foil on their noggins spouting off in full paranoia mode come to mind.

Whenever the desire to discredit someone, or at least someone's argument, was called for, the term "conspiracy theorist" was used. That would give the impression that (either) the person and/or their argument had no basis in reality, and that everything they said could be ignored.

Often this is the tool of those with something to hide.

Now, I'm not saying that everything uttered in the name of conspiracy is valid. Trying to get the thousands of people involved in the moon landing to go along with a hoax is far more difficult to swallow than whether or not we actually took one small step for a man . . .

But what I'm not saying is that everything uttered in the name of conspiracy is invalid either.

I find it rather funny that statements like "the majority of scientists agree" are used to give credibility to things like "man-made climate change", in order to silence those other scientists who don't agree. Especially with the track record of scientists' "facts". (Check out this video on birth control methods.)

Have you ever heard of Edward Snowden? Interesting fellow. There is a movie coming out about him. Oh, and by the way, whenever you see "based on a true story", or something similar, in regards to a movie, remember that all falsehoods require at least the tiniest element of truth to make them believable. In other words, don't let Hollywood be your source for historical accuracy.

Anywho. Edward Snowden has been called a traitor for leaking government secrets. Actually, I think I figured out why Mr. Snowden is living in an undisclosed location in the land of vodka right now: he proved that those conspiracy theorist nut-jobs were right! Their government WAS spying on them.

And the Emperor was not pleased that he was naked before his subjects.

Does this give credibility to the conspiracy theorists? I don't know. As the saying goes: "Is it paranoia if they really ARE watching you?"

I think it is time for the shoe to go on the other foot. The tables need to turn. The bread needs buttered on the other side (WHAT?!?)

Maybe we need to change the focus from those who don't trust, to those who OVER trust. You know, the lemmings that blindly accept what is told them by "experts" with agendas. Just because President Obama said that (man-made) climate change was real, doesn't mean it is true.

Maybe it is time that we call those individuals by what they really are: conspiracy deniers.

©Emittravel 2016

Who Told You That?!?

WHO told you that?!? Who TOLD you that?!? Who told YOU that?!? Who told you THAT?!?

The other day a coworker told me about a transgender woman being attacked on a subway. A woman started yelling obscenities at her and ended up chasing her around the car. At one point the attacker yelled, "What should we do about you 'cause this sh** right here ain't appropriate for my child." The attacker wasn't travelling with her child at the time, but apparently didn't see the disconnect between screaming obscenities at someone for just being different and determining what was appropriate or inappropriate for her child.

I'm not going to spend a lot of space discussing my opinions on the whole transgender topic. If you want, you can read that here.

You do not have the right to hate someone because of their sexual identity.

I want to ask the woman one question: Who told you that?!?

President Barack Obama has been given the "title" of "First Black President". That is a title I have a lot of problems with. For one thing, he comes from a father who is black and a mother who is white. So, if anything, he is the "First Half-Black President". Calling him "black" is just as racist as calling him "white". Regardless of whether or not you agree with his policies, if you focus on the color of his skin - as a badge of honor or disgrace - you are being racist.

Let me state that again: It does not matter whether you focus on the color of his skin in a positive or negative way, the mere act of focusing IS racist. You can consider him the best President this country has ever seen, or the devil's spawn himself, but you have to do that based on his character - not his color.

You do not have the right to hate someone because of the color of their skin.

I want to ask you one question: Who told you that?!?

Where did this prejudice come from? Is it something that is a part of our DNA? I don't think so. Our basic belief structures are influenced - nay, determined by those who we either chose (friends, coworkers, church members) or don't chose (parents, extended family, church members[?]) to associate with. It is up to us to open our eyes and minds to the POSSIBILITY that what we've been molded by was wrong. And once we've allowed ourselves that opportunity, it is up to us to change. How? Maybe by consciously filtering the inputs we receive before they, like weeds, take root in us and choke the life out of the beauty that we can experience.

I’m going to end this blog by sharing a "Shots of Awe" video. This video doesn't focus on the prejudice I've been smacking, rather, it focuses on the fact that our free will is not autonomous. Rather, it is influenced by the world around us, and our free will, as a result, influences it back.

©Emittravel 2016

Left-Leaning Bias at Cleveland.com? Nothing to See Here - Move Along

The featured story at Cleveland.com today: "Senate Bill 5 repeal sets table for Democrats and President Barack Obama in 2012: Analysis" by Henry J. Gomez (The Plain Dealer). It's funny that repealing Governor Kasich's plan concerning public unions was declared a win for President Obama, but nothing was mentioned about Issue 3: Ohioans soundly announced that they did NOT want mandated health care - which is a resounding DEFEAT to President Obama's 2012 plans. As a matter of fact, I had to do some extra work to even FIND the results to Issue 3 on Cleveland.com.

Yeah . . . Nothing to see here. Move along.

© Emittravel 2011