Toronto Star gets everything wrong...yet again.

The Toronto Star doesn’t get anything right. There is a silly little column about political pantywaist Sam Oosterhoff, and it is worth tearing apart because of its sheer ignorance to reality:

I am putting his name forward to be the first Canadian male anti-abortion politician to gestate a baby, the minute science effectively figures out how to do it. Apparently for a male to have a fertilized egg planted inside of his body and to gestate it until it’s ready for birth is life-threatening. Oh no!

This is a childish argument that completely ignores reality. Why are you pretending that men don’t have vulnerabilities when it comes to reproductive rights? They don’t need to get pregnant: they have sperm, and that’s good enough to put their own reproductive rights on the table.

Feminism keeps doing the same things and employing the same strategies, which is the reason why women’s rights are always precarious and never entrenched. You can’t keep using defensive strategies when your opponents keep using offensive ones. You have to learn to link their fortunes with yours: whatever happens to you will happen to them. You take away the rigs of barriers: they want women to lose their reproductive rights, then so do those who call for it. We take away men’s rights to choose when they can reproduce, if they can, with whom, how many times, and where.

If pregnant women are being framed as “host bodies”, frame men as “sperm gifters.” They gave away their sperm, they have no claim to it.

What you give to one, you must give to the other. You don’t make hypothetical arguments. You don’t justify yourself or allow yourself to be put on the table. You don’t fight to keep your rights — you go after the other side’s rights. Anything else is regression. This is a new war; ergo you use new strategies to ensure the other side knows that if they throw a grenade at you, you are chaining yourself to them first, meaning the explosion will hit them just as hard.

But women have this unnatural habit of justifying themselves to men and explaining and arguing. I once had a sexist male relative who kept trying to break me in for as long as I could remember. I could be dressed to the nines, and he’d say, “You have a pimple,” to which I replied, “And you have a huge glaring bald spot where hair used to be.” He lost the battle and then lost the war. You want to point out a real or perceived flaw on me, I upped the ante and struck where it hurt the most. Asshole, you don’t have the monopoly.

If it is all about reproduction, then start at the very beginning. If we are using biblical arguments about how God made man first, then his sperm is fair game. It’s God’s will and all that jazz. If women cannot be trusted, then neither can men.

When those misogynists are too busy fighting for the survival of their own rights, they have no time to meddle in other people’s rights. Feminists would be wise to throw away their old playbooks. They are obviously flawed. Bridging rights and entrenching that bridging puts the manipulators on notice that there are going to be heavy and painful consequences for their scamming — and anti-choice is a scam — it is a form of propaganda that uses fear-mongering to keep women in place so they do not succeed more than men. It creates a false pecking order and to indulge it is an admission that the pecking order is real and just.

And it is neither. Go after Oosterhoff’s reproductive rights. He is sheltered and insulated from reality and a nice big cold bucket of reality water would keep the little twerp and his ilk in their place.

The Toronto Star has no clue about reality, either. They puke 60s bullshit in a 2019 world. It’s no better and offers no solutions to how to create a real and lasting utopia…

More whitebread propaganda from the Hamilton Spectator and the Toronto Star

Canada is a country that fears change and standing on your own two feet. It is a nation with wobbly training wheels going around in circles day in and day out.

A pair of related articles in the Toronto Star and the Hamilton Spectator are rank propaganda, but they both suffer from the same cowardly confirmation bias that is short-sighted and doesn’t look at the real problems plaguing society: they are pandering to the chicken littles, nothing more.

Let’s start with the Toronto Star’s garbage first.

Screen Shot 2019-05-06 at 3.22.51 PM.png

Why are you protesting e-learning? What do you actually know about it?

Here is a simpler question: Have you ever heard of Bloom’s Taxonomy?

If you are a parent or student and you are griping about your “education” and you never heard this concept before, shut up.

I mean it. Do not get haughty and indignant about education if you do not know what system we are running and have been since the mid-1950s. Go do some basic research before opining about something you do not know anything about — but should.

And in the last decade or so, education has evolved and we now have a revision in the form of Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy.

What this means is simple: e-learning has come a long way. A very long way. It is how I got certified in Higher Learning through Harvard University and upgrade my art theory through Oxford University. I use e-learning, and as an educator with a graduate degree, I know quality education. Get with the times, kids.

Because I don’t actually think most of you do your own homework, but your parents meddle and do a lot of it for you — and if they aren’t computer savvy or you have to go school to learn online, you don’t have people being able to prop up your work.

And this isn’t anything new. We used to have correspondent’s courses — and when I was fast-tracking in high school, I had to do two my credits that was in order to finish one year early. It is not a big deal. Stop throwing temper tantrums because things have to change. That’s life. Deal with it.

So you have reactionary teenaged geezers whining because things have to change. That’s called life, children.

But the Star’s obnoxious whitebread wallowing has nothing on the Hamilton Spectator with this piece of trash:

Screen Shot 2019-05-06 at 3.44.58 PM.png

Memo to the Hamilton Spectator: people lose their jobs every fucking day. The Spec is so immoral that they do not do the same thing to those on the streets or shelters, putting a “face” on those poor people who lost their jobs and now have no home to go to anymore.

Hamilton is a city littered with panhandlers — all those people had jobs, but we don’t seem to give flying fucks about poor people.

Teaching has been seen as a safe career: great pay, job security, and benefits with a strong union. The problem is Ontario is too public sector heavy: when people working for the government are doing far better than the private sector employees, sooner or later, you no longer can afford the system, and you have to cull the fold. You don’t get to bypass the dues paid by those in the private sector who get laid off or let go during economic downturns.

And private sector employees are the ones who bring fresh money into the tax base. People who work for the public sector are, in fact, recycling government money when they pay taxes, meaning they are always a deficit. They give some money back in taxes, but not enough, and when your tax base ends up being public sector employees, you are going to be in serious debt, which is what Ontario is in.

So the Spec’s lazy propaganda suffers from a severe confirmation bias on every imaginable level: it is not looking at why we have a province with too many civil servants, forty percent of private sector workers earning minimum wage, and how do we deal with those real problems.

You interview a few sulky people. Big deal. That’s emotional manipulation. It’s not news. News is asking why we have over 115,000 teachers in this province in the first place. Do the math on their salaries. Look at how many of those educators are on the Sunshine List. Look at how top heavy their administration is, and then go from there. You are not going to get people working minimum wage feeling sorry for these people. You are not going to get precariously employed people feeling sorry for them, let alone small business owners, or people working the private sector busting their tail hustling with a fraction of the pay and with no benefits feeling sorry for them.

Losing a job is life. Hamilton is a city where the majority of people who do well financially work for the government, in healthcare or in education. That’s a dangerous problem and one that came from myopic and shitty leadership. And Hamilton went NDP and we do not have a single cabinet minister — just a single rookie MPP who is in the outskirts of the town.

Hamilton cannot blame Doug Ford for any of its woes. These wounds were entirely avoidable and self-inflicted. The Spec is pure worthless garbage. Let’s have a pity fest seems to be their way of brainlessly waddling through life, and no wonder they are an empty shell.

No one seems to be thinking or using any skill you should have learned in school in the first place. This province needed to do things differently and change on its own before change was imposed on them, but that takes courage and proactive thinking, which doesn’t really speak well of anyone around here…

Whoppers from the field: J-Talks are self-serving narratives, nothing more.

Fallout from the Field? Nice try.

Screen Shot 2019-03-26 at 4.27.54 PM.png

Another bullshit J-Talk which is nothing more than journalistic propaganda spewed to try to save a dead profession. It is as honest as a US reporter’s “scoop” on Russiagate, though I doubt the Toronto Star’s Daniel Dale is keeping a list of all the lies his fellow journalists told about that.

No chance of that happening.

Or of this talk being anything else but a self-aggrandizing farce.

This is not to say that journalists who covered wars before were more thespian than scribe. Daniel Pearl was a real war correspondent who died on the job. So did my favourite war photographer Dickey Chapelle.

Huet,_Chapelle.jpg

That’s her receiving last rites as she was fatally wounded on the job.

But slowly over time, that changed.

And the poseurs took over.

The PR firms hired to manage the optics in the civil was in the former Yugoslavia set up white tents and handed out press releases.

I seriously doubt that caused any PTSD.

And during the upheavals in Syria, one CBC journalist had the nerve to pretend her and her crew were under siege, all whispering “shh!” in the dark all while they had huge lights on them.

Yeah, the snipers are blind, but have super-hearing. Fuck you, you shitty fibbers. What’s up with that?

And you know this is a big bullshit story.

How so?

Have you noticed that none of these motherfuckers cover gang violence or human trafficking or the South American drug cartels.

So, you will cover the superlative dangerous wars, but not drugs, traffickers, or gangs?

Uh-huh.

It is a real knee-slapper because you know there are no public relations firms setting up white tents to hand out canned advertising disguised as news; so you know it’s a big, fat lie.

If you fall for any of it, you are a so naive...

Erosion of Trust? No, just corrupt governmental nincompoopity: The federal Liberal freak show gets more pathetic.

The Prime Minister is puking up a storm, spewing about “erosion of trust” in a sad attempt at deflection and spinning over their corruption in dealing with SNC-Lavalin and their mistreatment and fuckery of Jody Wilson-Raybould, but let’s review the facts here.

The CBC and the Toronto Star, loyal liberal lapdogs, are spinning nonsense about a fake “he said-she said” narrative, which is an out-and-out lie and misrepresentation of reality.

“He said-she said” applies when both parties can speak freely and put all of their cards on the table. It does not apply in this case.

Why?

As has been repeatedly said by Jody Wilson-Raybould, she is not allowed to speak freely about the matter. So all bets are off.

This is a rigged case of He-he-and-he (Trudeau, Gerald Butts, Michael Wernick) spin and She (Jody Wilson-Raybould) can only present a bit of the facts unless the Big He (Trudeau) allows her.

And if the board can be that rigged in favour of the Liberal regime, and they still fuck it up, you know there is more than just bad optics: we are talking about some serious illegal bullshit going down. An entire month of this scandal — that had it just been a wacky “misunderstanding” — would have been put to bed on Day One. That shipped sail far away, never to return because the ship is the Titanic.

But the journalist minions keep distorting the facts. The propaganda here is beyond pathetic.

The only person to offer evidence is Wilson-Raybould. The other three spin as they drag their feet.

This scandal is far worse than what it appears.

But as Canadian journalists are cowards to defer to authority, they do not have either the courage nor intelligence to find out…

Jody Wilson-Raybould won the war. There are no do-overs in a political joust.

Gerald Butts and Michael Wernick wasted their words today.

Because whatever bullshit story they puke, Jody Wilson-Raybould has more to say.

And, as she made public, that devastating testimony she gave before was merely a “detailed summery.”

A preface.

Wernick played the same game the last time, and Wilson-Raybould tore it to shreds. She can do it worse again.

The Prime Minister can call off his press conference tomorrow. He waited too long. It is done.

The Toronto Star can go fuck themselves, too: Yes, Ms. Wilson-Raybould is the hero of this entire sordid affair: she took control of the narrative first, she has given details, and she wasn’t the one dawdling for weeks. Anyone who says anything else is trying to spin propaganda.

What we heard today was pathetic excuses, and gaslighting the way abusive men try to pin their crimes on the women they abuse. It is textbook.

The entire world watched this episode and they have chosen sides: Wilson-Raybould’s. It is done. Both Butts and Wernick keep tweaking her nose, and she has said full force that she has far more to offer. Wernick is a patronizing asshole and his condescending bullshit is just prolonging the Grits’ well-earned agony. Not only are they corrupt, they are liars and pretenders who proclaim to be progressive, but when a single woman speaks out, they talk down to her.

Wernick, no one gives one flying fuck that you are “profoundly disappointed.” Get over yourself.

Because whatever feint or ruse you puke, the heroine of this story can trump you. She whipped your skinny ass last time, and she has the proof to do it even worse now. It is over.

The end.

As in, the end.

It is done.

Two of your own ministers have turned against the party.

That is all it takes.

The problem is the Grits are arrogant and are used to scamming and manipulating themselves out of a jam. They have made things even worse by blocking her from speaking again because they have cower in private and fill their diapers. This just makes them look guilty of treason at this point.

The problem is two-fold: Trudeau had pissed off several other nations, and this isn’t the worst thing they are trying to keep clamped down.

All it takes is one more scandal or revelation, and the Liberal brand will no longer be viable. The provincial counterparts lost the Ontario election and could not even muster enough seats to be official opposition.

They are hanging by a thread and Wilson-Raybould has all but said she can drop the nuclear bomb on them.

The bad guys lost.

The problem is that Trudeau and Butts thought they could fool all of the people all of the time, and always be seen as the heroes with smarmy little smirks on their lounge lizard faces.

But those jive turkeys weren’t the heroes. They never were…

Memo to the Toronto Star: Don't speculate who is going to replace the Prime Minister. He is still prime minister.

I

pe19801126.gif

II

Remember the love affair between Canadian journalists and Justin Trudeau?

Fuck that shit, it’s like, so over.

They dumped the cad and are throwing horse dung at him with reckless abandon.

Like this column from the Toronto Star that has got a jump on things, by speculating who could replace him:

Who will lead if the Liberals toss Trudeau?

How about Ester the Wonder Pig? She has a great reputation, lives in a progressive home, is a great mascot for cherishing flora and fauna — and beat cancer (go Ester!).

Her website has the motto “Peace. Love. Ester" and her security pillow says “Save the world.”

How could anyone go wrong with such a cutie?

No wait; she’s too successful to go down that dreadful path.

We need some sort of etiquette rule here that you have to wait until someone’s actual ouster before speculating who is going to replace them.

He hasn’t emptied his office yet, and there is a good chance he won’t have to do it unless he loses the election.

Until then, cool it, kids…you are making it sound like you are writing his obituary…

Journalism was never about being polite or comforting. It is about forcing the collective to face the truth: Why journalists would make horrible doctors.

Imagine you have cancer.

I don’t have to imagine it because I had it last year.

And you had a choice of two oncologists: one who told you to fucking grow up and face reality, and threw up on the operating table, gutted you, and then poisoned you with chemo as they warned you of the ugly consequences of being a wuss. They made you hurt, have your hair fall out and your fingers go numb as they showed you every ugly tumour in your body, and made you feel like shit as they put a PICC line in your arm, and made you drag around the poison that made you hate living as they put a cramp on your free time.

The other one was nice to you. They shielded you from unkind words and didn’t make you feel sick. No gutting, no poisoning. No having to go to scary places or see scary pictures of your innards. No treatment at all!

Which one is the morally superior physician?

It ain’t the one fellating your worthless ego, asshole.

To shield the patient causes irreparable harm.

What feels good isn’t what is good.

Or right.

But that never stopped the Toronto Star from virtue-signalling and trying to protect people who neither need protecting nor deserve it. This column take the cake:

In the wake of the resignation of Gerald Butts from his post as principle secretary in the office of the prime minister last Monday, a CTV reporter and photographer attempted to conduct and film a clearly unwelcome interview with his spouse, Jodi Butts, on the doorstep of her home.

The exchange was painfully uncomfortable to watch.

The reporter ignored any and all respectful social cues as Jodi Butts sternly, and somehow still politely, requested privacy out of concern for the safety of her children — a response that was remarkably patient and graceful considering the circumstances.

This is garbage logic and what propagandists bank on. Don’t pretend you are compassionate or moral. You’re just a tool.

Why?

If I did something sketchy and I, like a coward, don’t want to be forced to face the public, I can throw someone from my family at the front door, and then we can have pseudo-journalists feel “uncomfortable” with the exchange.

That is an old ruse, and if you were a genuine news-gatherer, you’d know it.

What a great excuse not to do a job.

It’s uncomfortable.

Yes, it is. It is uncomfortable and intrusive. And rude as hell. That is the reason it has to be done. What the middle class who have secrets of their own screech and babble on Twitter is unimportant. If we used their logic, cancer would be treated by ignoring it because surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation are uncomfortable.

Of course the family will kvetch about “privacy.” They don’t want to be accountable; so they use a misdirection of morality to do it.

And Gerald Butts had no problem being in the public eye, particularly chest-thumping on Twitter.

Who said there is a “right to privacy”, especially if the government was playing in the sewer with a corrupt company?

When it came to pushing a questionable agenda, Butts had no problem strutting on the Troll Scroll, but when it came to him being called on the carpet for what went down, let’s get the wife to take the hits as she begs for “privacy.”

Really?

That nice house and lifestyle came with the public life and aiding and abetting a regime.

And taxpayer money funded that lifestyle. There is no privacy whatsoever. That’s the price you pay.

You are to be held accountable as you make yourself transparent.

People can try to build fortresses, but reality doesn’t care. You can say the family didn’t ask for the glare, but I didn’t ask for ovarian cancer, either. It was imposed on me, and I didn’t even know what hit me.

I had to deal with it, and I did.

She’s a big girl. She can say she is not in a position to answer the questions, but give her husband’s whereabouts — because he is a big boy who has to answer to the people.

And the sooner, the better.

The Toronto Star is a decrepit rag. Shame on them for trying to protect the federal regime yet again...

Toronto Star's Alternative Facts in recounting the press's role in the Smollett Hoax. Nice try.

I

Screen Shot 2019-02-21 at 9.02.44 AM.png

II

The mainstream media loves to take credit for things they didn’t do, but distance themselves from the bad things they did do, and the Toronto Star is no exception.

The Jussie Smollett Debacle is a scandal that hit left-wing and mainstream publications. The right-wing partisan ones didn’t buy it, and neither did Alexandra Kitty. I have recounted the episode here, complete with many screenshots of mainstream outlets that treated this hoax as if they were real.

No use of the words “alleged”, “purported”, or “according to.”

CNN has already tried to pretend it wasn’t a vector when the screenshots don’t lie.

The Toronto Star is playing a similar gambit with Rosie DiManno doing so with this column, inlcuding this knee-slapping passage:

Though it should be noted that mainstream media, with old-school reporting values, were the most carefully and cautiously qualified of the bunch over Smollett’s incendiary claims

They were the least qualified of the bunch. In their never-ending war with Donald Trump, they gleefully ran with it. Stop pretending that your pack of jackals are superior to everyone else.

Even the headline is an attempt to distance the press from their sins:

Empire actor Jussie Smollett’s attack allegation strained credulity all along

Nice try.

Because if it “strained credulity” and the press still spewed the yarn as if it were real, that has worse ramifications than if you all were just stupid.

That means you deliberately reported a lie as truth.

ABC News touted its “exclusive” complete with softball questions.

Screen Shot 2019-02-21 at 9.34.39 AM.png

This sentence is also instructive:

What damage this foolish, vain actor has caused. Gifted the haters with hee-haw ammunition to last . . . well, at least until the next social media driven hoo-hah comes along. But liberals will have to wear the humiliation.

Even now, DiManno finds it necessary to put down ideological rivals who were correct, and then throw the blame on Smollett and liberals — but not the press that spread the disinformation in the first place. The Chicago police chief didn’t exclude the press from his complaints.

And she does it again:

[T]hese are not glory days for the rush-to-judgment virtue-signalling brigade. A bad look for liberals, oxygen for the “liberal media bias’’ hordes.

That’s like saying DNA linking a killer to a crime gives “oxygen” for the anti-crime “hordes.” Just how stupid do you think people are?

No mea culpa. No owning up. No admission of a flawed mindset and structure, let alone method.

In other words, the same dysfunctional system stays in place and more propaganda gets reporting as news all the same…

Toronto Star nincompoopity continues. Children, grow up.

I am still laughing at this stupid article from the knuckle-draggers of the Toronto Star:

Why experts say Canada should follow Australia’s lead on China in wake of Huawei crisis

Yay, experts. They are never wrong, so you can’t question this bullshit. I like this attempt at shutting down debate:

Canada should not be afraid to follow Australia’s lead in standing up to Beijing in policy and practice, say experts who have analyzed foreign relations for decades.

Ottawa has long prioritized economic gain over national security, worrying over the state of its relationship with the global heavyweight rather than voicing and defending its interests, say analysts.

They have analyzed things for decades, so you can’t question the big gaping holes in this article.

Nice try, but there are so many things wrong with this bullshit story that I could write a book on it.

For starters, Canada is not Australia. We cannot just blindly follow someone else’s playbook and expect the same results. If a single “expert” is making that decree, take away their credentials. They are morons.

Australia has its own problems right now, and they stem from their unpopular policies at home and abroad. Canada doesn’t need more luggage.

And the worst of this article is its Middle Class mindset that it is all about tweaking the nose of other nations to “slap back” at them — and that everything will work out in the end.

You don’t know that, and neither do your experts.

For example, you do not know what dirt China has on the Canadian government or its players. You don’t know what China owns here or what the contracts say are penalties. Australia may be in a better position than Canada and can afford to do what they do.

And you do not know what’s actually going on between Australia and China — you do not know what backroom concessions the Aussies had to give in order to save face publicly. That is not something “experts” would know. That is something insiders would, however.

You keep quoting the arm’s lengths people, who cannot tell you anything that is useful — just the façade of it.

Canada has to solve its own problems actively and originally, not crib from other regimes. That requires being creative and not stealing playbooks from other countries and appealing to authority.

If governing were that easy, then we wouldn’t be having the big problems we are having now…

Okay, class, name twelve things Justin Trudeau did wrong: How not to handle a scandal.

This latest nightmare for the Prime Minister is still news in another work week. This should have been fluffed off by now.

The big tactical errors coming from the Jive Turkey are amateur errors. Do not say that a demoted minister is in agreement with you because she is still in cabinet because you have just given her a prime opportunity to upstage you by resigning. Don’t be a nerd.

And the long non-denial denials. Good gracious, if there was nothing amiss, you would have said it right away.

And now your Big Meany press conference trying to paint a wronged minister as a duplicitous villain. If the PM didn’t look guilty before, this last hot mess pretty much blares the opposite.

He is acting like a jilted boyfriend who pretends to be nice about it, until people find out why it happened, and then he gets nasty. How dare she?

She dared, all right, and not everyone is buying the excuses from the PM. She put up and shut up long enough. The trolls at the Toronto Star keep wondering why she didn’t resign or speak out, but it is not a stretch to say that you will endure a lot when you are the groundbreaker until you see the ground you are breaking is filled with toxic waste and you have to cut your losses and leave.

Like Jeff Bezos, the Prime Minister’s own narcissistic insistence of trying to control everything in the optics department is backfiring on him. This scandal has legs because he keeps walking it in circles. In the public eye you have various phases: the breakout honeymoon phase, the positive press phase, and then when you screw up, the give him the benefit of the doubt phase.

When you go one step more, you are entering negative territory. Mark Zuckerberg found this out the hard way. The script doesn’t deviate. The more goodwill you send, the faster you accelerate into negative territory. You will never go back to the honeymoon phase, and you cannot manipulate 7.4 billion people.

But arrogance compels former media darlings into trying to punish the naysayers. It doesn’t work. It is like kicking the car that you drove into a bad neighbourhood. Asshole, you drove it there yourself. Hitting the car won’t make it turn around.

You can take so many hits before you run out of goodwill.

Mortal_Kombat_11_gameplay-640x360.jpg

Goodwill is a precious resource and gift. You may have been conniving enough to take it from people, but once it is not appreciated, you are in serious trouble. You can always make a comeback, but that requires contrition, making serious concessions, admitting wrongdoing, and understanding the nature of the dynamic has changed.

Trudeau is stepping in so many piles of horse dung it truly is shocking. The sins keep piling up, and he has taken responsibility for none of them.

October should be a very interesting month, indeed…

Reading the melodrama of the immature...

The Toronto Star is a sheltered publication.

How else to explain this bizarre and childish column:

The National Enquirer faces nuclear annihilation and Jeff Bezos is the mushroom cloud

Don’t be a nerd.

What Jeff Bezos did was spin a narrative. What he calls “blackmail” isn’t. Journalists pull similar shit: if you don’t talk to us, we will write the story without your spin. Is that blackmail?

Not the illegal kind. It is not as if the Enquirer has a reputation of being virtuous angels. They deal in dirt and this will not impede them.

They have been sued and lost. Carol Burnett winning her suit still being the most high-profile example — and she is a beloved celebrity. It didn’t bury the Enquirer.

He is trying to save face, and in a world where the news cycles spin at warp speed, in a few days, something else about him or his companies overshadows what went on now he loses momentum.

And in a climate where we have people of questionable motives wanting to tax the rich out of existence, it is not as if sympathy is on his side. The Enquirer is not Gawker: they know what they are doing.

No one expects the dirt mongers to play nice or fair. Bezos has a huge black mark, and one social media entry isn’t going to change the outcome.

A crisis management team will have to school him on not blaming other people, accepting responsibility for his actions, a contrite demeanour, some generous donations to various groups, and then move on with some feel-good gestures that involve having some token gesture to employees.

This is not the end of Jeff Bezos. This is not the end of the Enquirer. No nuclear bombs. No annihilation. Just a spat, and the world spins merrily along…

You mean there is no difference between the federal Liberals and the Conservatives? You don't say, Toronto Star! Duh.

I

II

III

I love this oh-so-serious headline from the goobers at The Toronto Star:

Screen Shot 2019-02-10 at 9.06.04 PM.png

No shit, Sherlock.

I can’t see a difference. Do you actually think there is a difference?

Because you have the same kind of people who made it using the same means and vying for the same job telling the same bullshit stories and you are going to try to snow Alexandra Kitty by saying they are, like, totally different?

Jebem li ti sunce zarko.

Give me a break.

It is no different than getting into a slap fight because you use Crest and someone else uses Colgate — and then you have some dumbass who gets plummy and slaps you both because he uses Rembrandt.

It’s fucking toothpaste. They are all the same. They are all owed by big companies, have to go through the same motions, strategies, and standards.

Politicians are just toothpaste.

Anyone who says otherwise is either a liar or a moron.

They are all slapping each other the way kids slap each other in musical chairs: they are clawing for power. Why people get excited about them in 2019 is a mystery.

It is the same old trick, people.

That’s why this new generation bitching for socialism are losers of epic proportions.

You motherfuckers haven’t read a single history book?

You are too stupid to see it is the same old confidence trick?

Are you really that worthless as a thinker?

You’d think you would have radical centrists and political atheists who didn’t degrade themselves in public with some garbage tantrum about this old system being better than that old system.

Jebem ti slavski kolac.

It’s fucking toothpaste.

You are willing to destroy people over something you know absolutely nothing about.

And the Toronto Star is no better, playing tattle tale.

Yeah, they are all alike.

They play the same games.

It’s the same old song with them — and the press.

Garbage in and garbage out…

Quite possibly, one of the worst Toronto Star articles ever written...

Dear lord, what is this piece of garbage doing in here?

Why legal cannabis growers can’t compete with the black market — yet

The article quotes an “expert” who obviously never had to hustle in the real world, and neither did the person who puked out this truly gullible article.

The laughable “conclusion” was that government cannot “keep up” with the blackmarket because the can’t produce the same amount.

How stupid and short-sighted can you be?

I am serious: that is like saying that all Sears Canada had to do was have more product on their shelves and people would have bought more.

Idiots.

I have written about this before months ago as to why the legal market cannot compete with the illegal one.

There is a lot more than just quantity. For one, the blackmarket can undercut the price every time. No tax, either.

Second, the legal sellers have to sell to an older crowd. The blackmarket hooks in kids and teens. They get first crack, and hence, loyalty.

Third, the demographic. The blackmarket grabs in a wider net. The legal market attracts jittery middle class nerds trying to be badass. Government casinos didn’t stop illegal gambling. It just gave pensioners on a fixed income a place to go to gamble a few pennies and then eat at the buffet. High stakes rollers aren’t stopping their games.

Finally, legal sellers just sell weed. The blackmarket sells everything.

The legal and blackmarket are apples to oranges. You cannot compare the two.

It is truly mystifying just how devoid of basic thinking one newspaper can be. No wonder no one reads them and they have to take their soiled underpants up to Ottawa to throw tantrums for pity money.

There is bad journalism, and there is brain dead journalism, and this article is a new low in stupid…

The "Majority" Feint: (Mis)using polling to built support as reliable as bought social media followers.

Polls once said Rob Ford would never be mayor of Toronto.

They also said Brexit would never happen, Donald Trump would lose the president race, and that Doug Ford would lose to Andrea Horwath.

Polls are not reliable, nor do they measure psychological nuances.

And yet, we have a constant barrage of polling propaganda, even when we have been shown time and again that polls to actually reflect anything.

Here is today’s sampling of such propaganda:

STAR EXCLUSIVE

Majority of Toronto residents want public waterfront access at Ontario Place — not a casino, poll finds

Forum Research poll shows many Torontonians disapprove of a casino at a revamped Ontario Place, but they are supportive of a landmark Ferris wheel.

So what do polls mean? What do they do?

They are a form of shepherding and corralling people into pushing an agenda on behest of a vested interest.

Public opinion has very little value in many regards: we don’t quiz people to see how much they actually know. We talk about minority rights, but always use majority rule and appeal to mob to strong arm people. Just people the majority disapprove, it doesn’t mean following them is the right thing to do.

So don’t take popular opinion to the bank, kids.

But there are other considerations to taking polls as anything else but myth creation.

Often, people know how to manipulate the optics: what loaded questions were asked, for instance? What were the options, if any? Who answered the survey? Does the survey measure what it proclaims to measure?

For instance, do you think people would opt to austerity measures if it meant getting through a difficult national crisis? No, they would be marching on the street, up in arms, bellyaching and wanting more, even if that more resulted in an economic collapse.

So should a government follow a poll, perhaps commissioned by someone who wants to force the government to collapse in order to build public resentment, or should they ignore the polls and do what is necessary for a long-term benefit?

And often, polls are a form of propaganda employed by a weaker side in order to get something that they didn’t exactly earn.

The first poll up there was published in the Toronto Star. Ontario Place is in Toronto, and it is closed because attendance was down, meaning no one was actually using it. It was a money loser. That is fact.

But here is another fact: Toronto shut itself out of provincial power because they switched their vote from Liberal to NDP who lost to the Conservatives. Toronto is shut out of cabinet, and out of power. People outside of Toronto and Hamilton voted for Doug Ford’s Tories. Toronto outsmarted itself and suddenly, can no longer dictate to the rest of the province how their lives will roll.

Worse, this is the city that went after Ford and his brother Rob with reckless abandon…and now are ruled by Ford and shut out of power.

So how to try to wrest some of the power back?

By manipulating polls and try to pressure the government to sway to their whims by some other means other than the democratic process.

Polls for public consumption have no empirical value. They are imprecise, based on folksy logic, and do not challenge the opinions of people to see what they know and why are they answering the way they are.

It is a feint and ruse for followers.

Hillary Clinton banked on the Majority Feint to psyche out her rival and make people believe her victory was a foregone conclusion.

That’s why you never trust polls. They are a ruse and misdirection. Private polling is a different matter, but the garbage used in news reports is strictly meant to coerce people into walking lockstep with a decree, and should be ignored and the stratagem that it is…

Toronto Star in denial about obvious recession...the Reality Deniers strike again.

It seems that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau isn’t campaigning against anyone except Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario.

I find Jive Turkey’s fear of Ford to be utterly fascinating.

16EL.gif

The Grits, contrary to trash talk, are more worried about Jagmeet Singh than they let on.

But Ford is the true spoiler to the Liberal plans. They fear him because he is uninhibited and unpredictable. They may paint him as some sort of rube oaf, but he isn’t. He took advantage of the Patrick Brown Circus, barrelled over Caroline Mulroney and Christine Elliott, and not only won the leadership race, he won a majority in the Ontario election, and then pushed through whatever he wanted, upstaging and outfoxing the Left who seem to think they own and control the government as their divine right.

This does not bode well for the federal Grits — they are elitist and arrogant, honestly believing they are smarter and more cunning because their daddies got them their jobs.

But the Star — the propaganda arm of the federal Liberal machine — is trying to lie outright by denying this whole recession thing won’t happen and that Ford is “blowing smoke”. His background is in running a business, and he knows the signs. Others are also pointing out that are there, and this time, the US isn’t having one.

But we are already in recession. People have too much debt, and that is evidence that we were in one all along, but covered it up through borrowing money we don’t have, making things worse in the long run.

Postponing the inevitable is not an economic strategy.

But the Star has a vested interest in all of this ridiculous spinning. If the Tories take over, goodbye to the newspaper slush fund. It’s gone. The Star, which has been using its own product to openly and relentlessly lobby the feds for money in lieu of improving their product, has a horse invested in this race.

Meaning their conflict of interest is blaring. This is a cardinal sin that makes their product utterly useless.

What this means is simple: you cannot trust the Star. Every assessment is suspect and self-serving. That means you also have no barometer of measuring anything positive or negative. When you have spin and propaganda, you truly have no way of knowing who or what to believe. You cannot just dismiss criticism as a knee-jerk reaction, but you cannot believe it, either.

These kind of games infect an information stream, and it is not a minor problem. We are in a recession. When you have too many people who are $200 away from insolvency, you have a crisis. A

And with oblivious people demanding Basic Income when that in itself can trigger a depression, you have no sensible electorate: just a childish and greedy one. A Zero-Risk Society in an neo-Victorian Age of Propaganda? Temper tantrums and death threats on the Troll Scroll as if you can have an ounce of respect for tyrannical and uninformed slacker divas who morally masturbate and issue royal decrees.

The Gimme-Gimme mantra comes from the super-rich to the super-poor with not a single one bothering to mention what active things they are doing to help society. Everyone is just sitting around with their wish lists, thinking some They owe them something.

And then flat-out lie in order to justify their tantrums.

The Star hasn’t made the changes to justify getting a dime from Canadians. People exercised their free will, and then they used the Federal Regime to steal money and then work as a propaganda arm of their sugar-daddy.

That is not democracy.

That is the definition of tyranny.

And that is a serious problem for a country already stumbling around in the dark moving in the wrong direction…

The Grits' Bullshit Saga of the Burnaby South By-election Continues.

Well, I guess the Federal Fiberals do want to win Burnaby South after all!

As they have replaced one chewed up and spat out candidate with someone who is qualified enough to be a contender.

Not even the Toronto Star bought the bullshit story of how the Grits weren’t all that concerned and they had some sort of brilliant master plan all along.

This is what it means to be in the federal Liberal Party:

And the stench of burning pants from their headquarters reeks way over here…

We call the shots and reap the rewards and glory, but you foot the bill: That's not how it works, kids.

The Left have a serious problem being Reality Deniers these days.

Once the voice of reason and compassion, their ideology has been hijacked and replaced with some idea that they are owed something to the point that they can call all the shots, reap all of the rewards, get all of the glory, and the people they slag have to foot the bill.

This is sanctioned insanity.

You want to call the shots, foot the bill.

That should have been the Left’s focus all along: ensuring that people have the economic freedom and ability to earn their own way.

Not to be dependent on a nanny state or look for well-heeled sugardaddies and sugarmommies, but to have the cash money to afford upward mobility.

Not a hamster wheel. Not a chain of debt.

But the Toronto Star has problems with the notion of personal competency.

They lament that student newspapers will wither because students will have the option not to fund them. Ontario university students — the ones who get titles running for useless organizations — are upset that those who do not wish to find them will have the right. No one owes you a paper crown, kids. Do not pretend you are holding anyone “accountable.” What you are doing is résumé-padding, but no worries: you will still land that same crappy jobs after graduation as your friends who skipped that exercise entirely.

Contract work “unfair” to newbies in universities? How old are you people again? It was profoundly unfair that my grandmother was dropped by paramedics and that I had to look after my mother who had cancer at the same time I had ovarian cancer. An untested commodity not getting a bragworthy contract, who gives a flying fuck? Earn your stripes first.

But the Star’s logic extends beyond post-secondary education, and lands currently right on Ontario Place with a pair of very manipulative articles:

Ontario Place must remain ‘family friendly’ and accessible to all, experts say. Here are their ideas.

and:

Ontario Place Cinesphere, pods could be demolished under Ford government plan.

Must be “family-friendly”? No, it doesn’t. There is no logical or physical necessity. It can be condos, a retirement village, an airport, a casino, a mall, a hotel, a factory, a school, a resort, a university, anything.

It can be a nudist resort. It can be a weed haven. If the Ontario government wants to convert it into something else, they have the mandate. Experts do not. They can try to exploit their paper crown to meddle, but at the end, it is not their call.

I have many times in my life decided on a course of action where “the experts” said that I must do something else that went against my wants and needs. Every time, I was right to trust my instincts, and had I gone with their sexist decrees, I would have not succeeded or been in a good position.

Ford got his majority. He has never made a secret of what his vision of Ontario Place was — and it is not called Toronto Place, but Ontario Place.

It used to be “family-friendly”, but then it didn’t work. It wasn’t making money, nor was it attracting people. It had to be shut down and has been in limbo ever since.

Experts are not elected. They can have opinions, but they cannot dictate the parameters. Your cabal of experts rig the results one way. Someone else’s cabal of experts will rig it the opposite.

But what we have are people trying to bluff their way into power. They do not have the financial or political authority or means, so they try to position themselves as having the moral or intellectual superiority to be the ones in charge.

Except they have neither. It is just a grab. The way Torstar openly lobbied for government money — forcing people to pay for a product they do not use — and then pretend the money is not for them to keep their titles and pay checks even though they are incompetent propagandists.

You cannot be a functional system without fiscal management skills. You cannot borrow and get yourself in a hole because then you are beholden to someone else. The Left have never been a viable option because they want control of a populace by making them financially dependent on the state so that the state can scare them and do all of their thinking for them.

This scam doesn’t work. Other Leftist nation who played that gambit imploded. It is time to retire that economic ideology once and for all.

If you truly believe in freedom and freedom of choice train people to thrive on their own out in the wild. Do not throw them in cages and then feed them a bullshit story how glorious and moral it is to live in a cage. That’s what Millennials are doing to their own perpetual misery — and instead of moving out of the cages, they want to be forced to be in a smaller cage with less freedom.

Western thinking lacks instincts and literate ferality. When you have a society trained on apps and prepackaged goods, something gets lost.

Life is not trouble-free or without effort or heartbreak. It is ironic that for all the bad-mouthing of capitalism, champagne socialists are the most indoctrinated — the difference is they want someone else to give them stuff and an enviable lifestyle, not be the ones who earn it themselves.

If capitalism had one serious defect, it is that it failed to take human greed into account. It rewarded financial hoarding. Had there been a slight tweak in its structure, we wouldn’t see the blaring inequities we are seeing now.

Nor would we be seeing people expect a champagne lifestyle as if it were a human right. It is not a human right. There is something to be said about having to earn your way and not be given it.

We don’t have an adequate system that deals with the worst of human thinking, such as greed, jealousy, deception, anger, arrogance, or laziness. Sins or not, a truly viable political and economic structure goes in knowing that grifters, thieves, and manipulators want to leech from the competent and the diligent, but in order to do that, they have to dupe enough empty-heads into relinquishing their power and free will to form a barrier to keep prying eyes away from their blood-sucking.

We have two seemingly competing ideologies that have the identical structure, meaning we don’t actually have a choice.

It’s just like journalism: we don’t have a choice. We have propagandists who spew from the Right, and those who spew from the Left. We have no alternative structure that actually does its job.

Journalism that wants to call the shots, reap the reward, and get the glory — but have someone else foot the bill.

No wonder the profession is fubar: with ridiculous thinking like that, it was inevitable…

Temper tantrums aren't saving Canada. Let's try something that actually gets results.

The Reality Deniers of the Toronto Star are at it again, using irrational and oblivious chest-thumping in lieu of actual reportage:

China needs to pay a heavy price for its treatment of Canadians

Are you serious? Are you truly that stupid? Canada stepped into dog shit without thinking about something called consequences.

Canada has no cards to play. Our economy is tanking. Housing is crashing. The few quality jobs are being lost. We fucked up USMCA because the Arrogance-Obliviousness Disease the federal regime has. We pissed off the Saudis as we are tweaking their noses as they can still make damage.

But China is another matter. They can, for instance, recall all of their university students studying in Canada. That can screw up our post-academic viability in a heartbeat. Canada can recall all of their students studying in China, and…that regime will not feel a thing.

Or, China can decide to stop all exports to Canada. Canada would collapse. We don’t have factories that can pick up the slack. We don’t have the workers who are trained. From medical equipment to food, most of our staples come from China.

And you asshole think that China gives one flying fuck about your threat? We put all our eggs in one basket, and then dropped the basket.

China is now throwing every single word we threw at them back in our faces, and this has been a long time coming.

Grow up, children. You have been nannied and sheltered. Stop making a mockery of this country with your moron hick schtick.

This reminds me of a horrible tragedy that happened in Toronto in 2003.

It was a ten-year-old girl named Holly Jones. She was grabbed by an adult male and dragged away to her death.

She was a lithe and dainty girl, and I remember the case very well. I have always had issues with adults who prey on children. There is cowardice, but that kind of cowardice is vile.

But I remember one columnist who basically opined that had young Holly taken self-defence lessons, somehow, that would have saved her.

Right.

A grown adult male and a child fighting. He has a plan, and she doesn’t.

Self-defence is not some sort of magical cure-all.

We could train a 10-year-old to box and then put the kid in the ring to fight the adult male.

You wanna place your bets on who would win that bout?

It takes a special kind of stupid not to understand that kind of grossly unequal fight, but it broadly hints that Canadian journalists have not gotten very far on Jean Piaget’s Four Stages of cognitive development.

That they have not reached Stage Four is not a surprise, but they are struggling through Stage Two — the Pre-operational Stage where they have yet to master this key concept:

Children at this stage tend to be egocentric and struggle to see things from the perspective of others.

They also have serious issues of Stage Three’s Concrete Operational Stage where children:

[B]egin to understand the concept of conservation; that the amount of liquid in a short, wide cup is equal to that in a tall, skinny glass, for example.

There is no logic. None. It is just anger control issues and temper tantrums. How does Canada go up against China? With irrational vendettas, wasting thoughts, money, and resources with childish tweaking? By making alliances where they have to enslave themselves with odious and costly favours? China can do to Canada whatever it pleases. They can literally hit us with such economic force that we will not be able to recover for decades.

And they know it, but we don’t.

But the Star column is as privileged white bread as you can get — sounding like some rich snot who becomes enraged because the foreign nanny spoke out of line. How dare she? I’ll show her! Do you know who I am?

Oh, get over yourself, you morons, and take some racial sensitivity courses.

Or didn’t you get the memo that this is the Woke Generation?

If China were to call Canada’s bluff, we’d be screwed, and royally.

The Globe and Mail also is making silly remarks: yes, Canada was in a weak position, but we have already lost that war. We lost it when the US knocked us off that pedestal. We got cocky and like our housing market, we vastly overestimated our value and power.

So is the National Post who are oblivious: China doesn’t need to “frighten” Canada — they can just fuck up the economy. They can flood the market and undercut us. They have intelligence they can use. If it comes to a brawl of might, Canada is cooked.

And once again, Canada had to go crawling to the United States for help because we are not an actual power.

Anger is not Canada’s friend. We can roar, and then get stomped on by someone who’s power is bigger than our own.

We don’t need propaganda sending us down the wrong path. We need an accurate picture of reality. We need strategy based on our own unique circumstances. This storm was brewing for months. We ignored it, thinking some They was going to make all better. It has gotten worse.

So instead of petty and vindictive rage puking based on nerdy revenge porn, we need a plan that actually works, given Canada’s deteriorating circumstances. Use wit, not a shit fit.

Because the longer this drags, the more incompetent and weak we show ourselves to be — and no temper tantrum can hide that bottom line…

What to election campaigns actually measure? Ability -- or theatrical performance?

I

Cthulhu_by_disse86-d9tq84i.jpg

II

Consider this passage of this Toronto Star article from November 9, 1994:

Rowlands under fire at debate

…Hall and Meinzer peppered Rowlands for being absent at the crucial times when Toronto residents needed a calm, reassuring voice that said, "Someone's in charge." Two incidents support the view, they said.
Rowlands, 70, carried on with a city council meeting while Toronto residents watched Yonge St. erupt in violence in May, 1992, after a peaceful demonstration outside the U.S. consulate over the verdict in the Rodney King case.
And Rowlands didn't know a band of youths had terrorized merchants and swarmed people for several hours along Yonge St. this Halloween. She was caught off guard when asked about it the following day at an all-candidates meeting.
"It's important to have a mayor who knows what's happening in this city. You've missed the boat, June," said Hall.
Meinzer called it "inexcusable that the mayor, 16 hours after the event, doesn't know" the swarming happened.
Hall said that "after incidents like the so-called (1992) riot on Yonge St., the mayor has an obligation to speak" to the public right away. "I also believe it's important for the mayor to know what's happening in the city."
Rowlands said she was busy holding a council meeting during the 1992 incidents. But after the violence, she said, she "met first thing in the morning with black leaders and issued a joint communique which cooled out the situation."

Rowlands, not surprisingly lost the election. That was a turning point.

Now consider this latest faux pas from federal NDP leader Jagmeet Singh when asked about Chinese Ambassador to Canada Lu Shaye’s article in the Hill Times (where he wrote “The reason why some people are used to arrogantly adopting double standards is due to Western egotism and white supremacy. In such a context, the rule of law is nothing but a tool for their political ends and a fig leaf for their practising hegemony in the international arena. What they have been doing is not showing respect for the rule of law, but mocking and trampling the rule of law.”):

“Sorry, who accused who of white supremacy?”

It didn’t play well, but considering the Liberal opponent just stepped aside given her own comments, political memory can be short. Rowlands bad luck was the debate happened too close to voting day and her opponents avoided stepping in the dog shit she did.

But campaigns are pretty much canned events and photo ops that don’t do very much unless the politician in question really screws up. The Hamilton Spectator once waxed on it during the last federal election on October 3, 2015:

There was a time when election campaigns were…spontaneous, intimate, passionate. Politicians said what they thought, and actually answered questions…
Reporters were allowed more access, and were discreet and respectful, sticking to the issues and overlooking what might then have been considered none of their business.
Today, those rules are gone and the campaign is a highly scripted event.
Journalists are kept at a distance, the farther the better. Questions are few; answers are evasive.
Politicians are told what to say, when to say it, how to say it, and to whom. Every line is memorized, rehearsed and focus-grouped. Any attempt to go off-script is dangerous, sometimes suicidal.
No matter how unpredictable the question, there is always a predictable response.
Unlike the stump speech of another era (so named because politicians stood on a stump to see above the crowd) today's are controlled, with picturesque backgrounds and obedient onlookers. The Conservative party events are by invitation only. The party even tried (and gave up) to put a gag order on attendees, making them promise not to transmit "any description, account, picture or reproduction of the event…"
The result is that today, voters are left with - well, they're left with the campaign we see before us: three leaders mostly unchanged in the polls since the day the election was called…
None of the leaders make many - if any - gaffes. But neither do they say anything remarkable. They do not use journalists to get their message out; they use social media or blanket the airwaves with multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns…

In other words, everyone was slumbering, and too deferential to dig. Now that social media allows a finer refinement, politicians are trying to rig the canned event so that no one can see, hear, or witness what is really happening.

Campaigns have never been empirical. They have always been theatrical. Even if someone makes a gaffe, often it is not a real gaffe; it is a mere flubbing of a line that looks bad in the context of a performance.

The qualities we ought to consider are slumbering we ignore because there is no way to measure it. Instead, we revere the irrelevant, and that’s a case of sanctioned insanity. Every once in a while some out-of-control vice explodes in spite the choreographed scripts, and they stand out.

Until someone even worse upstages it.

That is the question. Journalism played along and then got shut out when they couldn’t deliver voters.

The alternative to journalism has to create the measurements in order to empirically measure what is out there, and what it means.

Because in a Zero Risk Society, we take unwise gambles for no good reason at all…

Building antidotes to war games, Part Two.

I

Screen Shot 2019-01-11 at 4.13.24 PM.png

II

Screen Shot 2019-01-11 at 4.13.40 PM.png

III

Journalists are now having bricks in their pants right now.

Hedging their bets on the Left for the most part, they have proven they cheering goobers that they absolutely know are no different than the ones on the other side.

And now some are lock-stepping in a different direction, hoping to spin themselves out of the box they built themselves into.

But even their seeming about face is just as manipulative: you do not admit flaw as you state that neither side is trustworthy, but suddenly, your unchanged methods are to be trusted?

Nice try.

It is a way to pivot and bridge by means of misdirection, and it’s not working.

Once upon a time, however, it did work.

In 1996, for example, the Toronto Star won an award for their reportage on a con woman who lied about being mugged in order to get drugs.

The problem is that they were the ones who first reported her yarn as fact. Only after people recognized the anonymous woman’s shadow and called in to the paper that they suddenly change what they were reporting.

The Star should not have won any award. They should have been fined for public mischief: the people who recognized the woman and called the newspaper should have gotten the award.

This was before Facebook and Twitter where people could expose hucksters without a middleman to get the credit and the glory.

My goal has always been to create manuals of combatting deception by various means. Much of how we are raised in rote memorization of rigs, rules, and roles that isn’t education, but indoctrination. Specifically, into accepting patriarchal structures as reality.

Question things as a radical centrist, and that isn’t something you can fake, wing, steal, or make up.

I have done my research and thoroughly so, but I have respect for my labour and my talent. I demand credit where credit is due. Online, I give nudges, here and elsewhere. You may be trying to throw a brick to get a jade, but that’s not going to work with someone who builds manuals.

In book form, I spell it out with sources and plenty of them. There is a huge difference.

But journalism tries to hedge their bets. I like this passage from Ann Coulter very much:

What viewers don't understand is how lazy media personalities are. They are merely quoting what someone told them. They don't know. Their expertise consists of memorizing a set of talking points, like ABBA memorizing the syllables to English words without knowing what they meant. 

If journalists allowed follow-up questions and you could ask, "How do you know that?" The answer would be, "I heard it from a guy at Vox." 

The media go to extremely biased sources; they know nothing, so they're not in a position to challenge them; and even if they were, they wouldn't, because they're on the same team. 

Yes, but I would add they also steal ideas from people and then appropriate them as their own.

And this happens because journalism was never an empirical social science or science.

If you have to show how you have come to your conclusions, and can have your work replicated, you are going to take a very different approach. You are not going to steal from other people because all eyes are on you. Journalism is one of those professions where personalities dominate and hog the attention, but their actual methods and practices fly under the radar.

My work has been to spotlight those practices and methods. Left, Right, Centrist, it is all the same game.

Radical centrism is a different perspective. You are not sitting on the fence. You travel in all directions while finding and maintaining yourself in the core.

Not the middle, but the core.

Journalism could have been a powerhouse academic discipline for a general audience.

It chose laziness and ego, and there is no place in the information stream for that kind of pollution…