It’s just about how good they are about concealing it.

The TRUST Myth

We’re told we can trust our leaders. Their words affect our daily lives and when repeated by our media, have profound effects on everything from grocery and gas prices to world peace.

However, there’s a very small number of people in the United States who can lie with near total impugnity. None of us can lie about our boss or to our customers without being promply fired. But if you’re one of the 635 on Capitol Hill (clearly not the best and brightest 635 in America either….), and as long as you’re on the clock, you can say anything you want about anything or anybody.

Must be nice….

The Senators and Representatives shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
— United States Constitution (Article I, Section 6, Clause 1)

And they’d NEVER abuse that privilege, right?

“If you like your doctor, you can keep you doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”
— President Barack Obama, PolitiFact ‘Lie of the Year’

Obama knew Republicans would be hard pressed and/or gutless trying to prove “high crimes and misdemeanors” here as presidents were not included in the Clause, so he just repeated this whopper over three dozen times.

We had politicians on the floor of the Senate accusing a presidential candidate of not filing income taxes (knowing he did), and after the election one was called on the mistruth to which he responded, “Well, he didn’t win, did he?”

Americans have to live with the daily ramifications of falsehoods spoken and written by House and Senate politicians, echoed by both legacy and social media. Imagine how much better life could be if the elected were required to be honest….

The Only MEN ARE SLOBS Myth

There are probably hundreds of instances where women declare men slobs, pigs, etc. Husbands and boyfriends are the butt of such declarations on women’s talk shows, op-ed and social media posts, and are never called on it.

That’s because women know and consciously deflect from an ugly truth: they can be easily outed as mockable projection hypocrites if their behavioral tendencies were exposed and publicly acknowledged.

Go to any department store and look at the women’s clothing and shoe aisles. One will see blouses and dresses strewn on the floor under the hung garments. Women just throw garments anywhere but back on the racks where they found them. Shoes, instead on being put back in place after being tried on, are just left on the floor to be walked around or tripped over.

Laura has also decribed the horrors of using a women’s public restroom.

Shit, piss and menstraul fluid literally splattered on and around toilet seats, soiled femine hygene products left on the floors or stopping up toilets… yeah, it’s fuckng gross and the same women who punchline men as slobs will NEVER tell you how disgusting they are behind closed stalls.

The Myth About ACADEMICS

There is this perception that teachers and professors have the last word during any discussion. If one has any doubt, their academic credentials are thrown back in your face in an attempt to shut down any disagreement one may have with their conclusions. But why must we take their conclusion as the final word?

Because we’ve been trained to accept their word.

Teachers have the ultimate power, by issuing grades from first grade through college, to certify or destroy an academic record that has profound implications for an employment career. Since their grades are as simple as right or wrong, the implication is they know more than the student which most of the time is correct.

However in recent years, teachers (who are never given the opportunity to be vetted by parents) enter the classroom, not with the mission to educate children with the tools needed to function in society but with personal agendas that may be at odds with the values with parents. But because they are teachers with the power to destroy the academic record of any child, those agendas have been legitimized.

Parents are given no proof of the proficiency of any teacher but are supposed to accept they are good teachers simply because they’re employed by a school. We have no prior assurance teachers are actual decent people. But again because they are teachers, parents are not allowed to question their competence and sanity even when they repeatedly behave in deviant manners.

The LAWYER Myth

Given the lofty compensation for their emergency services (they’re mostly only hired when bad things happen), one would think lawyers are the ultimate professionals. Cinematic and television portrayals collectively sure give that impression.

And where’s the proof?

When looking for a lawyer, you’re presented with a headshot (usually taken when he or she was much younger). You’re to be impressed by the law school attended, their degrees, their years since passing the bar exam, and years in a legal area of expertice. But there’s one piece of very important information you won’t see in a lawyer’s bio.

When a professional sports team is looking for a new coach, the first metric their fans look at are the wins and losses. That’s the easiest way to gauge if that coach candidate is worth consideration. However with lawyers, you will NEVER see the wins and losses of any law firm or individual attorney on any website.

So how do you know if the hundreds of dollars per hour, or contingency, is going to a good lawyer or a bad one?

You won’t.

Ask an attorney for the number of their wins and losses and see what happens. Note the grammar in their response for a quick clue.

The DOCTOR Myth

Again because of their level and years of education, we’re told it’s extremely problematic to ever question the conclusion of a medical professional. But doctors and lawyers share one commonality in said professions.

They don’t perform law or medicine. They “practice”.

That long-standing word description alone should be pause for concern as the common definition is it’s a “method of learning by repetition”. Do you really want someone learning when your finances, freedom, health or life is on the line? Like lawyers, you’re to assume high-priced doctors are good at what they do despite your not given any documentation to back it up.

How many patients have they cured? How many have sued them for a misdiagnosis or negligence? How many patients have they lost?

Despite the high compensation demanded for their services, neither offer a guarantee of success.

If you don’t ask, they won’t tell you. If they do respond, they’ll probably hide behind HIPPA so they still won’t tell you.

The HEALTHY FOOD Myth

Just read the ingredients on any food product you purchase at your market of choice and you’ll be left dumbfounded because, chances are, you can’t even pronounce some of the chemicals added to what we consume on a daily basis.

It might surprise you to learn that many food additives found in bread, baked goods, and candy manufactured in the United States are banned or restricted in Europe and other parts of the world because of potential health risks. U.S. consumers generally assume that items on grocery store shelves have been vetted for safety, but a loophole in the approval process of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) means that 99 percent of new food chemicals aren’t evaluated before they are added to products.
— Everyday Heath

While the excuse may be these chemicals are added for visual and palate aesthetics or preservation, many of these additives have quite negative short and longterm health ramifications. High fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin, monosodium glutamate are some of the most widely used culprits. Funny how when you see drug commercials that reveal those pesky, possible negative side effects (that inconveniently include death), we’re never given similar warnings when it comes to the ingredients added to our food.

Are they trying to kill us?

The HOUSING SHORTAGE Myth

For anyone listening to news reports about the affordability and/or availability of homes, disregard all the metrics given as there’s one very important factor the media leaves out.

Realtors.

They set local and regional market prices based on their personal commission demands. They are the ones assuring hallucinating sellers how valuable their neglected or damaged homes are. There are more protections for buying a used car than a home purchase worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Why are the homes neglected or damaged? Because some people bought over-their-head and after mortgage, bills, and daily expenses, had little money left, let alone for routine maintenance. When the inevitable happens and repairs are required, handyman cheap appears to be the remedy of choice and shoddy workmanship will be discovered belatedly by subsequent owners.

If you have the misfortune of searching for a home, there’s one constant: the condition of the homes you’ll see range from tolerable to you-must-be-high. From experience it’s safe to say 98% of the homes you’ll tour are in some way damaged. To a seller and realtor, the buyer is a mark. They want your money and conscience is in very short supply.

Unless you have the wealth to build from ground up you’ll be choosing from poorly maintained, insect and/or rodent infested, mold and/or water damaged homes with inflated prices that will help an entitled seller hit the lottery and the greedy realtor receive that generous commission. If that house was initially listed at an realistic price with honest verbal and pictorial descriptions (big IF), it’ll most likely be scooped up quickly by another realtor/broker who’ll put the minimum into that house and flip it at a hefty markup. It’s the optional ethics of realtors that make home prices unaffordable for most buyers, not to mention the ripple effect of jacking up the property taxes of all those around that home.

Also be wary of the typical descriptions of houses found online: “meticulously maintained”, “nestled in”, “cozy”, “spacious” and other glowing adjectives that will be fodder for instant disappointment when you visit the property. Getting honest disclosures from realtors (required by law in some states) about the house is like pulling teeth. You’ll only be told what you know to ask. Then it’s a question of how much potential money you’re willing to tolerate or invest in that house after buying that expensive shack.

Despite all you’re told, there is no housing shortage.

There IS a shortage of houses that are worth the asking price.

The QUALITY Myth

Speaking of overpriced, there was a time in America if you were to spend a little more money on an item , you were assured of receiving something of higher quality that would last for many, many years.

Those were the days.

Cars actually had steel frames and bodies that could withstand a simple bump and could inflict even more damage to whatever it came in contact with. The left saw that as unfair, so all cars were subsequently constructed with lighter materials so damage would be more equitable.

Just look at some of the 60’s era kitchen appliances you can still find in homes currently for sale.

Today, the more you spend on anything, you’ll purchase the inferior in order to get you to repeat that sad cycle. Any product or service you don’t buy often will be used against you. The quality will be questionable at best to assure multiple repeat visits that will never fix the problem. Whether we’re talking about an appliance, store, auto mechanic, finding someone who’s first mission isn’t to rip you off is like seeking the Holy Grail.

As this appears to be the current business model, not sure when our money will be respected again.

The MEDIA Myth

We’re told to trust the media, and who says that the most?

The media.

Without those who consume their product, their overinflated salaries don’t happen. News anchors must come off as authorities on any given topic and when the inevitable happens and they get something very wrong, apologies and retractions are as brief and short as possible. To make matters worse, whether we’re talking about the news or entertainment industries, these people truly believe they are smarter that the American people whose ignorance on any given topic should be solely blamed on… the media.

Our job is to control what people think.
— Mika Brzezinski, 2/22/17

Note the use of terms used when describing the American people: “average”, “everyday”, “ordinary” people. Think of the narcissistic arrogance and sense of privilege it takes to constantly look at others in that fashion. It gives too many the license to misinform and/or manipulate because they believe they know what’s best for the public, and for those they prefer and deem protectable.

Many of today’s journalists also believe if it’s something they’ve never heard of, it never happened. What could go wrong with that thinking?

Also be wary whenever a journalist cites an “expert” to justify a conclusion. More times than not like “anonymous sources”, those experts are not named and if so, the number is as few as possible. That “source” can also be an academic (see: above), or based on past incidents, can be made up altogether.

Arrogance crosses into the entertainment industry where television and movie celebrities believe they’re deep thinkers and know it all simply because of where they work, not to mention those who work for them who don’t have the guts to risk their employment and tell these entertainers when they’re wrong. As a result, embarrassingly misinformed musings are distributed to the masses.

It has been brought to my attention that, in my support of Palestine, I have inadvertently re-posted articles, and/or statements, that have contained misinformation and falsehoods. I am aware how sharing inaccurate content can cause confusion and distress; for this I am deeply sorry. I will certainly endeavour to be more diligent in future to verify anything I share online.
— Guy Pearce, actor

“Inadvertently”….

For the most part, disregard their opinions unless you put them in the parody column.

When it comes to the world of broadcast sports, on-air pundits could be the worse as too many believe they’re also comedians instead of analysts. Their jokes and segments aren’t funny, and we’re to embrace their condescending belief that eye candy is necessary to keep men interested.

Stop.

There are other examples of myths that will inevitably come to mind as life continues.

#ItsOnUs

Because they are “teachers”, it’s assumed they are knowledgeable of the topics of which they speak and issue factually correct information of that which they speak because they grade students on the information taught thus are in the position of being able to alter the forward trajectory of any student’s academic record.

One would think a competent educator would present all sides of an issue and allow the critical thinking process to develop in the young minds of their students. However, that is NOT what occurs in the classrooms across the United States of America.

We’re talking about a massive industry (mostly taxpayer-funded) that’s an incubator for one political party and ideology. Instead of giving students the opportunity to formulate their own opinions, free from intimidation and threat of a potential failing grade just because he or she may not agree with blatantly partisan presentations, today’s academia is an involuntary breeder for the Democrat Party.

While there are 10 Democrats for every Republican among professors over the age of 65, the ratio balloons to 22.7 to 1 among scholars under the age of 36, indicating the ideological disparity could continue to grow as more senior professors are pushed out and replaced by a new generation of scholars.
— Washington Times, 10/6/16

On rare occasions, we’ll hear professors and administrators whining about students on campus issuing demands and even questioning their authority. The phrase “eating their own” happens too infrequently to be of any real consequence even though it’s briefly entertaining.

Teachers have our children, on average, from 175-180 days out of the year. They are the only people to whom we send our children on an almost daily basis and have no idea what they’re being told behind our backs. Some states even have policies where teachers can help their students to do things (like get an abortion) without the knowledge or consent of the parent that may not think it a good idea.

There was a time, seemingly long ago, when we assumed only the best and brightest were brought into classrooms to teach. Most teachers love their job.

Some teachers really, really love to fuck their students.

Notorious teacher sex scandals
R.I. teachers unions, ACLU object to bill criminalizing sex between school employees and students
Almost 1 In 5 Children Face Sexual Misconduct By Public School Faculty

Whenever we see young people behaving badly, it’s always easy to blame parents and more times than not, it is a reflection of bad parenting. But if you think about it, who do children really spend most of their waking hours with? It’s not the parents but with teachers and now these young intolerants are the ones who’ll be forming public policy on a generational basis with the limited thinking they were taught to accept and now bully the public with.

Despite our always being told by teachers that their priority is “the children” and it’s not about the money, they are the first to strike for more pay and by doing so, leave millions of parents scrambling for sitters on short notice as to keep their young ones off the streets unsupervised because taxpayer-funded schools are closed due to strikes.

2018: Teachers are striking all over. What is going on?

Questionably-qualified, partisan academics are the greatest threat to America because the children they’re unleashing on the world are only as good as how they were taught.

2015: The U.S. ranks 14th in education

But they know a whole lot about sexual orientation and at a very young age.

Meanwhile….

2014: The U.S. ranks 2nd in ignorance
2013: The U.S. ranks 24th in literacy
2013: The U.S. ranks 17th in educational performance
2012: The U.S. ranks 11th in fourth grade math
2012: The U.S. ranks 6th in fourth grade reading
2011: The U.S. ranks 23rd in PISA science score

Students may not be able to read, write, and do basic math well but they can tell you how evil white people are, identify all the evolving genders, protest in the streets while not fully knowing why they are protesting, and defy basic standards of decency because they only know what an agenda-driven teacher “taught” them.

A new YouGov poll asked more than 1,000 people aged 14 and up about their knowledge of the country’s history and institutions, and their patriotic feelings toward the U.S.

Basically, it found younger generations — millennials (age 22-27) and Gen Z (age 14-21) — are less likely to love and respect the country. And they’re less informed about American history, and way more likely to embrace socialism. Is that just evidence of youthful ignorance? Or is it the result of a school system that indoctrinates children in leftist ideology?
— Investor’s Business Daily

If teachers aren’t the greatest threat we as a nation face, who and/or what really is?

But why let reality spoil a good liberal talking point?

Over the years, however, we’ve seen political violence and it’s almost always committed by young people on the left. Whether we’re talking demonstrations at political party conventions, World Trade Organization and/or G8 summits, we usually see the same types congregate: young people in bandanas or skull caps covering their faces who routinely destroy public and private property under the guise of their right to assemble and speak freely.

While no organized Tea Party event has resulted in mass arrests and property damage, it’s the right that’s been smeared as the violent “crazies”. But why are young people so prone to political violence and who’s putting them up to it? The very people who aren’t dumb enough to be present at a political rally where damage and arrests may occur: the radical professoriate.

Granted, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin can reach a large audience, but when they (or their message) become annoying you can change the channel. You can walk with no repercussions. Young people don’t have those options when sitting in front of a liberal teacher who either tells his them Bush’s “tones” was like Hitler’s or people trapped in the burning Twin Towers are “little Eichmanns” who basically had the horrific death coming.

We have young people who curiously go from politically-ignorant one summer to hardcore activists who put themselves between Israeli Army bulldozers and Hamas hideouts. Is this the normal thinking of a young person or were they worked up into a frenzy by a teacher that more than has the common sense to place their own bodies between construction equipment and buildings?

We now have politicians who want to make it illegal for a private citizen to threaten a lawmaker (which I thought it already was), yet it was okay for then-Senator Barack Obama to tell his millions of young followers to crash the sites of those who opposed him, “push back” and get in our faces.

I would consider that violent speech considering what would happen to me if I attempted to “push back” or get in the face of the president. Personally, I can’t recall an instance where a conservative told his or her followers to flood the sites of opposition while they routinely do that to ours.

Sarah Palin’s website was hacked by the punk son of a state legislator and it’s easy to understand why the left sought leniency for him. He was probably indoctrinated by the same liberal academics who teach the virtues of civil disobedience and “by any means necessary”. While still under some kind of investigation, I think we’ll one day find that the young people behind the shutdown of corporate websites hostile to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange are probably college students whose grades (thus their futures) were dependent on staying in the good graces of professors who can be quite vindictive towards those who stray off message.

While the ratio of conservative-to-liberal teachers is very low, the instances of students documenting abuse by conservatives is almost non-existent, but we routinely see press reports of students who sat through America-hating, Bush and Republican-bashing, socialism-praising presentations by professors who believe that starting the day off with a good breakfast is only second to reading the New York Times.

So it’s not surprising that a good number of young people see above-it-all Jon Stewart as a real newsman and can recite liberal talking points ad nauseum. It’s also not surprising to see just how angry and vile they can get when presented with a view they don’t agree with or lack the intellectual ammunition to rebut. They resort to disrespect, profanity and if they weren’t hiding behind online anonymity, perhaps violence.

Young people today act out in ways older Americans never would to adults back in the day. Today’s young people are taught that their political opponents are intellectual inferiors and they do things “smarter”. Today’s young people are taught that all opposition to their superior reasoning is to be shouted down, thus all that “free speech” bullshit they’re taught has qualifications they alone determine.

So let’s not get all shocked when young people commit horrendous acts of violence and destruction. Whether we’re talking about Jared Loughners or the Earth Liberation Front, we’re dealing with people who are acting on what they were taught; not by Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin but by heartless, radical progressive teachers who eagerly offer up sacrificial students who come and go yearly.

The media has never looked at who indoctrinates young people to disrupt political gatherings (on both sides) or infiltrate web forums with the primary intent of insulting those whose views differ with theirs. But take a good look at who shoots up campuses and supermarkets. We’re not talking about older people with subscriptions to Beck and Limbaugh. We’re talking about the youth who are later found to be college educated with the “Communist Manifesto” and “Earth in the Balance” on their bookshelves.

Take a look at the radical professors and see who’s really placing the bulleyes on their opposition.

Patriotism @ Berkeley: Examples
With the anniversary of 9/11, the University of California, Berkeley will conduct a “Remembrance Day” consciously sanitized of all things patriotic and religious. In “honor” of the victims and heroes of the World Trade Center attacks, there will be no singing of the national anthem, and no recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance because of its mention of God.

“We thought that may be just too political, too patriotic,” said Hazel Wong, chief organizer for the Associated Students of the University of California (ASUC).

“We didn’t want anything too centered on nationalism; anything that is ‘Go USA.'”

Yeah, wouldn’t that just suck?

Wong doesn’t want anything political “disrupting mourning and grieving”. White ribbons will replace the red, white and blue.

Man, can you imagine the cow liberals would have if they found a conservative group giving out all white anything? And although liberals find a racial component in almost everything they touch, this “white ribbon” could never be read any other way than what they portray it as, right?

Jessica Quindel, the president of the Graduate Assembly said the day is about politics. She finds problems not only with the WTC attacks, but President Bush’s military response. “We are trying to stay away from supporting Bush. We don’t want to isolate people on this campus who disagree with the reaction to Sept. 11.”

So screw those who agree with the President, right? Tolerance….

Quindel, who reportedly admits she hates the American Flag, the federal government, and the “Star Spangled Banner,” insists that she is patriotic. “It depends on your definition of patriotism. Everyone has a different definition,” she said. That good ol’ liberal “gray area” again.

Okay. Do you think this girl harbored these opinions the day she first left home for college? Do you think this child reasoned all by herself, or was she subjected to sanctimonious liberal professors who required blind agreement in classroom participation and homework? Is Jessica a brainwashed little girl who will most probably regret and be embarrassed by her statements once she has time to reflect on them independent of her liberal academic influence?

She continues, “Patriotic songs may exclude and offend people, because there are so many people who don’t agree with the songs. God Bless America is very exclusive because it mentions God.” The organizers have seen to it no patriotic songs will be sung. There will be no salute to the flag since “the flag has become a symbol of U.S. aggression towards other countries. It seems hostile”.

Patriotism @ Berkeley: Commentary
The beauty of America is that these people at Berkeley can do and say anything they want, for the most part.

What bugs me are all these academics assuring us that college is a true celebration of all points of view and the active search for all opinions. Hazel Wong and Jessica Quindel clearly debunk that assertion. They think they are being more inclusive while in reality, are being quite divisive.

When the vast majority of professors and administrators are registered Democrats and are encouraged to “share” their point of view with their captive, impressionable students, I only have a problem when these are the same people who preach tolerance to all of us. Ask any college Republican who tries to make a point in either voice or print. They are routinely censored, shouted down, targeted for retribution, and sometimes threatened with violence.

To be consistent, I would also have a problem with a college that was too far to the right. Once the kids get out of school, they can hang out with whomever they like, but while in school I’d like them to experience all points of view and have access to materials so they can do the research and reach their own conclusions.

But some students know they will be flunked on the first day they don’t agree with their professor that Al Gore was the superior candidate robbed by a Bush family-Republican coup d’etat. Students are taught that they should make all people feel welcome, unless they are one of those evil, mean-spirited Republicans. And if you agree with anything they assert, you too are misinformed, brainwashed, and no longer welcome.

Don’t get me wrong.

I’ve met and heard intolerant conservatives, and for the most part, they are intellectually honest and do not rename or attempt to disguise their positions. However, liberals claim to be the guardians of open-mindedness and that is the furthest from the truth. Liberals, or is it progressives…?

Remember the student-led class at Berkeley, “The Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance”? The course description ended with “Conservative thinkers are encouraged to seek other sections.” After this story made national news, the course’s professor withdrew his intended warning.

What do you think would happen if a conservative instructor said liberals need not apply?

University of Pennsylvania history professor Alan Charles Kors notes that “for every professor in trouble for criticizing U.S. policy from the left, there were five or 10 students in hot water for supporting the war on terrorism”.

UC Berkley students introduced a bill saying their college “… remains one of the few places in the world where a thoughtful, critical exchange can occur from people across a spectrum of backgrounds and races, without fear of reprisal or hatred.”

The problem is they actually believe this tripe. They claim not to wish to suppress varied ideas, but it was their mission to end any speech that they deem racist, sexist, homo or xenophobic, or violent.

According to the column ‘One-party campuses’, by Ellen Sorokin of The Washington Times,

· At the University of Maryland, of the 69 professors whose political affiliations were located, 59 were registered as Democrats and 10 as Republicans. Out of a sample of 37 sociology professors, 34 were Democrats. Of 20 political science professors, 17 were Democrats. Of 12 economics professors, eight were Democrats.

· At the University of Colorado at Boulder, 116 of the professors whose party registrations could be established were Democrats and five were Republicans. Out of a sample of 37 professors who teach English, none were Republicans. Out of a sample of 29 history professors, one was Republican. Out of 19 political science professors, two were Republican.

· At Brown University, 54 professors whose political affiliations showed up in primary registrations last year were Democrats, compared with three Republicans. Out of 10 English professors, none was Republican. Of 17 history professors, none was Republican. Out of seven political science professors, none was Republican. Of eight sociology professors, none was Republican. Out of six economics professors, one was Republican. Of nine engineering professors, two were Republican.

· At Harvard University, of the 52 professors whose affiliations were found, 50 were registered Democrats and two were Republicans. Of 15 sociology professors, none was Republicans. Out of 16 economics professors, one was Republican. Of 21 political science professors, one was Republican.

· At Penn State University, 59 professors from the arts and sciences department were registered Democrats and 10 were Republicans. Out of 37 sociology professors, 34 were Democrats. Of 20 political science professors, 17 were Democrats. Out of 12 economics professors, eight were Democrats.

· At the University of California at Santa Barbara, a sample of 72 arts and sciences professors were registered Democrats and one was Republican. Out of 29 history professors, one was Republican. Of 21 English professors, none was Republican. Out of 29 history professors, one was Republican. Of 13 political science professors, none was Republican, and out of eight journalism professors, none was Republican.

· At the University of Texas at Austin, of the 109 professors whose political affiliations were found, 94 were Democrats and 15 were Republicans. Out of six philosophy professors, one was Republican. Of 19 political science professors, 15 were Democrats. Out of 14 history professors, two were Republicans. Out of 42 English professors, 35 were Democrats.

For all of us who’ve ever complained about a “liberal bias”, I think this proves my point.