Freedom of the Press: Have they gone too far?..

Our First Amendment rights include “freedom of the press”. Our Press, our Media has been given a mandate by our founding fathers to be the watchdog of the government. To root out corruption and deceit no matter where it leads.

How has the Press done with this mandate? As I write this, we are two weeks away from the 2016 election. For research, I went to the major news network’s FaceBook pages to see what political and election related news was being headlined.

October 25, 2016, 10am Eastern Time:

ABC – What Hillary wants for a Supreme Court Justice, Where Clinton and Trump stand on issues, Republicans in tight race more likely to abandon Donald Trump.

CBS – Clinton no longer shying away from dealing the “woman card”, Democrats try a new strategy to garner black turnout, Salma Hayek claims she turned down a date with Donald Trump, Michael Moore calls Trump voters “legal terrorists”.

NBC – Time for a reality check on Trump’s poll numbers, Trump brags of endorsement that never happened, No the presidential election won’t be the next ‘Brexit’ for pollsters, Poll: Republican party fractured as Hillary Clinton maintains solid lead.

CNN politics – McCarthy: ‘Wind is in our face supporting’ Trump, GOP Sen. Toomey won’t say if he’ll vote for Trump at debate, Schlapp: ‘I am disgusted by the judgment’ in GOP, Clinton turns fire on down ballot Republicans, Jay Z to headline concert for Hillary Clinton, Kaine: Clinton as president would seek Congress’ input for ISIS fight.

MSNBC – Poll: GOP fractured as Clinton maintains solid lead, Biden calls out Trump wants to talk about the issues, Democrats take aim at GOP Senate majority, Gary Johnson: Vote your conscience, Are polls overstating Clinton’s lead?, Poll: Clinton up double digits over Trump, Is Texas up for grabs?, Elizabeth Warren unleashes on Donald Trump over “nasty woman” comment.

Fox News – Check out this Hillary-themed ‘Haunted House’, Clinton attack featuring Miss Universe was months in the making email shows, Clinton ally helped fund campaign of key FBI officials wife, Duck vs. Trump: Undercover video shows Clinton Campaign coordination on protests, Trump details 7-point plan to ‘Protect American jobs’.

Between WikiLeaks and Project Veritas, there has been a lot of information coming out regarding the DNC and the Clinton Campaign’s connection to a couple organizations that have promoted violence at Trump rallies, voter fraud and promoting the DNC narrative in the media. WikiLeaks revealed that CNN had given debate questions to the DNC in advance. News organizations were clearing stories through the DNC before publishing them. It has been clearly shown that there was a direct connection between the riots in Chicago where a Trump rally was cancelled where people were injured including two Chicago Police Officers and these organizations being directed by the DNC and the Hillary Campaign.

None of this has really made it to the major news outlets except for FOX. CNN did some reporting on the videos but raised more questions on the validity of them and the producer of the undercover footage. A quick look at the headlines shows a clear and obvious difference on how the Clinton campaign is covered and the Trump campaign. If it was not for social media and online news organizations, any news on Trump would all be negative and any news on Clinton would be all positive.

The mainstream media does not appear to be happy about the WikiLeaks email dumps nor the Project Veritas videos. These two groups seem to be doing actual journalism and news reporting. Back during the Bush administration, WikiLeaks revealed truths about WMD’s and the press was all over it. Now that WikiLeaks has uncovered corruption within the Clinton and DNC camps, the press is all of a sudden cautious on the validity of the information. They are even supporting the “Russia did it” narrative directly from the DNC and Clinton Campaign.

The Media’s reaction to the Project Veritas’ videos is much like the undercover Planned Parenthood videos. Because it goes against the agenda that they, as a whole, seem to support, instead of using these undercover videos as a springboard to do their own investigations, they instead, try to discredit the producers of the videos and claim that they are over-edited to sway the viewer. This is of course is what the mainstream media does all the time by cherry-picking the stories that they report on that DO support their underlying agenda.

I believe that the mainstream media has abused their power to inform the masses by pushing their own agenda as the correct way of things. How about you just report the news? Report both sides. Good and bad. And if there is a real story to chase down, chase it down. No matter where it leads. For our democracy to truly work, we need an honest Press. We as voters, need to be truly informed to be able to direct our country in the right direction.

Where are the Woodward and Bernsteins? The Walter Cronkites? I swear it has been a good 30 years since the Media has NOT pushed their own agendas. Does the Mainstream Media even do their own investigative journalism anymore? Or do they just report what is handed to them once it’s been approved by all involved parties?

The Media has given the Democrats a free pass and as a result, the Democrats have become more and more corrupt and deceitful knowing that they will not be called out. If a “conservative” news organization reports something negative on a Democrat, the Mainstream Media circles the wagons to protect them. This is not their job! Their job is to inform the people and to keep the government honest.

If this election has proven anything it is how broken the Mainstream Media is. These fledgling news organizations are the new hope for truth in journalism. The readers and viewers cannot take the headlines at face value. We must look into each story deeper and use various sources to get to the truth and not ignore the truth, even if it is contrary to our own agendas. The manipulation and conflicts of interests in what news is reported has gotten completely out of hand and needs to be reined in.

The truth is the truth. Facts are facts. When a news organization ignores the facts in order to bend the truth, they are no longer worthy to be a real source of information.

 

-Sean

Are Liberals "Over-Domesticated"?...

Is the difference between a Liberal and a Conservative just their political ideology? Could biology be involved? Could this difference in opinion be due to “over domestication”?

When we were cave dwellers, hunters and gatherers, our survival skills were our primary function. Competing with our fellow cave peeps or trying not to get eaten by a saber-tooth tiger were daily concerns. A bad day in the wild was a real bad day. If you have to focus on survival skills exclusively, you probably live in a pretty toxic environment.

Remove that caveman from the wild and place them into a more civilized setting. A village or community where you can purchase or barter for food, sleep in a hut or house and not always be fearful that you may be eaten on a daily basis. This leads to what biologist’s call “domestication”.

Similar to the domestication of wolves that led to our pet dogs. Based on years of experiments with the domestication of different species of animals, biologists have observed several common effects that occur as a result. Biologists attribute these changes to the Neural Crest cells. These are cells that develop early in life that determine the physiology of our bodies including our brain development and demeanors. These Neural Crest cells base their direction of development on the needs of the host. The environment plays a very vital role. Our ability to blend in, aggressiveness, athletic abilities, hunting prowess, etc. are all based on our need for these skills. Our need is based on our environment. Do we need to be a good hunter if we can go down to the local deli for a pastrami sandwich? If we live in a very low crime community, do we need to be on alert all the time? The more we progress, the less we need to fall back on our basic survival skills once needed when we carried spears.

However, there is some drawbacks to this domestication. Maybe it can be considered “over domestication”. If we get so far away from our basic survival skills, we lose them. But, when you no longer need to concern yourselves with basic survival it does allow you to delve more into philosophy, experimentation or maybe even shopping for an electric car or coming up with the newest popular latte’.

If you are living in a nice and safe part of a city, surrounded by your cashmere wearing friends reminiscing about the last protest you were involved in, you may have little to no need to fall back on your caveman skills of ole. It may lead you to contemplate why we even need the Police or the military or anything that is based on our basic survival skills.

If you grew up on a farm and faced life and death on a daily basis, provide protection for your livestock from potential predators, by shear necessity, you are still in touch with the basic survival needs. If you grew up in the country and hunted deer, you also tap into the basic survival needs. If you live in Boston and work in an office and your favorite past time is drinking craft beer with your friends from college. How much do you rely on your basic survival skills? You may see where I am going with this.

Our opinions on issues, prejudices, likes, dislikes are all based on our personal experiences and what we have been exposed to. I’m talking generally here, because there are exceptions to every rule, but in general, you tend to see people who are detached from our basic survival skills to have a more Liberal view on life as opposed to those that still have a connection to these skills. If you have no real sense of fear of any type of predator, you will not truly see the need for Police or even the act of preparing for a possible threat. This certainly can be a drawback in the sense that a predator who has the element of surprise will most likely be successful in their efforts. This puts you off guard if you do not at least entertain the possibility that someone may want to hurt you or take what is yours. You become more of an easy target.

You may not understand someone that prepares for a possible threat or someone who is concerned about a worse case scenario.

A domesticated dog will lose his camouflaged coat, his perked up ears will become floppy and his long snout will become shortened. Even the brain of a domesticated dog is different from that of their wolf cousins. All those things that are necessary in the wild are now secondary or even non-existent.

Is “over-domestication” what causes the Liberal-minded person to not fully understand a more Conservative viewpoint? Not having to burden yourself with basic survival worries allows you to delve into deeper thought on any and all subjects. If you do not consider the dangers of life are you missing the big picture?

As a Conservative, does thinking of these basic survival concerns take up too much of our thinking time? For some, it seems to be too important (i.e. conspiracy theorists). Does a Conservative need to concern themselves with worst case scenarios as much as they do? What are they forgetting or missing when weighing issues? For Police Officers or Military in a war zone it will save your life. But, how does one turn that off when you realistically do not need it? Or can you?

Maybe this is the difference between the Liberal and the Conservative or maybe it is just scratching the surface. I seem to have more questions than answers.

Most of my blogs are not just my opinions, but a different aspect of a conversation that may have not been considered. In this piece, I am comparing the two extremes in political ideologies and it’s possible connection to our actual biology. I would venture to guess that most of us fall in between within each party. Pigeon holing people into one or the other party is unrealistic. There are likely at least a few dozen categories that people fall into. Either way, I believe we need a balance between Liberal and Conservative views. If the pendulum swings too far either way we lose something. We definitely need to have people with a variety of opinions in order to find that happy median.

~ Sean Labbe

Where's Your Trump Bumper Sticker??..

This will be the first election where I did not proudly display my candidate of choice’s bumper sticker on my 1973 Plymouth. My McCain, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson stickers will not be sharing company with Trump. I’ll admit, I would have much rather have been sticking a “Rand Paul” sticker on my Scamp, but the vast majority of the Republican people have spoken and they have chosen the Donald. The thought of Hillary in the White House, again, sends shivers down my spine. More catering to special interests, political correctness, pandering to racist pseudo ministers and groups with false agendas. Using the power of the Federal government to enforce their liberal agenda and reinforcing the anti-Police sentiment that President Obama has graciously bestowed upon our nation. My heart goes out to the Police Officers that lost their lives as a result of this dangerous stance our current White House has taken.

With that said, it may already be obvious that the chances of me voting for Hillary are slim and none, leaning more towards the latter. Trump is my obvious choice. Not excited how he comes across, but this guy has been in the business world for decades, with great success I might add. The business world is dog eat dog. Trump is also a New Yorker. As a humble guy from Connecticut, I have always found New Yorkers sharp-tongued and pushy (my wife is from up state). If I look deeper into the essence of what Trump says, that is where I find an ideology I can agree with. Jobs, economy, national pride and the end to political correctness which threatens our freedom of speech. The “wall” and immigration are admittedly low on my wish list and in a previous post, “Trump Will Improve the Lives of Illegal Immigrants”, I spelled out how I would handle it.  I believe that a Trump presidency would be beneficial to small businesses and in turn would boost the economy and add jobs. I do not have the same confidence with a Hillary presidency. In fact, I believe it would have the opposite effect, based on the current administration.

Now back to the bumper sticker. I value my 43-year-old car and I imagine it will be difficult to replace the curved back window after some anti-Trump teen decides that they disagree with my political choices and smashes out a window that is most likely older than their parents. This is what this election has come down to. The Media with its constant barrage of how evil Trump is and they have even tried to blame the violence at his rallies on him, even though it is clearly his detractors that are trying to silence his message with intimidation and violence. These anti-Trump folks have gone way beyond their right to “peaceably assemble” and in turn block highways, damage public property, smash Police cars and assault people for wearing Trump shirts. This is bullying at its worst. Many times the Police are apprehensive to step in and make arrests due to the presence of the Media and the backlash that comes when they are forced to deal with the radical liberal left. I’m not seeing anything from the Hillary camp regarding this violence and the Media has not been asking her to denounce any of this. But, when some fools from a white supremacist group announced that they supported Trump, the Media was all over Trump for not immediately denouncing them.

So, unfortunately I will be putting my bumper sticker tradition on hold and instead will blog and post about my dislike for the liberal ideology that has crippled our country and my support for a candidate that is not only willing to stand up to the Media with it’s obvious agendas, but for a candidate that truly loves his country and believes that not only were we a great country, but will be again.

~ Sean

The Democrats are Not Far Behind...

Now Democrats, don't get too comfortable up there in your ivory tower. Yes, the Republicans are a mess, but it was inevitable. Just like it is inevitable that the Democrats will have to weather a similar storm.  What's going on nationally has already occurred in my tiny little town in Eastern Connecticut.  We had a Republican party that dominated with little or no competition from the opposing party. This happened around the turn of the millenium.  The Republican party split. Many registered Republicans were disgusted with our party at the time and changed their party to Independent.  Newer and some younger Republicans were moving into town with more modern ideas of how things should be.  The cronyism that was going on had it's days numbered.  The party split and formed a third party.  This party consisted of Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Once the new party took hold and got it's message out, it dominated the elections and future elections to come. Once we brought back balance to our town, the third party disbanded, but it's influence and message is still relevant today.

I see this same thing occurring on a national scale.  In the 2008 elections, Ron Paul marked the beginning of an apparent split in philosophies within the Republican party.  Ron Paul saw bigger and bigger crowds during his campaign, especially with younger voters.  His message was refreshing and made sense. The Republican party at the time was still staunch in it's conservatism and was able to muscle out Ron Paul with a lot of help from the Mainstream Media. Virtually ignoring his rise in the polls and manipulating his numbers in states where his popularity was strong. It was scary to see the Liberal Media and the conservative Republicans share an enemy. Although it may have seemed it, Ron Paul's message was not lost. Because of Ron Paul, the Libertarian message was being heard.

Fast forward to 2012 and we saw an obvious turn within the Republican party.  Their nominee, Mitt Romney was not fairing as well with this new faction of the Republican Party. This was something that was a long time coming.  The party was leaning so far to the right that it was inevitable that some movement to the left had to happen. The religious right no longer has it's strong hold over the party. Donald Trump is a new Republican. As much as he says the Bible is his favorite book, we all know his real favorite book is the Art of the Deal. Personally, I think religion has it's place, but it should not be in our politics.

Now this year, I am seeing some fracturing within the Democrats. You have Hillary, who with all her escapades, has turned off many of the Democrats.  And then you have Bernie Sanders, the Ron Paul of the Democratic Party. There is a difference though. With the Republicans, they are starting to move slightly left. So you would think that the Democrats would start moving slightly right. Nope, they are actually moving further left! I don't care what Seth Mcfarlene says, we do not need more Socialism in our country.  President Obama has already damaged our country with his Socialist ways. Socialized healthcare and pandering to the extremist minority groups. He has made common sense a four letter word.

I am personally happy to see the Republican party changing. Much like my town's Republican party, it has started to not represent my core values and beliefs. We all need to re-read the Constitution and return back to what our fore-fathers intended.

- Sean

What If John McCain were President?..

I’m going to say that two of the top issues/problems within the past year(s) has been the rise of ISIS and the Syrian Refugee crisis.

The rise of ISIS came about from the U.S. downsizing their military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan and ultimately our complete withdrawal from these countries.  This of course was announced by President Obama months before it occurred and he even gave a timeline of when the downsizing would begin.  This was useful information for the leaders of ISIS to have. Once we were gone, this left these regions up for grabs for any powerful group to come in and fill the void we created.

Did we know that the Iraqi army would be so easily defeated and quickly surrender their weapons and equipment to another army (i.e. ISIS)? Well, if anyone remembers Desert Storm when Iraqi soldiers were surrendering to journalists and camera crews who were covering the war and how easily the “elite” Republican Guard was quickly defeated by the might of the U.S. Military. I would say that we knew that the Iraqi army lacked the courage and integrity based on their previous reactions when confronted by an opposing army.  The “JV Team”, ISIS quickly took hold of these regions and easily took over the Iraqi army’s weapons and equipment. Weapons and equipment that the U.S. paid for and gave to the Iraqi army were now in the hands of ISIS. Not to mention the thousands of deaths, tortures and beheadings committed by ISIS. We gave up real estate that thousands of our military troops died taking and defending. Soldiers that made it home with debilitating injuries, both physical and psychological saw what they almost died for, what their friends did die for, was now handed back over to the enemy, an even more dangerous and sinister enemy.

There is no question that the American people were tired of the wars in the Middle East and the majority of Americans wanted to bring our soldiers home. I am even one of those people that wanted the soldiers to come home. But, I am not privy to all the intel that a President would know and I am not a military expert and would not know that if we pulled our armies out of these regions that it would destabilize them and open the doors for more dangerous factions to come in and wreak havoc. Well, had I really thought about it, it makes sense.  I’m pretty sure there is a video going around YouTube of President Bush exactly this.

But, honestly, I was all caught up in the whole “bring our troops home” thing. The rise of ISIS and the destabilization of the region is what has also caused the Syrian Refugee crisis. This has had an adverse effect on a large portion of Europe. Death, rape and multiple other crimes have resulted in this huge number of people escaping the unstable regions of the Middle East.

Now with that said, we are going to play a game of “what if..?”

What if John McCain was elected President in 2008 instead of Barrack Hussain Obama?

If John McCain was President, do you think that he would have pushed for the complete withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan?  Let alone announced it to the world what he would have done? The fact is that we were there. We were neck deep in the Middle East and our mission was not done. The Iraqi army was far from ready to defend their country. As much as the American people wanted our troops back (including me), it was the wrong thing to do. It destabilized those countries, caused the mass exodus of the Syrian people and as a result, thousands of people died, were murdered, raped and a slew of horrible things occurred.

There are some situations better left for the experts to decide then some poll of Americans that have no clue of foreign affairs and military strategies.

If John McCain had become President in 2008, ISIS would have never gotten as big as they are and most likely would have been squashed by our military had they even tried. Thousands of lives would have been saved. The ripple effect on the nearby countries as a result of the Syrian Refugees would have never happened.  These are just two issues that would have been dramatically different had John McCain been in the White House.

Think about it…

~ Sean

So, Why Isn't Obama Accused of Being a Xenophobe?...

Ever since Donald Trump announced his candidacy for President with his now famous speech regarding Illegal Immigration, I have heard the word “Xenophobe” thrown around. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines a XenoPhobe as “one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin”. Because of Trump’s stance on illegal Immigration, he has been compared to Hitler and it has been suggested that he could orchestrate the next Holocaust. Pretty harsh comparisons to a person that wants to simply enforce the Illegal Immigrant laws.

In actuality, the only thing Trump is suggesting that is different from what is currently being practiced is the building of a wall or to reinforce the currently porous borders. As far as the deportation of illegal immigrants, the Obama Administration has deported over 2 million illegal immigrants since he has taken office. This is the highest number of deportations than any U.S. President in history. I just read an article regarding illegal immigrants that have agreed to join our military in order to get their citizenship and surprisingly, the government has reneged on some of these agreements and deported them or their family members anyway. If this is true, this also occurred and has been occurring during the Obama administration.

Since our government is actually enforcing the illegal immigration laws currently, doesn’t it make sense to fortify the borders in order to slow down the number of illegals entering the country? Would this not help our border patrol keep up with the influx? Why is Trump a “xenophobe” for suggesting a wall when Obama has never been called that, yet has actually deported 2 million people?

“We should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system — to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.”

- President Barrack Obama,

  2010 State of the Union Address

 Donald Trump still to this day gets lambasted on his speeches about the wall and the deporting of illegals, yet not one brick has been set nor has Trump ever deported ONE illegal immigrant. But, under President Obama more illegals have been deported than any other President. No mention from the mainstream media regarding Obama’s ACTIONS on deportation, but lot’s to talk about Trump’s words.

SML