Tag Archives: Congress

Russia Again? The Media Storm.

Early Sunday morning and the news sites are crying about Russia again.  After a quick search you can find them.  You read the headlines and really tell that they are just spouting propaganda.  Their source(s) are thin air or they are former employees of so and so agency that mean nothing to the public because they just need a name for their stories.  I have no doubt that they may know something, but how factual it may be is not communicated in the story.  If they had worked in the government and is now a front person in a private company, you almost have to assume that the reason they are talking is only to boost their pockets.  The list below can’t even decide if the “Russians” are trying to help Bernie or Trump.

CBS News

The Washington Post

New York Times Click for transcript.

CNN Politics

The following are trying to get people riled up because Trump booted Joseph Maguire possibly because he allowed his underlings to give a classified brief to the House Intelligence Committee possibly without having any hard facts, just rumors and innuendo and we know the House Intelligence Committee is well known as an oxymoron these days.

Daily News

Tasmin Mahfuz A You Tube Blogger

The Washington Times is the only one that said that this is not just a Russia problem with a quote from some underling under Maguire that we have to watch out for everyone with axe to grind or butter to spread.

“This is not a Russia-only problem,” Shelby Pierson, the election security threats executive for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said last month. “Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, non-state hacktivists all have opportunity, means and potentially motive to come after the United States in the 2020 election to accomplish their goals.”

Sounds like CYA.

Remember the saying: If you fail once, keep trying.  Is this what the media will do for the election cycle?  When we get back to real reporting and real stories?

Search for the Truth

JH

Does an Oath of Office Mean Anything?

Merriam-Webster defines it as thus:

1a

(1)
: a solemn usually formal calling upon God or a god to witness to the truth of what one says or to witness that one sincerely intends to do what one says
(2)
: a solemn attestation of the truth or inviolability of one’s words
The witness took an oath to tell the truth in court.
b
: something (such as a promise) corroborated by an oath
They were required to swear an oath of loyalty.
took the oath of office
2
: an irreverent or careless use of a sacred name
broadly : swear word
He uttered an oath and stormed away.

From Wikipedia:

In the United States, the oath of office for the President is specified in the Constitution (Article II, Section 1):
“I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
The oath may be sworn or affirmed (in which case it is called an affirmation instead of oath). Although not present in the text of the Constitution, it is customary for modern presidents to say “So help me God” after the end of the oath. For officers other than the President, the expression “So help me God” is explicitly prescribed, but the Judiciary Act of 1789 also explains when it can be omitted (specifically for oaths taken by court clerks): “Which words, so help me God, shall be omitted in all cases where an affirmation is admitted instead of an oath.”
The Constitution (Article VI, clause 3) also specifies:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
At the start of each new U.S. Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year, newly elected or re-elected Members of Congress – the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate – must recite an oath:
I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]

This oath is also taken by the Vice President, members of the Cabinet, federal judges and all other civil and military officers and federal employees other than the President.

Blog post by Phoenix:

It is apparent that the section of the oath that seems almost daily violated by politicians is “I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without reservation or purpose of evasion;”

The congress as a whole along with the executive branch has been knowingly presenting legislation contrary to the constitution and then relying on legal challenges to make it to supreme court for final disposition, that folks is still a violation of the oath taken no matter the lawyeristic maneuver of passing legislation as constitutional and waiting for a challenge. If these were your children you would immediately scold for exceeding limits by their hope of getting away with trouble but suffering consequences for only the most egregious just by sheer quantity, its evasive both by congress and by children, both should be accountable.

Below is the most detailed listing of codes covering the subject of congressional oath and penalties for violation,

It is apparent that the section of the oath that seems almost daily violated by politicians is “I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without reservation or purpose of evasion;”

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be “altered” by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

Violating Oath

The subject I am bringing to the table is “why do the American people allow their representatives to break oath of office (a federal crime) and not hold them accountable?

This should be a non-partisan subject simply due to the fact this has been going on for long decades and both parties are guilty according to the law.

The scales could be tipped back somewhat if the public had awareness that the oath has teeth and voiced expectation that it be taken seriously.

I grew up on a rural farm and had an older neighbor and I had just got out of high school in the spring and turned eighteen in the late summer and come the next January, I enlisted in the military service.  The morning I was getting ready to report to boot camp Raymond came over.  I was getting ready to leave for the airport, he came up to me and stuck out his hand.  He said, “You are about to say some pretty big words soon and it will define you as a man.  Good Luck.”

At the time I was stunned, in all the years that I had known Raymond, he had patted me on the back after school football games, other sports, 4H, and at other events but he had never shook my hand till that day.  I had read the oath of service but until you are saying it and what Raymond said actually hit me like a rock.  In his eyes, I had just grown up.

Those words are what you are to live by every day during your service to your country and afterwards.  Why is it that our elected representatives fail to follow their oath of office when they require those in military and civic service to follow theirs.  We have been complacent in letting them tear us down.  We need to stand up and make them follow the same laws and Oaths we do.

via LA Times Admits Trump Right About What’s Causing California’s Massive Wildfires

by Tim Pearce

Adopting more active forest management policies such as increased thinning of trees and conducting controlled burns will help mitigate damage from future wildfires, The Las Angeles Times editorial board writes.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke began advocating similar policy prescriptions earlier in the year after President Donald Trump blamed California’s “bad environmental laws” for creating a wildfire-prone environment.

California forests have grown dryer and less healthy from overcrowded trees, infestations of bark beetles and the effects of climate change, the Las Angeles Times writes. California’s restrictions on active forest management have contributed to the poor and worsening conditions of the forests, allowing them to grow uninhibited while suppressing fires that would normally naturally control the forests’ growth.

“Fire is not necessarily bad for forests. California used to burn with regularity, and low-intensity fires are vital in some ecosystems to clear excess brush and small trees from the landscape,” the editorial board writes. “But there’s been a change in fire behavior over the last century, as the state and federal government began dousing the blazes. Decades of fire suppression have allowed forests to grow dense with trees.”

“Combined with drought, insect infestations and the stress of a warming climate, those management practices have led to more intense and destructive fires that are more dangerous to people living near the forests and more damaging to air quality,” the op-ed continues.

California’s environmental laws entered the national spotlight in early August when Trump blamed them for the severity of the wildfires that were ravaging the state.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke was soon at the front of the administration’s push for California to begin adopting more active land management policies. Zinke traveled to California to see the damage from the fires and meet with local officials and firefighters Aug. 13.

Zinke ramped up calls for greater forest thinning while also dismissing the idea that climate change is playing a significant factor in the wildfires’ intensity.

“I’ve heard the climate change argument back and forth,” Zinke told Sacramento-based KCRA. “This has nothing to do with climate change. This has to do with active forest management.”

California Gov. Jerry Brown partnered with state lawmakers to introduce changes to the state’s policies. The bill would grant $1 billion toward forest thinning and ease regulations on cutting trees on private property, according to the Las Angeles Times.

Kind of reminds me of something I hear many many years ago.

Setting: Courtroom with the Forest Service Manager (FSM) on the stand.

Lawyer: “Sir you are in charge of all the national forests in the United States. Correct?”

FSM:  “Yes Sir.”

Lawyer: “For purpose of demonstration, we will equate one wooden matchstick for one million trees.  Please hold out your hands, as he placed a couple of boxes of match sticks in the FSM’s hands.  This should equal the amount of trees that were around when you department was formed.  Now, over the years, your department has sold off lumber rights to harvest for private and public industry.”  The Lawyer takes a few off the FSM’s hands.  “With a few outcries of deforestation, your department gets an expert guidebook to run your forests.”  The Lawyer adds a few matchsticks back. “Now with trees doing what trees do in the forest and new science backing your guidebooks,” adding a few more matchsticks to the pile, “Your department was slowly breaking even keeping the forests healthy and productive, correct?”

FSM: “Yes.”

Lawyer: “Now we have the interference from people running around with unproven scientific facts and Lumber companies and corporations trying to tell you how to do your job, making your department spend all your allocated money in the court system which is not allowing you to do your job to keep the forests healthy and productive.”  All this time the Lawyer has been adding to the pile in the FSM’s hand.

FSM: Looking down at his hands and seeing that he is holding about four boxes of match sticks in his hands. “That’s about right.”

Lawyer: “Now to be fair, I am going to remove the percentage that you were allowed to sell off.”  He reached up and removed one matchstick from the FSM’s hands and holds it up for the court to see.  Turns to the FSM and looks him in the eye, “What do you think Mother Nature’s solution to your problem would be?” 

The Forest Service Manager’s eyes got very big as he saw the Lawyer’s thumbnail scratch the head of the lone matchstick in his hand.

I believe in conservation but to go too far left or right really upsets the balance.  Mother Nature has been doing this for millions of years and we can see what she has done with mistakes over that time period.  The bigest problem we have today is too many theorys that are broadcasted by the media, our leaders and schools and not enough facts.

Climate change in nature is an ongoing thing.  If humans are speeding it up or slowing it down is the question we need to answer.  I turn on the news and someone is spouting something about it but it is all theory with little or no facts behind it.  They trot out some unknown science person that says in the last twenty, thirty, or fifty years there has been this amount of change  but when asked, they have no clue what climate did in a certain area one hundred, one thousand, one million, or one trillion years ago.

The Truth of it is, that while it is sad for the lives lost and the damage done to the forests, we need to return to the middle of the road to continue to survive.

Chess or Checkers?

For years the political establishment was like playing the game of chess and they were quite good at it.  They had the money from the Political Action Committees, Wall Street, and the propaganda mill donated by the Media.  Their electorate was contained and bowed to their will at call.  Their strategies were really good and for every move, there was a counter move.  The Elite could skirt the Rules at any time or completely disregard the Laws at will.  The laws that they generated was never top of the line, they wanted an out at every corner.  If you are elected to Congress, you are on the fast track to be part of the rich and powerful elite.

When it came time for re-election, you could almost have a free pass in the primary but if someone came out of left field to challenge your position, you would have a laugh.  For an outsider or a complete unknown to step into the ring, the odds were stacked against him or her.  It is amazing how easy it is to speak up and toss your hat into the political ring but once you are there you have to get the backing from some money source and galvanise the electorate.  The Founders of our country wanted the elected leaders to be people who did well enough in their occupation or companies to want to set it aside for a term and step up help run a country, then return to their life knowing that they helped the country with their service.  But over time, the only ones being elected where people who knew how to gather money and prestige without actually doing nothing or being at the top of their profession.

Now, along comes a person that is a successful business person which helped him accrue some great wealth and after looking around, throws his hat into the ring.  This person is not some nobody.  The people have heard about him.  He is out-spoken.  He doesn’t fall into the category of  the established political realm or a Media darling.  He speaks to the common people like he is at a family dinner table and what he says hits home.  He does not use the Media to filter his message, he speaks over them.  He is playing checkers with the common folks.

The political elite on both sides have been playing their game for ages and now this person has come along and worse than the running of the bulls, he is upsetting their apple cart.  He forces everyone to follow the laws of the land that the elite have spent little time reading over before passing.  He finds the loopholes that will make them scream.  They have had years and many options to fix these laws and didn’t.

Now you look at all the campaign promises that was made, you will find that he has bucked the establishment at ever turn.  He is following the laws enacted by the establishment and the previous administrations.  He has asked and at times, demanded that both parties involved, step up and fix the problems that they both have made.  They both have denied him.  When will they see the error of their ways?  Both sides of the Establishment think that their spines have been reinforced with iron, that it is their way of doing things, and they can outlast him.  They do not think that the laws that they made need to be changed.  They wrote them to keep the money pouring into their pockets.  They wrote them to keep their supporters in the electorate  docile and wanting the free things that others have worked for.

The common electorate on both the republican and democratic sides, as well as all the other fringe parties are starting to sit up and take notice.  Those that vote really do have the right and duty to take the blinders off.  The electorate does have the ability to soften iron or break it.  They may not leave the center base of their parties but in the General Election, a person does not have to vote the party line.  Hopefully they will vote for real leaders, not like the scum that conned their way to leadership.

 

Illegal Immigrants Left For Dead By Smugglers

In this day and age of the media and the far left telling of all of the so-called atrocities that are happening by our government and the men and women that work there on behalf of the United States people on the southern border.  We never hear of how these people are actually better after medical care and being given food and water.  We are not hearing about corrupt leaders of the countries that these people are coming from.  We are not hearing about the heroes in these countries that are trying to stand up to the corrupt leaders of these countries.  The Media is not giving them a voice.  If they did, more world-wide political pressure could be gained for change.

The United States has in the past stepped in and helped make these changes and was held up as a standard for the rights and welfare of all.  This was done openly and covertly at times.  Due to the changes of politics and Media in our own country it is frowned upon today.  Because of the actions of the past, good and bad, to many in the region the United States is still a beacon for Freedom and Justice but we are  not allowed to do it today.  Rather than the US helping those citizens in these corrupt countries change for the better, the citizens of those coutries seeing no hope or assistance for change are trying to leave there, for here.

They are leaving any way they can.  They are paying for safe passage for their lives.  They may be abused, sold into slavery, sexually assaulted, or one maybe two may be killed so that  the rest of the group may continue.  These smugglers already have their money so they have no problem letting them die rather than them being caught.  In the US, they may get jail time but in other places they may get summary executed and a trial, if any, after words.  So they will leave these people to die in the desert which brings us to the excerpt below.  Even though our media portrays the Border Patrol in such poor light they are sometimes the angel of mercy for those that left seeking a dream only to left to die.

via Border Patrol Rescues 57 Illegal Immigrants Left For Dead By Smugglers | The Daily Caller

Border Patrol rescued a group of 57 Central American migrants abandoned by cartel smugglers in Arizona Friday.

The group of migrant men, women and children — including one underage pregnant girl and 36 minors — were left for dead in 108-degree heat and had to be rescued by the Tucson Sector Border Patrol, according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Among the 36 minors who were as young as one year old, 17 were unaccompanied by an adult. The stranded illegal immigrants came from El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala, according to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.

Several of the migrants were given fluids to treat dehydration, and the pregnant female was given intravenous fluids by Border Patrol EMT’s and transported to a hospital for further treatment. The rest of the group was transported to Ajo station for processing.

“Regardless of the unscrupulous and ill regard for human life attitude by smugglers, Border Patrol Agents work tirelessly to ensure not only the safety and security of our nation but also the safety of those who they come in contact with,” Customs and Border Patrol said in a statement on their website.

Of this group, the 17 unaccompanied minor will probably end up with social services until their families can be located then the immigration courts will take over and the rest may be deported because they did not cross the border at a port of entry.

The Media and the political establishment keep saying that we are a nation of laws but we keep seeing that many are exempt from following or suffering the consequences of these laws.  That is like saying that if I come to your home and the front door and the back door is locked but the side window is open it is illegal for me to enter and make myself at home.  But if I do this, the Media and the Left say it ok for me to stay and make a life with you with no repercussions.

What a state we live in.

In the below joint statement, two of the worlds leaders have a face to face discussion and set up an outline to further talks and future it may hold.

via Joint Statement of President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at the Singapore Summit

President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) held a first, historic summit in Singapore on June 12, 2018.

President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un conducted a comprehensive, in-depth, and sincere exchange of opinions on the issues related to the establishment of new U.S.–DPRK relations and the building of a lasting and robust peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.  President Trump committed to provide security guarantees to the DPRK, and Chairman Kim Jong Un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Convinced that the establishment of new U.S.–DPRK relations will contribute to the peace and prosperity of the Korean Peninsula and of the world, and recognizing that mutual confidence building can promote the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un state the following:

  1. The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new U.S.–DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.

  2. The United States and the DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

  3. Reaffirming the April 27, 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

  4. The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

Having acknowledged that the U.S.–DPRK summit—the first in history—was an epochal event of great significance in overcoming decades of tensions and hostilities between the two countries and for the opening up of a new future, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un commit to implement the stipulations in this joint statement fully and expeditiously.  The United States and the DPRK commit to hold follow-on negotiations, led by the U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible date, to implement the outcomes of the U.S.–DPRK summit.

President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have committed to cooperate for the development of new U.S.–DPRK relations and for the promotion of peace, prosperity, and security of the Korean Peninsula and of the world.

DONALD J. TRUMP
President of the United States of America

KIM JONG UN
Chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

June 12, 2018
Sentosa Island
Singapore

 

The Media stuttered because they were not the conveyor of news between two world leaders.  The propaganda machine tried to speculate, discuss, and outright fabricate many scenarios.  But all failed because the leaders in question made a private deal to get together and for the first time in many years and just talk.

Many things may come out of this.  Some good and some bad.  That is to be expected.  After seventy (70) years of conflict and bashing propaganda that set the region on edge, this is a good start.

There have been many attempts in the past by many US leaders, Presidential, Congressional, and other individuals, but all in all, they were worried about their political future rather than actually finding a peaceful solution.  There will be the naysayers and their puppet media outlets but if a good solution is presented to the American people and they feel it is in their best interest, the American people will force their congressional elected leaders to approve it or get replaced.  For if the diplomatic process ever fails and sometimes it does.  The final option doesn’t allow for safe spaces.

All In Or Nothing

via Democrats Anger Bernie Sanders Supporters with Rule Change for Presidential Candidates

Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders bristled Friday at a new rule being proposed by the Democratic National Committee that would require Democrat presidential candidates to identify as a Democrat.

The move came during a meeting of the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which was meeting over the weekend in Providence, Rhode Island, Politico reported.

New of the proposed rule was tweeted by DNC member Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. Weingarten said Democrats “changed the rules to ensure to run for President as a Democrat you need to be A Democrat.”

“At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat,” the rule said, according to Yahoo News. “Each candidate pursuing the Democratic nomination shall affirm, in writing, to the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee that they: A. are a member of the Democratic Party; B. will accept the Democratic nomination; and C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.”

Sorry Bernie, you want to be an Independent but run as a Democrat.  That is not going to fly anymore.  Looks like some of the big money party members wasn’t to happy with what you tried to pull the last primary season.  I know from what the media portrayed, they really did not know what your platform was and how it fit their agenda.  So, you took the spotlight away from their chosen one.  You were trying to dig into the big money pockets and that limited them when it came time to help the party candidate.  So if you want to try again to become the Democratic nomination the next time around you have to join them whole hog.

Or.

Are they scared that some sleeper Republican or other party will run?  Win the Primary, use their money in the general election and once sworn in, change party allegiance?  That would be somewhat funny.

Are they adding all this fine print to give them a way to get their money back?  Would this be so Mr. Sanders doesn’t buy that fourth or fifth beach house?

I could speculate but I will leave that to the Media.  It is hard to find a story with one confirmed fact now days.  It will fun to watch this play out.

 

A Delaying tactic for Term Limits

If people think that Congress is talking about it then they don’t have to force the issue.  WRONG!

via Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Pushes for Term Limits

An old approach to draining the Washington swamp has become new again as members of Congress push for congressional term limits.

Term limits were one of the items proposed in the 1994 Contract with America, developed by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Although the issue was widely debated at the time, and term limits were imposed on some local and state elected positions, the bid to create term limits at the federal level never succeeded. Although some states sought to limit congressional terms, The Washington Post noted that a court rejected those efforts. Instead, imposing congressional term limits requires a constitutional amendment, which would require two-thirds passage in the bitterly divided houses of Congress and then ratification by 36 states.

Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania said he told Trump that there is a connection between length of service and corruption, according to the Washington Examiner. 

“I made clear to the president that, as a former FBI special agent who oversaw the FBI’s Political Corruption Unit for the entire nation, I witnessed firsthand an undeniable correlation between the length of time in office and the instances of corruption,” Fitzpatrick said. “The lines that were very bright for elected officials on day one in office were not so bright in year seven or eight, and even less so in years 15 or 20.”

It is clear that if we wait for Congress to get around to doing this themselves, the proverbial hot place will freeze over first.  Those that are currently riding the establishment of power in Congress will always come up with the one vote not to allow something to curtail their power or cut off the millions they receive in office for doing something the highest bidder will pay for.  That folks,  will not be what you voted for them to do.

If you do any research, you will see that what they have made over their years in elected public service far exceeds what they are actually paid for.  With this, there are a few that say they are not making enough.  Is that after they just bought their second or third beach house?

A constitutional amendment for congressional term limits could never achieve the blessing of Congress; it could be initiated only by the states.  Dwight D. Eisenhower

To get anything done in this way will require that every state place it on the ballot and force a Constitutional Convention.  This would be a very steep hill to walk and a hard fight against the established political power and the media giants to return us to the original democratic republic we are supposed to be.    What former President Dwight D. Eisenhower was trying to say is that it is up to the people who cast the ballots to collect the signatures and force the issue.  It is not enough to just stand and be counted.  It is up to all of us to get the conversation started and ram it past the elected establishment, the media, the judges, and the naysayers.

In states that have passed term limits, there have been large changes in the diversity of those elected to office and a greater discussion of what really to be done within the state.

Privacy Concerns

Just read an article about a Congressman trying to hype privacy concerns in regards to the upcoming Congressional questioning of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. I had to laugh.

Why, you ask?

Privacy in America, let alone in the world is a joke. How do you think the Junk Mail industry got started? How do you think Credit Cards got off the ground so fast?

You go to the store and you buy something and then when you get home and turn on your desktop computer and start looking at you social media page and there it is an ad for what you just bought, but it was cheaper next door to the store you just came from. How did this start you ask yourself.

Way back when it was implied in those old comic books where you just had to buy that toy through the mail. The person or company got your name and address from when you bought the item. From that item they were able to assign some values like age, gender, and what you may like. Then someone came along and paid him for that information. Then turned around and convince some other company that you may become a customer to them if they would pay for him to send you these advertisements to you. BINGO! You are now on a list to get JUNK MAIL!

The same thing happens today, just at the speed of electrons. Remember all that fine print that you just browse over? Yep. That’s it. You just agreed to all of that, when you clicked.

Even when you get a new smart phone you have already passed over most of the legalize fine print and signed for it. Sometimes you may think you have optioned out of certain aspects but they come back to the fine print when you bought your smart phone or other items. Most option outs start at the time you option out. They already have your information.

Did these companies and organizations take advantage of you while covering their backsides? Probably. We are not all lawyers, or big corporations, we are just regular citizens trying to make it through the day.

You keep hearing about all these data breaches, but after a week or two you hear nothing more. If your information was part of the breach, the company involved will usually send you a notice that your data may have been exposed and they offer you a year free monitoring service to watch for misuse of your data.  That is like hiring an armed guard to watch your house and notify you if someone tries to get in.  The armed guard will only watch your house, not stop someone from entering and doing what they will.  They will not protect you from the loss.  There needs to be updates through the media about these breaches that hold these people responsible.  There are some companies that will help you recover any loss due to a data breach but you have to pay for that service.

If there is anything to come about all these known data breaches it will probably be buried to cover a company’s bottom line.

The Truth – How do we find you?

You read or see a report in the newspaper, on TV, or hear it on the radio. Do you accept it as true or do you dismiss it as propaganda?  In the last few years you cannot accept anything at face value anymore.  You will actually find more truth at the local coffee shop or gossip mill than you will find in print or on the boob tube.  Gone are the days when you could pick up the paper or tune into the news on the television and be confident that what you read or heard was the truth or really, really close to the real truth you would ever get to outside a courtroom or a church confessional.

We used to rely on the Media to gather all the facts and then present them to us as un-biased as they could. Now, they would rather speculate some out of this world story that fits their agenda.  Remember when they would do all sorts of things to get ALL the facts before trying to tell us what has happened?  Some of those reporters really went too far at times but the Truth or as close to the Truth came out.

Do you remember growing up and first learning about the Truth? As we got older the Truth started to have varying degrees of Truth to fit the needs of the one telling it.  As it stands now, you cannot trust what the media is telling us and you most definitely cannot believe what our elected officials keep spouting.

We need to take every story told to us and do our own research to try to find the real TRUTH. Unfortunately, most people today cannot handle the Truth.