(It is a fickle, sycophantic creature frequently used
as an advertising and propaganda gun-for-hire
by business, government or religion.)
You back-stabbing, double-dealing, traitorous scum. While you could be forgiven if the events of 911, Pearl Harbor, Oklahoma bombing, the Branch Davidian Siege, and numerous other incidents of murder having occurred a thousand years ago... your actions of describing the Orlando LGBT murders as the worst and bloodiest massacre in U.S. history is a disgusting betrayal to the multiple memories of death and destruction the people of the Nation still live with. Shame on you. You have damaged your reputation not only with the people of the Nation, but billions of others in the world who come to realize they too must question the faith they have held for Journalists living amongst them. You can not be trusted to tell the truth... because your truth is whatever helps you in your careers regardless how much you must distort reality. You can not be relied upon for reporting events in a professional, unbiased fashion. If this is what University courses in Journalism are teaching, they might as well be shut down. You need no college degree to be a professional liar. We now know it is not the U.S. flag that you wave, but the rainbow one. You have desecrated the expression "We Will Never Forget", because you indulge in sycophantic inclinations of selective memory.
Your betrayal of the American people is similar to that now being contemplated by Bernie Sanders. It is pathetically stupid for him to consider that the Democratic Party, Congress or Hillary will adopt any of his stock-in-trade campaign assertions. The Democratic Leadership, the Congress, nor Hillary give a damn about Bernie's ideas. All they care about is winning the Presidential Election no matter what empty promises to Bernie and his followers are made. They can not be trusted just like the National media can not be trusted... and nor can Obama and his followers... because they all lie through their smiling teeth and practice selective memory. Hillary could care less for the people or she would have Bernie as her Vice President... the same goes for Trump. The question remains whether Bernie will do the right thing for the people... not for the Democratic Party, not for some rationalized government status quo nonsense, not for anything except for the people to have control of the government... as a Real Democracy should be. We are sick and tired of this pretend democracy the U.S. and other countries have been practicing at the expense of the public. The People say to hell with the members of Congress, party affiliation, the Electoral system, the frivolous government of falsified democracy, and especially Hillary... It's bad enough for the people to have to choose between two dumb blondes.
Bernie must do what is right for the people, just as the philosophy of his campaign was focused on. To do otherwise, is to earmark this Presidential Election as that to be remembered for its Public Betrayal by all the candidates (including those who got out of the race), the election process, the political debates, the government, all the political parties, and in particular, the National Media— supported by local Journalists. The media is often the source for so much social discord such as the fallout from the Brexit result... that is strongly giving the impression of having been orchestrated. The public can not be certain that the Brexit voting tally was correct... or wasn't an instance contrived to produce circumstances involving a deliberate attempt distract public attention. It's timing during the American election is felt by some to be too much of a coincidence.
If a political protest is to succeed, protestors must target the National media. We must use the same tactics on them as they do on the public... though many of us shake our heads at all the dim-wittedness the National media can come up with. To be fair, Journalists faced with deadlines frequently find themselves producing copy as if they were working for a comic book publishing house or fringe-top magazine. Whereas there are frequent distortions of facts, or they pander to the whims of elected officials— if not using their position to voice a personal opinion in favor of this or that... or against it. How a topic is or isn't journalistically covered can standardize the role that truth is perceived and practiced. For example, instead of admitting that both Trump and Clinton are decidedly less than what the Nation needs in terms of Executive Branch leadership, they make a choice to serve one or the other, but exclude the public from their equation. Many journalists don't simply cover the news, they try to promote a view point as if it were already a fact. Under such conditions, a protest movement can be faced by an army of journalists set against them. Hence, a protest movement with a distinctly articulated agenda, must include a movement to target the National media.
But let us at the very least acknowledge the effort of those Journalists participate in an effort to provide the truth when they serve up a fact checking article about what a person (such as a political candidate) has said. Such efforts are no doubt much appreciated by those readers interested in unraveling what is and and what is not valid, as well as determining what level of lying a person engages in. However, who fact checks the media? For example, when a journalist says that a majority of people think or feel in such a way, we must question the validity since the readers themselves make up the populace from which a Referendum on the subject has supposedly taken place to make such a determination... yet no such referendum ever took place. Likewise, for another example, when a Journalist makes a claim that their information is in accord with some latest polls, they do not also tell us who conducted the polls, nor where, when and how they were conducted. As far as we can tell, their comments are made-up stories to meet a deadline, which permits them to introduce "copy" with material describing supposition without identifying it as a transcribed fairy tale. Journalists are not typically monitored for veracity, unless it is done by their own kind... as a sort of "in house" policing that is supposed to take place in many institutions, businesses and organizations, but often occurs only marginally so. In short, the public must not only be skeptical what Journalists are saying, but must be customarily targeted to verify their information in order to improve the sloppy standards of Journalism now being practiced.
When Journalists speak about political situations, they do not also discuss issues in terms of Sociology and History. They frequently make things up, and in so doing, exhibit a bias of their organization's prevailing perspective. For example, the recent indulgence to label the shooting of LGBT members in an Orlando Nightclub as the "Worst or bloodiest Massacre in U.S. history", or that "The Nation is heart-broken". This highlights the fact that the National media engages in selective memory since it fails to take into account such things as the 911 event... which many believe was undoubtedly staged by members or associates of the U.S. Government, since the actors involved in the aircraft kamikaze runs did not have the intellectual or financial wherewithal to carry out such attacks on their own. It also describes the media's attempt to suggest it represents the views of the majority... though neither Obama nor the media were unanimously selected to do so. They should not try to put words in a Nation of so many millions who undoubtedly have their own views, but are never given a chance to provide an unedited version thereof. Interviewing a handful is not Representative of 300+ million... no matter what system of rationalized logic is used. However, by engaging in such selective memory, they are better enabled to show their biased support for the LGBT colonies scattered here and there. The National Media is not representing the majority of the public's views, because like politicians who supposedly "represent" the people; they do not actually know what the people feel nor think. Neither the media nor the members of Congress conduct periodic National Referendums from which laws can be established which truly reflect the Will of the People. Instead, they rely on silly polls and make rationalized excuses for doing so based on the various rationalized guesstimations that so-called professionals engage in as part of their ego-structuring.
We the People did not vote the National or local media groups to speak on our behalf. Nor do elected officials, particularly since none of them were voted into office by way of a unanimous decision. In addition, it is needless to say that individuals who are selected by one or more politicians to serve an office, do not represent the people either. They may represent themselves, the person who selected them, or some assumed fanciful "government" notion... but they don't represent the people. Even though such people, including the media take it upon themselves to presume that they are the key spokesperson for practicing the right of free speech, the people did not directly vote on this provision. It is a self-adopted entitlement that exercises an additional presumed right to upstage the public's right to speak for itself. The people are customarily denied the right to discuss and vote on any and all issues they want to. Neither the media nor the government wants to relinquish their marginalizing pedestals. Hence, our protest movement targeting the government must also target the media. While we prefer not to use violence, it must be remembered that every government does so as a viable means to assert its views, even if those views do not reflect the Will of the Public. When we have both a government and media that does not listen to the collective Will of the people because there are no established protocols for doing so, and those channels for doing so are ludicrous examples thereof, what are We The People to do?
Whereas the media thinks it carries a badge of immunity which enables it to seek us out no matter where we are, we too can play at this tactic... though a new term other than "paparazzi" will have to be coined in order to portray a system of protest which uses groups of individuals to seek out the media just as the media does to the public, professionals or politicians, hounds them without end. We can be on their doorsteps, their places of work and recreation, and engage them night and day with incessant calls for interviews that are repeated with the same information over and over again. Indeed, we can create our own system of targeting media that acts as a group of assertive Professional lobbyists.
Indeed, we can be just as myopic and self-centered as the media is. And we can print or voice retractions for deliberate falsehoods meant to influence opinion. We can engage in character assassinations and background checks meant to be used as bribery. We can take polls conducted amongst like-minded friends and pretend we don't completely understand a confused situation in an attempt to convey the image of distortion simply because we disagree with a given presentation. Yes, we can use the same back-stabbing double-dealing techniques involving bribery and ambush. But we will do so in the open, so that the public is fully aware we are doing so as a mirror-image of how the government and media conducts itself. No less, we can be highly organized in our secret attempts to uncover secrets presented in an open forum plagued with biases.
For some, "targeting the media" means to carry out a deliberate act of violence. Such violence would no doubt be labeled, by the media, as the worst and bloodiest domestic terrorist attack... if a certain number of workers in the media were killed. Exactly how many would need to be killed is uncertain, but bets are it is in the range of much fewer than any other "mass" killing, since the word "mass" is alternatively defined by arbitrary standards... and is not used for such things as "mass" raindrops fell yesterday, or that a person received a massive dose of bee stings, or the is a mass assemblage of holes in one's underwear. For others, "targeting the media" is little more than a means to convey that the Media can not be depended on... can not be trusted to deliver the correct message for a protest because of ulterior motives that parasitically seeks out some event to use as a symbiotic mode of conveyance for something else that is hoped will bring about circumstances to involve the media in more intense efforts. And yet, for still others, "targeting the media" means to carry out a program of deliberate intensification of protest efforts that will unequivocally emphasize the tenacious depth of seriousness.
Although it is easy enough to kill a bunch of innocent (unsuspecting) people to exhibit an act of rage, jealousy, disgust or by way of following orders, members of conscientious movements for corrective social change have difficulty in rationalizing such insanity. These types of activities require religion, patriotism, or a radicalized political perspective that has gravitated towards extremism due to personal conditions that convince a person they are in a desperate situation... whether or not they are conscious of it. It is desperation which can be fueled by both Media and government actions... or non-actions. These two entities seem surprisingly unable to grasp the situation that many in the public are seeking a movement that will end the dominance of the present media and government perspectives, which are viewed as being counter-productive to the interests of the public's need for growth. Both the government and the media have indulged in a self-created entitlement of fantasy for too long. But a one-of-a-kind horrific event is not enough to create a sustained move towards productive methods for enhancing social self-governance with an intended desire for creating a better society... however it may be defined or labeled in the future since the present definition and usage of the "democracy" label are poor examples thereof... As can be seen by the recent falsified labeling of the government and media with respect to the killings in the Orlando LGBT event, the memories of presumed officials is particularly short and selective.
Indeed, the Media and Obama should apologize to the Nation and world for such a gross error in judgment, compounded by saying "we're" (the Nation) is heart broken as opposed to "we're" (Obama and the Media) are trying to convey their personal views as if they were National ones. Though you both need to apologize, you won't, even if a gun were held to your head... at least not in a public venue...since both want to use it as a means to go after Trump, though not necessarily assist Hillary. Every single social event is used for some other ulterior motive. Your comments are merely scripts for some other agenda. The LGBT community of colonies would be foolish to embrace such expressions as being genuine... though some will since they grasp onto anything that appears favorable since the majority of opinion is commonly negative. They need something as large as their parading methods of over-compensation for feelings of inadequacy... that nothing but various forms of colony-practiced inebriation help to numb self-disparaging personal reflections.
It is unfortunate that the public is forced to become radicalized by a media and government that does not know how to grasp beyond the traditions of perspective which continue to create so much social disharmony and disenfranchisement. Ignoring or attempting to sublimate it will not make it go away or surrender to neurotic forms of government practice. Many Sociologists and Political Scientists also do not readily perceive this need for developing a better functionality of governance because their career or academic interests force them to specialize in enclaves of consideration which is a fancy way of describing the use of accepted blinders, as one might put on a horse until such time as a given perspective is habitually memorized. The fact of the matter remains that more and more are viewing our social situation as an acceptable inevitability that a Revolution must occur... because there is no other alternative for the people to acquire a New Government— a Cenocracy. There exists no government-established means for the people to effectively inculcate their collective opinion for creating laws and policies which best suits the desired growth of the Nation as part of a global village. The government and the media force us to become radicalized. The present governing philosophy of a pretended democracy and the philosophy of practiced Journalism is a distasteful joke.
Thus far, there has been no large domestic group that have staged a violent expression of its perspective. And no, neither the Occupy (Occuparchist) movement or Black protests are representative of the type of violence being indicated here. Such representations have been carried out by only one or two individuals who resort to using violence against innocents... which details a cowardice... like so many suicide bombers have done, as well as law enforcement who used a tank against the Branch Davidian group. When innocents are exploited, abducted, or killed, most of us are genuinely outraged, even if those who have been targeted practice a perspective we ourselves do not share. For example, though many do not believe in the philosophy that the LGBT community of colonies do, it is not hypocritical for us to share in the grief which accompanies the needless loss of life... even if we at the same time exhibit a disgust for their life-style. This is not a schizophrenia (ambivalence) unique to our era, it is a portrait of the complexification of social issues that we are required to become adept with, but may harbor conflicting consternations about; which are brought to the foreground of consciousness under given situations. Many things are not so easily described by a black and white, yes or no, right or wrong dichotomy. Different answers, as well as different rationales, are contextually driven. In other words, many of us share in an undisclosed philosophy of having limits we may come to exercise sometimes more... or sometimes less... depending on circumstances. It is not an act of immorality to dislike or hate one or another minority... though such minorities may want such a perspective to be seen as commensurate with some unholy act... just as Obama and the Media are trying to impose their rationale of reality on us by an incessant application of stupidity.
The National Media, in so much as this is the main topic at hand, though some readers may be inclined to include isolated journalistic practices by referencing one or more local media operations, has been painting a target on itself for quite some time. And a few observers have taken one or another (symbolic) pot shot at them for a specific or generalized orientation. But we are not talking about engaging in a shooting gallery exposition found at a carnival or fair grounds deployment for which a stuffed animal or ridiculous trinket might be won. They have made us into those who have begun collective discussions about a needed predation. It is similar to the predatorial orientation seen when protestors gather to discuss strategies for effecting purposive government reform.
The trouble is, the old methods of protest for social reform are seen as ineffectual tools. We need a new game plan, as are many aware of. Petitioning the government is a joke, because it has established protocols for deflecting or diminishing such efforts... and the Executive Branch egotistically claims ownership thereof because, as one might interpret from such ownership, it views itself as "the government"... and all other branches as being subsidiary. If this were not true, then a petition to the government would simultaneously be received by all branches, but each must provide a response... and not engage in a hoop-jumping scenario of dismissiveness if a certain number of signatures are not received. Every single citizen should be respected for their opinion. The silliness of the presently practiced "Petition the Government" formula is likewise echoed in the notion of writing letters to Congressional Representatives... since it is a staff member who might well reply to a letter, that is if it is at all read.
No less, marching through streets carrying banners appear to be more effective in letting people vent anger and frustration than they do in accomplishing anything of certainty. With such regulated obstacles in our efforts to bring about corrective social change, it is unfortunate that we must turn to more assertive methodologies that some readers may interpret to mean direct aggression... since this is what both the government and the media do, with respect to their individual armaments. In as much as the government would like the public that aggression does work (or that crime does not pay), one need only review historical and current events to know that the government and the media engage in the use of such in different ways. In other words, though the government may resort to the usage of firearms, the media uses its traditional penmanship sword that is frequently double-edged and sometimes alternatively designed to make any secret agent jealous of such an arsenal.
For example, assertive predations against extremist perspectives such as the LGBT (Lost Girls and Boys Totem) community of colonies foster... even though the public is being subjected to government and media tactics of censorship that disallows members of the public from having a means of exercising a contrary opinion in terms of voting on adoptive laws; or in so doing are labeled as having a social pathology defined by a convoluted reverse psychology practice— does not provide for a public incentive to push for a desperately needed alteration in the functionality of the government. But let us disentangle the foregoing for those readers not adept at approximating a dot to dot scenario rendered in a vernacular that is not so easily intelligible to some:
Though many in the public are no doubt happy that the deaths of a few members of an Orlando based LGBT colony occurred, many of us do not react in the excessive manner that Obama and the media have, such that history is denied and that the cause for such a calamity occurring in the first place though to be directly related to firearms. No matter if a gun, knife, or bomb was wielded, such things are only tools or weapons put to use by a person. Likewise, while we could simply walk into a large media environment and kill whomever was nearby, this would only indicate a calloused stupidity... when our actual overall intent is to alter the cultures of the media and the government. The media and the government are considerably problematic for the people to establish an enhanced form of self-governance over the present pretended form of democracy. We need to ram their pretend form of Democracy down their throats.
Killing a handful of LGBT members and/or supporters, will not readily accomplish a change in governance or the neurotic practices being employed by many members of the media. Nor does killing a group of Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, Native Americans, Asian, Pacific Islanders, Religious practitioners, etc... And we can not expect to create a better form of self-governance if our own anti-government position adopts the perspective of a minority such as that embraced by the LGBT community of colonies. One of the (many) problems those connected with a Cenocratic (New Government) perspective have consistently encountered is that anti-government ideas are sublimated along channels described by feelings about minor issues enlarged by the intensity of emotions being employed as defensive gestures that conceal inexperienced instances for examining one's position of logic. Not too infrequently do we find the practice of unconventionalities interpreted as an indication of something unique... as a personalized model of over-compensation for realizations of perceived inadequacy. Simply put, such people are not particularly familiarized with themselves in situations of self-examination, with respect to comparisons of alternative ideas... and thus by way of accustomed repetitious thinking, will defend their perspective even if they come to appreciate the false nature of their logic. Some people do not know how to react spontaneously to an ephiphany, and will thus defend a previous ignorance until an extended period of time is spent in reflection.
While it is difficult enough to get different non-professional people to discuss an issue about government reform from their individual perspectives in order to find a common ground of unity... or acceptance that they are all somewhat mistaken in the objectives needed to be undertaken; the situation is compounded exponentially when confronting someone who believes their adopted professionalism in one field automatically guarantees them with the added advantage of harboring an above average system of logic that can be applied to any and all situations. For example, many people think their anti-government attitude is to be equated with a certainty of profound on-of-a-kind exclusivity of character equal to any and all who have stood in the foreground of a Revolution, or have participated in what is believed to be underground activity against a perceived foe or evility.
...Thus, for example, when they come across others who are focusing on the idea that social problems are the result of the government being too big, they reiterate this notion as if it were an absolute. There is an often practiced inclination to go along with a crowd as if a "safety in numbers" ethic can be equated with truth in like-mindedness. But such a perspective, that social problems are the result of the Government being Too Big is based on a fallacy. Government is not Too Big, it is Too Small. When a democracy is supposed as a government Of, By and For All the people, then the size of a given population is the size the government is supposed to be. In a population of 300+ million, such as the U.S., this is a really Big Government. Unfortunately, in practice, the concerted Will of people is not used to run their government. Their role is minimized by a government structure which enables only a few to run it. The people have no actual collective voice.
The situation of living in a society which claims that it is a government Of, By and For All the people but is actually run by a few elected "Representatives" and their selective members, is made worse by a media who takes it upon themselves to assert their opinions as if they Represent the public. The public itself is not permitted to do so, and when it does, this opinion frequently becomes truncated by policies and procedures like most gaming institutions are, in order to get the lions share of all contributions... where in the case of many government employees, is the ability to dictate terms to the majority by labeling such dictates as policy, procedure, rule, etc... Representatives do not represent the people since the Will of the People is rarely given the opportunity to collectively express what that Will is... and the media also does not represent the Will of the People because it does not openly discuss the need for actual and honest governing laws that would enable the Peoples' Will to be correctly identified. Simply arranging questions and comments in order to channel predispositions into being represented by a contrived poll or piece-meal discussion is particularly pathetic when these same media representatives take it upon them selves to lie about or exclude poll results, as well as redefine discussed information within the restricted guidelines of interest or the comprehension of one's own convictions.
The media, not too infrequently, acts as a sycophant to the government... or some government practice. If a media outlet has an over-riding ulterior motive wanting to be reinforced, it attempts to do so by exploiting an event supported by a government spokesperson, no matter how much they must lie, since to lie means they can simply claim they stretched the truth or print some meager retraction. It, like the government, has their own values of practiced immunity standards which laws have guaranteed loopholes for permitting the public to be taken advantage of. For example, in the wake of the Orlando LGBT killings, Obama saw an opportunity to influence public opinion to side with an attendant political motive involving the current Presidential race, through over-valued emotional rhetoric regarding the deaths. The media nor the government can be trusted for exhibiting actual feelings since they are coupled with such a stark representation of falsified history. Imagine claiming that the deaths if 49 people represent the greatest American tragedy when there are many other examples of death and associated destruction which surmount this quantity. No one should trust an over-valued expression of emotion when it is aligned with a lie which disrespects those thousands which have died by way of actions now defined as domestic terrorism which enables the government and the media to practice different protocols of behavior... which includes lying to the public.
Both the media and the government owe the Nation an apology, without resorting to the now practiced acceptance where the guilty do not have to admit to any guilt... but are permitted instead to retire with a full pension, or simply pay a fine that is given back along some other negotiated channel not readily recognized by a public duped into believing the nonsense being fed to it by the media and the government. Yet, neither the media nor the government want to engage in soliciting the double-standard Justice system to effect a criminal standard with suitable punishment; because they may at some time be caught with their own pants down and want an accessible get-out-of-jail free card because they had indulged the same to another... as a type of tit-for-tat unspoken contractual agreement that the public is not enabled to share in.
The media and government frequently engage in the practice of exhibiting one example as being representative of a whole. For a minor example, take the situation with a reported above average temperature for Phoenix, Arizona, but the article's heading claims the situation exists for the entire Southwest... yet no other location in the Southwest is being mentioned. This exaggeration is a lie... and one lie leads to others and then this becomes the accepted standard of reporting... but to point out the mistake is tantamount to accusing the media of committing something that they can then sue a person for slander! They help to perpetuate a social atmosphere of irrationality in perception. Truth doesn't matter anymore... just so long as someone's career is assisted.
Again and again and again the public is met with snapshot articles featuring hostility. And when there are no readily available examples, the media, and/or the government, make them up by using their own forms of hostility against this or that group, this or that person, this or that situation. Each in their own way utilizes whatever palette best suits the picture they want to paint. While obama works on his agenda to downplay the role radical Islamists have in terrorism by intimating that a few don't represent the whole, his hypocritical comment about the Nation being heart-broken about the death of a handful of LGBT members when he neither represents the Nation nor permits the Nation to speak on its own without its voice being stuffed full of nonsense printed by the media regarding the event as the worst or bloodiest massacre in U.S. history; is counter-balanced by the government's efforts... assisted by the media, to paint some Americans as Right-wing extremists because they attempt to defend a rationality that neither the government nor the media support... though they both once did. Heaven forbid if Obama and today's media existed during the Dawn of the Revolution since the Founding Fathers would be cited as Right-Wing Extremists. The government and the media are pitting the people of the nation against one another, and thus, it is they who must be targeted.