Abortion is NOT the Same as Owning a Gun

This is where I try to explain why Liberals are so frustrating to adults.

Let’s use the abortion and 2nd amendment arguments as an example.

“Indeed, Crow insisted that conservatives who are both pro-life and pro-Second Amendment are hypocrites.

“I feel like obviously, everyone is pro-life, and I am conflicted by the argument that if you are pro-life, you would be standing up about gun laws,” she exclaimed.” (https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/06/07/sheryl-crow-slams-abortion-laws-in-georgia-missouri/)

First note that in her statement she says “I feel”. Unlike many death cultists (abortionists), she isn't appealing to “logic”. Rather, she admits her belief is based on emotion - childlike thinking.

Other Pro-Death voices attempt to use grown up logic but, of course, fail. They make statements like, “If you are Pro-Life you can’t logically be pro 2nd Amendment.”

Such a statement is certainly not logical.

It is not logical because it is not parallel.

Pro-Life stands against killing babies.

The 2nd Amendment stands for owning and transporting weapons. The 2nd Amendment does not stand for killing anything. The 2nd Amendment does not say Citizens have the right to shoot people. While weapons can kill they can also protect. Owning and transporting a weapon is clearly not killing.

The crux of the matter is children and mentally immature adults do not understand that there are two very different kinds of verbs: Action verbs and state of being verbs (today called “state verbs”).

I throw the ball. Action verb

I have a nickel in my pocket. State verb

Abortion is an active behavior. Owning a gun is a state.

So, logically the Pro-Death supporters are attempting to compare action with state. This is illogical.

Liberals make this kind of thinking error so frequently that it must be a characteristic of the Liberal, immature, mind.

There is another factor at work which supports the emotional base for their fallacious comparison.

Pro-Death supporters only see death. So, a weapon has only one characteristic – killing.

Liberals constantly claim that “guns kill people”. Here they also have a state issue. Guns are inanimate objects. Guns do not “act”. Yet emotionally weapons symbolize, to the liberal, death.

To the liberal abortion (death) is the same as a weapon (death). Thus, Liberals’ are comfortable with their illogical statement that Pro-Life supporters are hypocrites if they also support the 2nd Amendment.

To the child the adults seem to be saying life good and death good.

“But mommy I don’t understand!”

BTW "if you are pro-life, you would be standing up [for] gun laws" should imply that "if you are pro-abortion you would be standing up [against] gun laws."

I hope this brief explanation has ever so slightly illuminated why liberals are so frustrating to adults.

Are Investigators of the "Insurance Policy" Looking in the Right Places?

Here’s what I think is missing in the Insurance Policy investigation.
At least I haven’t heard about these things.

Someone or a group PLANNED the operation.

Someone RECRUITED the field agents and contractors.

Someone, probably a lower level manager, RAN the field agents and contractors.

Someone authorized PAYMENT for salaries, transportation, food, hotels, communication, etc.

Someone COMMUNICATED with the field agents and contractors.

Someone TRAVELED within the US and overseas.

Someone MANAGED NDAs –wrote, sent, received, reviewed, and filed them.

Someone BRIEFED the planners on field operations.

There is a considerable amount of paperwork generated by an overseas op.
Some of this material is likely still around.

Find the intermediates & support staff – US and overseas agents, perhaps foreign agents, office staff, communications folks, airline reservations, lawyers, folks who print checks, expense report reviewers, and embassy visits. There is a lot of detail in the bureaucracy.

Brennan and Comey likely didn't plan, recruit, run, pay, or communicate directly with the field agents and contractors. They had agency, multiple agency, help.

Go after communications between these parties.

Find the funding trail. Find out if the contractors were paid in cash. Find the Agent’s time cards or regular activity reports. Expenditure of such funds is likely a crime. Brennen likely hid the expenses in an unrelated black account – also a crime.

Find out if the field ops were run by a foreign government. Conspiring with a foreign government to commit a crime is probably a crime – at least sedition.

Plan, Recruit, Run, Pay, Communicate, Brief, Support, NDAs

I hope investigators are digging in these places but we haven't heard about it.

Elite Control of Information: Fake News & the Rise of iTribes

Tribal

For a very long time the elite controlled the distribution of information – the news.

First there were religious organizations where priests and scribes created and “published” books.

With the invention of the printing press, secular elites wrestled control from the religious elite.

Newspapers dominated the distribution of “news”. The elite controlled them and thus controlled the masses.

Trains and telegraph appeared and were quickly controlled by the same elites.

The telephone quickly followed and the elites made long distance communication expensive thus limiting its use to the upper classes.

The breakup of AT&T inadvertently lead to both cheaper communication and the spread of the Internet.

Now control of communication was attacked by a different elite population – the technically elite. This group had no strong ties to the old elite and distrusted them. The Internet wealth explosion created a new elite.

Information, “news” to the masses and the old elite quickly became inexpensively available to everyone. Individuals could now observe events and share their experience with many other individuals all across countries and even the world.

Information control was lost.

The technically elite, now massively wealthy, found themselves philosophically aligned with the old elite as they sought to maintain and grow their wealth. The started trying to put the information back in an elite controlled bottle.

Meanwhile, the masses had discovered power in sharing information. Social Media began to re-purpose. Individuals suddenly found their voice could compete with the wealthy elite.

Information control is not just about how “loud” the voice is it is also about how prevalent it is.  As other voices rise up the elite voice becomes less powerful regardless of how loud it is.

The old solution of channel ownership, book publishing, newspapers, long line telegraph and telephone, radio stations and TV channels was applied: Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Bing etc.
ISPs control via cable systems was not defendable against cheap competition.

A solution to this problem is to silence those competing voices. Banning Twitter and Facebook users, blacklisting websites and bloggers and the like works but competing channels rapidly arise.

Another solution is to “jam the channel”. Bots, fake news generators, fake user accounts, all seek to overwhelm the recipients/consumers of “news”. Initial attempts to counter these efforts by responding to them and adding more information actually added to the "jam". By filling the communication channel with more “information” individual users have difficulty absorbing any of it.

Individuals quickly responded by blocking some of these extraneous voices, filtering their email, simply not visiting “news” websites, stop watching MSM, blocking bots, and cutting the cable.

One negative consequence of this response is to drive individuals into isolated groups. This is a new form of tribalism – iTribes. Information tribalism is a simplistic response to an overwhelming amount of Internet information. It works like tribalism has always worked: Tribalism reduces stress, reinforces beliefs, creates a sense of family, and constantly/consistently feeds a particular world view. The individual equivalence of the political echo chamber.

I’ll leave a discussion of the effects of such tribal behavior in general to another time. Instead I want to consider how iTribes effect decision making and how they respond to jamming the channel.

Psychologist have studied decision making from the discipline’s beginning. The literature is huge and contains many, tho oft ignored, pithy findings. A follow on blog post will address iTribes and Decision Making.

Also more to come on the elite intentionally “jamming the channel” to cause confusion and poor decision making: iTribes and Jamming the Channel.

Come back in a bit and read these blogs.