In face to face conversations, when I'm asked to offer my opinion on some topic, I find that it is better to politely decline. I really can't think fast enough to offer an intelligent and cogent opinion on most matters. That's because I want to avoid knee-jerk responses.
So I figured I would place my opinions on my web site. If you happen to stumble upon this page, so be it. You may or may not agree with what I say here, but then, I'm not thrusting my thoughts on you via Facebook or Twitter or Parler or Truth Social or whatever "social media" platform that's out there.
So, if you're interested, read on. If not, no problem-o.
I've often thought about starting a simple multiple choice survey just for shits and grins.
The survey would start with the following statement:
I am praying for Donald Trump ... (with the following choices)
1. To die.
2. To be thrown in jail.
3. To be re-elected as president.
4. To disappear from view.
The Trumpers will all go for #3. The anti-Trumpers have a variety of ills to wish upon the man. It's not scientific - and it is a bit like the stupid survey Elon Musk posted on Twitter to see if Trump should be allowed back on.
I don't have the means or the wherewithal to publish such a survey in any "official" capacity, nor a way to offer responses and track them. I was thinking about using Survey Monkey... nah...
Back in “the day” when America was “Great” (whenever that was…) media outlets had to conform to something called “The Fairness Doctrine” – where the outlet had to present, without bias, all views on any story, no matter how mundane or controversial it was. Usually, the outlets would avoid the “controversial” subject matter and focus more on the “mundane”.
But, when they did get into the controversial subject matter, they were required to present all known sides of the story. My point is: the outlet (today they’re called “the mainstream media”) was required to present multiple points of view. Not anymore.
In the 1980s, good ol’ Ronnie Reagan repealed “The Fairness Doctrine” claiming it was not constitutional and violated the First Amendment right to Free Speech. So here we are, 40 years later and what’s happening is: the consumer of news is now responsible to determine “what is fair”. It is NOT the originator of the story’s responsibility. As a consequence, the viewer is presented with left or right wing fringe news outlets who say they’re “fair and balanced” (when in fact, they’re not) and contribute to echo chambers for the red meat eating idiots who religiously watch these so called “news outlets”.
At the top of the food chain are Fox “News” – MSNBC, and CNN – all of whom have decided to carve out a niche of nuttiness in the American dumbass Viewer population. Then there’s OAN and NewsMax which have placed themselves squarely into the realm of extreme-extreme far right.
Social Media has proliferated the availability of echo chambers and extreme views. Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, Parler, and Truth Social. And - all of these outlets have required the consumer to decide which what’s right, wrong, legal, and fair. A reminder, the consumer is not trained in journalist values, and has to figure out what’s true while all these niche services claim they deliver a “fair and balanced” version of the news, when in fact, they’re not.
It is left up to the consumer of news to figure what is a balanced presentation of the news. And quite honestly, no one wants to do that at the consumer level.
The people who are 'anti-woke' are those who "just don't understand them gays" type. Being "Woke" is about becoming aware of social injustice and discrimination. It was originally subscribed to racial injustice and discrimination, but, it also applies to non-christian and sexual orientation. Since the conservatives can't really play a race card anymore because they need to fill their ranks with wanna be rich Blacks, Latinos and Asians, they've decided to vent their anger at alternative sexual orientation. So "woke" has become the code word for "fag" or other words with a negative connotation toward alternative sexual orientation. The conservatives are threatened by "them fags" when they have their pride marches or are represented on tv commercials or programs. "Well... shit.... we ain't got no White Pride parades!" they exclaim. Oh yes, whitey do have their marches, complete with swastikas and upside down US Flags.
I think some it has to do with the backlash reported in the various and sundry press outlets and demonstrated in daily life. Example: Money For Nothing by Dire Straits. The song has a reference to a "faggot" in the lyrics. Recently, the portion of the song with that lyric has been edited out. Some folks went bat-shit crazy when that happened. "They be Woke!!!" is the complaint. Regarding Money For Nothing, I think the song is better with the lyric intact. Why, because it ends with the statement that the so-called "faggot" is a millionaire - all the while the poor bastard complaining about it is a fat cigar-chomping appliance installer who is obviously jealous of the "faggot's" success. And maybe that's what it's all down to... jealousy. "Pursuit of happiness" is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. If people of certain sexual orientation are seeking their happiness, why would it matter to others who don't share the same thoughts? I don't see the same kind of vitirol spewed by the LGBTQ community about deer hunting.