The Illusion of White Privilege

Let's start with a joke. A Jew, a black man and an Irishman are all being put to death on crosses and they begin arguing over who is being better treated and why. Now that is the definition of stupid.

I have previously stated that I am Irish, well, American of Irish descent. I have also stated that the English starved one fourth of us to death with the Irish famine. That included people in my family. How many people starved their slaves to death? Not to many, they saw it as the same as starving their horses to death. Slave owners saw their slaves as their property. The Irish had no value to the English at all. I want you to take a moment and think about that, it is not the point I am going to make but is in and of itself something to consider. You see it is about human value.

When I was young I resented the English as I learned of what they had done and were still doing to my nationality. I was about 11 when Bloody Sunday happened. You can look it up or just listen to U2. I heard how the news spun it all and watched as Britain justified it. I saw the propaganda machine at work. I felt a quiet anger as my anger usually is. Anger makes me contemplative and strategic, it is my warning bell to look deeper and find my opponents weakness. I began asking myself what would be acceptable responses to the English by the Irish Republican Army and violence seemed to make sense. It is the simplest of questions, is it okay for the oppressed to kill their oppressor. A simple question that misses the moral issue while making you think it nails it; but that is not the point of this post either.

Lets look at the life of the average Englishman. Is he doing that well? How has he been treated historically. Ever see Braveheart?  The English monarchy treated nations as slaves to the king including their own. The owners of this world do not see color and they don't see sex and they don't see age, they see slaves and competitors for owning the slaves. Should I complain about English privilege?

Define privilege. It means to get a step up on others. It means that someone starts the game with a bigger advantage. Now who should the person given no advantage blame? The person who was started one step ahead, two steps ahead or a thousand steps ahead? Divide and conquer means starting one group in front of another while you are a thousand steps ahead. You get them to righteously fight amongst each other. I have described how musical chairs is the same thing. While 99% of you fight over the increasingly diminishing number of chairs, I take them all but one so you fight each other over the one last chair while I have the rest.

I could have used male privilege as my example or any other privilege you believe exists in a bigoted (the word means universal and generalized, attributing a common thing to a group) way. What is the greatest privilege in the world? What can you be born into that will give you more advantage from the start till the end of life? I think I know the answer and I think the answer is wealth. Beauty and strength can be taken in a moment as can fame; but, money can empower the ugliest, meanest, weakest and most corrupt person in the world for life and beyond. Money is the one thing the world makes sure can be passed on to your children.

UPDATE AND A COMMENT RESPONSE:

I received a comment to this post which you can read in the comment section. The response included a link to a video which I have watched. I am not impressed by the video as it fails to meet certain basic requirements. Lets start with looking at the actual law and not just someone's comments on it.

Legislative Assembly of Ontario - Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017.

The video claims that Canada passed the law to support gender fluidity and multiculturalism. That is not true. In fact, Canada has had a problem for a long time. Canada used to remove native children from their homes and send them to boarding schools to teach them to be more like Canadians.

If you read the actual bill and know Canadian history you come to understand that they are trying to undue a history of oppression of native Canadian Indians. Here is a quote from the actual law, "One of the additional purposes in the current Act is to recognize that services to Indian and native children and families should be provided in a manner that recognizes their culture, heritage and traditions, and the concept of the extended family." The truth is that the law is aimed at foster care and adoption primarily. The people that made the video in the comment below (click on the word comments at the bottom of this post to read it and see the video) are right wing extremists, I looked at their other videos. The rumour is wrong, it is not illegal to call your children son or daughter in Canada. 

As for the case mentioned in the comment video, here is the actual document submitted by the family to the court.

FRANCES BAARS and DEREK BAARS vs THE CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF HAMILTON.  

Two girls were put in foster care while waiting to be reunited with their biological family. Mr. Baars was working on becoming a minister and did not believe in holidays. Imagine having a Foster family that will not allow you to celebrate your birthday because they are Jehovah's witnesses. Here is an actual quote of what the Baars claimed, "Ms. Lindsay’s comments did not relate to any actual situations we were facing as foster parents.  We had not interacted with any prospective adoptive couples, nor would we be doing so, because the plan with our foster girls was that they would be reunited with their biological family. We repeatedly protested this offensive allegation.  We assured Ms. Lindsay that we would treat any same-sex adoptive parents as people worthy of dignity and respect.  Yet, Ms. Lindsay, without any factual basis or grounding, persisted in telling us that because of our religious faith, we would discriminate against same-sex couples.  Ms. Lindsay told us that she intended to prevent us from ever encountering a same sex couple, and that she intended to close our foster home."

The couple were responsible for meeting with prospective adoptive parents and refused to do so according to their own words. The case had nothing to do with sexual orientation, it had to do with the responsibility of foster parents and they refused to do their job. This case also predates the new law.

Happy Father's Day

To all my readers, friends and family that are father's or care for children I wish you a happy father's day.

Three Articles For You To Read

The Guardian - Faking 'wokeness': how advertising targets millennial liberals for profit.

Breitbart - Jerry Brown Plays President; Signs Climate Deal with China.  When a Governor or Mayor signs a international agreement, who gets to vote on it?

Wired - Humans Can’t Expect AI to Just Fight Fake News for Them.  People are seriously using artificial intelligence to determine what you can and cannot say in public. Hmmm, just like the question of whether or not NBC has the right to post an interview with someone the coasts hate, Alex Jones, except it lets anyone decide who is offensive to the civic body. Whoever controls your speech is your master, not your equal.

Alex Jones and Megyn Kelly

I have known about Alex Jones for about ten years. I became aware of him because of a man named William Cooper. Mr. Cooper did a radio series on Mystery Babylon which basically gave the history and beliefs of occult groups throughout history. It was a good series and I have an interest in secret societies. Now, Mr. Cooper and I would not agree on a whole lot of things; but, his series is well worth listening to. Mr. Cooper also claimed that Mr. Jones was an alarmist and a liar.

YouTube - Bill Cooper Says Alex Jones Is a NWO Shill.

Mr. Cooper was bigger than Jones at the time; but, Mr. Cooper was killed by police a month or two after 9-11. After Cooper died Jones continued to get bigger and is now one of the largest voices on the "alt right". Cooper and Jones had roughly the same audience, a sort of Libertarian, super-Patriot, distrustful of the government approach.

I prefer not to post videos by Jones, I posted the one with Brad Sherman because my post was about Mr. Sherman and I wondered why he had gone on Mr. Jones show as politically they have nothing in common. I think I know the answer and the timing had a lot to do with it.

Back to Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones started getting a lot of discussion in the mainstream corporate media during and since the election. Then during a custody battle with his wife the mainstream media made it an issue and lied about what had transpired in court. It was obvious what the corporate media was doing, they were setting Jones up for constant attacks. They wanted people to stop listening to him and only listen to the corporate mainstream media, the same reason they went after internet comedian and gamer PewDePie (who by the way has vastly more followers than Jones or anyone on television.

Well, apparently weeks ago Megyn Kelly contacted Jones and wanted him for an interview for her new show. He agreed to go on and taped the interview himself. Megyn Kelly is supposed to air the interview this Sunday. She posted a preview of the upcoming interview.

Now, the preview made it absolutely clear that she went after him over things he said about Sandy Hook and she should have. As a consequence of NBC posting the preview Kelly was criticized for interviewing him at all.

There were plenty of other people in the media who said the interview should not be on air. In addition, advertisers pulled their ads from the show. Even Mr. Jones told her not to air it because it would be unfairly edited.

Now Jones is stating that he will air the complete interview unedited. By the way, Jones has been interviewed before my mainstream media, he was even interviewed by Piers Morgan and nobody complained about it. So why all the controversy now? Nobody complained when Brad Sherman went on his show after the TARP bailout. He was even on Jessie Ventura's show multiple times.

The media is pushing Jones as the anti-government conspiracy guy. Why? The media says he is followed by millions of people; but, in fact he has 2 million subscribers to his channel and many people will only watch others on his channel. What was the genesis of all of this? The White House gave a press pass to someone working for Jones' network and the media did not like that or the fact that others outside the mainstream media were allowed into the White House press briefings.

Congressman Brad Sherman Should Be Removed From Office

Sometimes I regret that I deleted the first two versions of this blog. Not long after the stock market crash I wrote a couple of posts about Congressman Brad Sherman of California. I actually live in his district; but, did not at the time of the crash. I did write about him since starting this blog anew "Brad Sherman in the News". I wrote that in July of 2010. It was a follow-up with little detail.

I found out about Mr. Sherman during the voting on the TARP bailout of the banks. Here is a clip of what he said at the time.

He then went on the Alex Jones Show to talk about his statement in congress. When the TARP bill came out he was quoted as saying that people had told certain congressmen that if they did not pass the TARP bill that Martial Law would be instituted.

And how did Mr. Sherman vote? GovTrack - H.R. 384 (111th): TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009.  He voted to approve the bill. On his website it only states, "According to USA Today and The Washington Post, Congressman Sherman led the effort to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used for unlimited bailouts to Wall Street giants." Which sort of implies that he voted against it when in fact he voted for it; but, lets look a little deeper at Mr. Sherman.

Here is a link to his official Brad Sherman Resume.  He graduated in Law Magna Cum Laude from Harvard and even taught at the Harvard Law International Tax Program. He is a smart man and in addition to being a lawyer and worked at one of the big four CPA firms. He has even been on the Financial Services Committee since 1997.

So here we have Mr. Sherman and legal and financial expert and how did he vote when it came to repealing Glass Steagall? GovTrack - S. 900 (106th): Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. He voted to repeal Glass Steagall which resulted in the economic bubble and crash because it allowed banks to gamble with your money, with your pension money and the economy as a whole. This financial and legal expert was partly responsible for the crash.

The truth is that Mr. Sherman is either incompetent or worse. Why would someone who understood finance not understand what would happen if Glass Steagall were elimina when anyone knowing financial history knew that getting rid of it was a bad idea for the majority of us and would only benefit the banks. After eliminating Glass Steagall, Mr. Sherman was still on the Financial Services Committee and did not raise alarms when the economy saw a inverted yield curve, the number one indicator that a crash is coming.

Investopia - The Impact of an Inverted Yield Curve.

Now Mr. Sherman has announced that he is going to file articles of impeachment against President Trump. Fox - Reps. Green and Sherman announce plan to file articles of impeachment. This is ludicrous. One person I respect in congress is Dennis Kucinich. He is to the left of the Democratic party and is a true progressive and what did he have to say? Kucinich said, “It is destructive to America to proceed with an impeachment at this stage of the presidency” Kucinich, a Fox News contributor, said last month. “This is not the first thing you reach for, because when the first big move a party makes is towards impeachment, it’s very difficult for the American people to conclude that it is anything but a partisan issue.”

To be fair, I believe Sherman is returning a favor to congressman Al Green. Mr. Green called for it first and Sherman is the only congressman joining him on this current push. Hmmmm. Oh yeah they serve on the Financial Services committee together. Below is a video of Mr. Sherman discussing his calling for impeachment.

I want to review what Mr. Sherman said at this press conference. At 9:05 into the video, Mr. Sherman begins by saying that this is like Watergate and that the files that were stolen were electronic ones. He then states that the theft of files was done by Russian citizens; but, the truth is we have no evidence of that. The truth is that the FBI has not been allowed to examine the DNC server. The only people to see the server were from a private contractor to the DNC. Oddly enough Mr. Sherman does not insist that the DNC server be given to the FBI so that it can be examined by them. Also, we should remember that WikiLeaks has said the information was provided to them and was not hacked. Kim Dotcom has stated that he was involved in it and that Seth Rich was the leaker.

Not being able to prove that the DNC was hacked or by whom, Mr. Sherman says the Presidents crime is covering up the theft. If you cannot prove a crime you cannot prove a cover-up. You cannot be guilty of covering up something that didn't happen. Mr. Sherman goes on to say that they only need "probable cause" to impeach. Probable cause can be defined as it is more likely than not that someone is guilty of specific actions constituting a crime. NOT UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMORS. No prosecutor would propose what Mr. Sherman and Green meets the ground for taking someone to court.

Mr. Sherman likes to play it fast and loose with the law and the truth. He states that judges have been impeached for being drunk on the bench and that it is not a crime. Should we have impeached President Obama for drinking beer? Trump doesn't drink. A drunk judge cannot do his job, there is no similarity between the two. Judges can get impeached for failure to be able to do their jobs and that includes senility and Mr. Sherman knows that and was intentionally being misleading. Mr. Sherman then goes on to say that based upon rumors in the New York Times he believes Trump's meeting with Mr. Comey may have impeachable. There is a big problem with this as the Times article was wrong and under oath Mr. Comey explicity stated that he was never told to stop an investigation and that he had assured Mr. Trump on three occasions that he was not investigating him.

The truth of the matter is, and I reported on it at the time, that for over a year people have been discussing impeaching Trump if he were to be elected. Whether you like Trump or hate him there is a bigger issue at stake and that is democracy and the right of the people to choose their President as laid out in the constitution. Mr. Sherman is seeking to pervert the law to achieve a political goal and he knows it.

There is a guy named Alan Dershowitz, he is a very famous law school professor, he teaches at Harvard and agrees that there is no case for going after Trump at the moment. According to him, it doesn't matter why Trump fired Comey, he had a constitutional right to and Dershowitz is not a Trump supporter. ANYONE, who is against Democracy is your enemy and Brad Sherman is against Democracy and your right to pick your representatives. That's a problem. We should never allow someone to represent us in congress that does not believe we have the right to pick our representatives. Mr. Sherman is more than welcome to post a comment and I will publish it as long as there is no profanity or claims that a specific person broke a law without proof, the same way I deal with everyone else on this blog including how I deal with accusations in Pastor Carol Daniels murder. I do not do rumors as fact.

UPDATE:

I woke up this morning and Mr. Sherman had submitted his article of impeachment for consideration. I am linking to a copy of the actual submittal for your reference.

Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Specifically the article claims that Trump requested that Comey stop investigating Russian involvement in our election. The problem is that it never happened according to Comey and even if it had, it would not be a crime. The truth is that the President gets to tell the FBI Director what to do.

I need to be clear. I don't need to like Trump or his policies to believe in our right to pick our President.

New Post Coming About Brad Sherman

I was writing this post about Congressman Brad Sherman and really getting into his past, which I have written about before. He is one of the people responsible for the economic crash and is now asking for Trump to be impeached. I have been following this little weasel for years and wrote about him multiple times years ago. He hasn't changed, he is still a corporate shill.

So, I was writing about him and got distracted, had to talk to someone. I am like 90% finished with what I was going to post about him and am too tired to finish it tonight. I will finish it tomorrow and post it. This guy deserves to be removed from office. Not because of the impeachment garbage; but, because he is such a shill.

Politics is a business and you sell yourself to the interests that you like or that pay you the most. There is a balance between those benefits; but, you still up selling your influence, that is politics as an industry. Mr. Sherman sold out us all to benefit the interest of a few. Mr. Sherman is a Judas sheep. If I were to meet him I would ask him about the Logan Act and his association with him basically lobbying for another country while in office.

Now my longtime readers know, the Pimpernel doesn't pick fights or sling accusations he cannot back up. My readers know I never called for Obama's impeachment; but, I did say that Bush was a traitor because of the Patriot Act. I believe in the right of the people to pick their representatives. Mr. Sherman does not and that makes him as bad as Bush. Left or right does not matter, corporate shills are corporate shills.

I need another day to finish the post because he has proven himself bad enough to be worthy of my full attention.

Smart Cities and Automated Labor.

Curbed Los Angeles - City Council votes to dedicate $27M to Vision Zero, its plan to end traffic deaths.  Vision Zero, ever hear of it? Nope, you probably have not. It is a multinational plan, not a Los Angeles plan, not a state plan and not a national plan. It's avowed purpose is to make streets safer; but, it's real intent is to make the streets friendly to self-driving vehicles and keep personal vehicles out of the major cities. They don't tell you that. Here is a couple of lines from the article.

"Buscaino said he wants to prepare LA for driverless cars with a “smart streets” strategy, which could employ sensors, kiosks, and other tech designed for automated vehicles.

(It should be noted that if the streets were truly smart, they would also be dramatically reduced in size, as autonomous vehicles will not need as much on-street parking and the ability to share them would mean far fewer cars on the road.)" Yep, your tax money at work to stop you from using the roads."

Smart Cities Dive - Pump the brakes: Cities aim to eliminate traffic fatalities with Vision Zero goals. Some general information about which cities are instituting Vision Zero.

Los Angeles Daily News - Botts’ Dots, after a half-century, will disappear from freeways, highways. You know the little bumps that are used to separate lanes and remind you that you are crossing into another lane, they are going to get rid of them and thereby make it safer for self-driving cars and more dangerous for human controlled cars. Do you see the pattern to all of this yet?

FOX - Stan the robotic parking valet gets to work at Paris airport.

Yahoo - AFP - First robotic cop joins Dubai police.  Robotic cops do what they are told. Do you think repressive governments will use them to control people? Just think how many people Stalin, Hitler and Mau could have killed with no regrets and no push back from the police or soldiers.

MSN - Marketwatch - When Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg sound the same dire warning about jobs, it’s time to listen.  They ask a simple question, how will people find a sense of purpose when their labor is no longer needed. As the article points out, the issue of a laborless future is being looked at today by CEOs. For me the problem is that the majority people can't see it coming or be involved in the discussion until they do.

Reuters - Waymo working on self-driving trucks.  Waymo is part of Google.

The Kansas City Star - About half of all U.S. retail jobs could vanish due to computerization, analysis finds. The real issue of the future will not be a minimum wage, it will be any wage.

Daily Mail - Artificial intelligence will outperform humans in all tasks in just 45 years and could take over EVERY job in the next century, experts claim.  This is what is driving all of the changes you are seeing and you don't know it.

Geek.com - Elon Musk: Automation Will Force Universal Basic Income. Must is one of the good guys; but, "conservatives" hate his idea. The money won't come from your taxes because you won't have a job.

The big question remains. What do we do as a society when we no longer need people's labor. It is a moral question and a structural one and if you don't think about it, you will not have a say in it.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/news/business/workplace/article153864894.html#storylink=cpy

London Bridge Attack and the Globalist Perspective

Lots of people are wondering why the governments of Europe refuse to address the issue of how Muslim immigration from the poorest Arab countries of the least educated people from those countries is effecting their nations. Your average conservative will say it is because they are letting radicals into their country and that is true to a degree; but, most of the people who committed terror attacks in England were second generation and were radicalized in the United Kingdom. Liberals will tell you we just have to be more tolerant of their cultures, to be multi-cultural rather than adopt English culture as the Indians and Pakistani's have in the past. They mayor of London has said that terror attacks are just the reality of life in modern European cities. On it's face that is insanity; but, he actually meant it because he doesn't believe in borders and he understands that will be one of the consequences.

The assumption I begin with in politics is that things come about because the people in power want them to. Who benefits must always be the question, follow the money that determines what happens. The perspective of all globalists and the European Union is that having many groups in constant conflict has a value beyond bringing in new cuisines. What is the value they find in it economically and socially? Lets start by looking at Theresa May's (the English Prime Minister) response to the murders on the London bridge by Muslim extremists.

Time - Read Prime Minister Theresa May's Full Speech on the London Bridge Attack.

What did she blame the attacks on? Firstly she blamed it on sectarianism (religion, any religion that people believe in). Her solution is constant and growing internal security and surveillance. The second cause she found for the violence was the internet. She said it allowed people to gather and discuss wrong ideas. Her solution is to internationally regulate what you can say online and monitor all your online communications to make sure your not a bad person. She then states that we must attack ISIS in Syria; but, Syria was not involved in ANY of the three attacks that England has experienced in the last three months alone or ever. Her fourth solution is longer detainment for people not found guilty of crimes but suspected of thinking about committing a terrorist act. In fact, there had been discussions and a trial balloon floated at the idea of suspending the English elections.

Daily Mail - Call off the election! Social media users call for vote to be postponed to 'prioritise the safety of the country' but government insists the polls WILL go ahead.

John Oliver of Last Week Tonight posted a clip from his show last night where he talked about the London bridge attack, he laughed and said the English way was to laugh it off and said the real threat was Putin. I saved the clip; but, it is no longer up, I am sure it will pop up somewhere. Yep, found another copy.

These things just don't disappear. He starts by saying that "In no way is Britain under siege", just upset. How many people were killed in the last three irritating events, how many at the Manchester bombing alone? He literally laughs at the idea that some Britain' s might be worried or concerned. He claimed that the Britain's are more upset by people making tea in a microwave than the terror attacks. He then shows a gay man in England whos says that he will keep doing what he does because he won't let the terrorists win. Fair enough; but, they didn't ask this gay man if he felt threatened by the extreme Muslims who attack gays. He ends by saying that the biggest threat to the United States is Putin and Trump and that Putin had said that some Russians could have been involved in hacking the DNC; but, that is not quite what he said, just how Oliver summarized it. 

After 9-11 happened Jon Stewart and others gave heart felt sorrow and expressions of love for their city, Oliver didn't do that, he laughed about what happened in London, watch the video, he made fun of it and then attacked Trump and Putin. This man has sold his soul and wants to sell you on the establishment agenda while appearing to be anti-establishment. He also thought Britain leaving the EU was the worst thing that has ever happened, yet he left Britain and the EU. Lets not forget that he works for one of the six multinational companies that own 90% of all the media in the United States.

Here is a few questions for you. If we are facing overpopulation then why increase the number of people in Europe by immigration? If we have a problem with greenhouse gasses in the west than why increase the number of people through immigration and thereby increase the greenhouse gas emissions from those same countries? If we cannot assimilate people without terror attacks than why bring in more people who don't agree with western beliefs and not require them to assimilate? What is the benefit? 

I want to focus on the media for a second. I am going to post a video by a guy I find amusing but frequently think oversimplifies things.

I will not post it; but, Alex Jones has an even longer copy of the tape of the staging of this event. Specifically CNN was involved in arranging a show of support from what we are told Muslims for London and against terrorists. They also made it appear to be spontaneous, which it wasn't.

The Muslims did not crash the world economy, neither did the gays, the jews, xenophobes, Nazi's or Putin or Trump or Melania or Ivanka or the illegal aliens. Nope, it was the western banks that crashed the economy and rigged the markets afterwards. It was after the worldwide markets crashed that we attacked Libya, Syria and everyone else in the middle east. A distraction. By sending them to the west we have brought in a new boogie man so that we will ignore the real boogieman, our wealthy and our leaders.

"Last Man Standing", Writing for Profit and God. Thats an Interesting Combo Isn't It?

I am still retired. I am not even going to end up getting paid for the correspondence I just wrote. As a result of the position I took in the document I ensured I would not get paid. I had agreed to only get paid if the outcome was slightly different; but, I wrote what needed to happen even though it meant I would not get paid. I could have written it differently; but, I won't help people I don't want to and don't agree with in business and if I do help someone I do what is best for them in my estimation.

When I am asked for my business opinion or assistance I am righteous ass. If you don't take my suggestion I don't give you them. I am not your friendly neighborhood consultant kissing rear-ends for pennies. I wasn't a kiss up when I had a real job. When I had a real full time job they had all the managers get a psych test, an attitude test. My results said stand 3 feet away from if I work for you and just tell me what you want and leave. That was the advice the specialists gave my bosses and it surprised nobody. They scared of me and smart enough to follow it and reaped the benefits. I treated those who worked for me as family because I saw us all in it together and I didn't care if they hated me for it. I don't want to be kids friends, I sought to be their father even if it pissed them off sometimes. My goal was to help them find their way and be themselves, I think I did that or at least the best I could. You are responsible for your employees just as if they were your kids because you have the power. If you discipline, make sure it is in their best interest not just to get out anger.

I got irritated at the people I am helping. I wasn't upset because I will not get paid. To tell you the truth they don't even understand that my agreement means my solution results in my not getting paid. I love my work. LOL. When I take on a job I find the answer to the question I was asked to address, I feel a fiduciary duty (you really need to look up the word fiduciary, it means so much) when I agree to help someone. I got irritated about the people I am helping because they felt entitled to my best effort and forgot I owe them nothing and am doing them a favor and always knew I might not get paid. You should never expect things from others if you are looking to only get from them without ever giving anything back.

"Last Man Standing" is Tim Allen show, he was the guy behind "Home Improvement". I never watched the show until about a week ago. It got cancelled a couple of weeks ago and I didn't really know about it before then. Hey, I didn't know what a Snookie was till it wasn't. I didn't watch much television until I retired. I found out about the show because they cancelled it. Some said it was cancelled because it was too conservative. The network said that even though it was their third highest rated show they were killing their comedy night. I think they lied because it is the funniest show I have ever seen. I have been splitting a gut for the past week as I binge watch it. Maybe he reminds me of me except I am a socialist. Now, I am only on season 4 and am hoping Tim's character does not decide to get a sex change in season 5 or do something else I find out of character.

I really like this show and I want to talk about why. The show is about family and integrity, I like those issues. The show is about a real dad who actually cares for his family and pushes his daughters to be the best they can be while still viewing them as different than boys. I actually like the show more than I liked "Home Improvement". The messages it makes are about love, mercy, generosity, hope and innocence. There are no bad guys in the show, just people working through things and trying to figure out the balancing act that is life.

I told all my employees the same thing, "Do the right for the right reason and you cannot make a mistake that I cannot fix". I wrote a new correspondence today and it is great and will be very effective and I reminded the people I am helping that can't help them if they don't take care of their problems. To fix problems you have to address them when the opportunity arises. Sometimes it doesn't come up; but, when asked for help it has already come up. People ask for my assistance when all other answers have failed and they don't know what to do. That is exactly when they should ask for my assistance, when they are willing to listen and are desperate because I am a pain in the ass and make sure they know they have screwed up.

Sometimes I think God is like that. I think God waits until we really mean it, that we are searching for a solution and have screwed up badly. I think maybe we only hear him when we can see that all of our choices didn't find the right answer. We call him much more earnestly when we are desperate than when we are comfortable. Maybe he is always talking to us but we ignore him until he is our last chance to find a better way.

I should not have been irritated with the people I am helping, maybe I should have appreciated the fact they came to me in the end and trusted that I could and would help when nobody else had the answer. That is the kind of message I saw time and time again on "Last Man Standing". Tim Allen does not need more money, he is doing fine and always will. When he was young he made a lot of mistakes and then asked God what to do. I don't drink beer, I drink wine and only red wine because it keeps my blood cells from coagulating and giving my that all important third heart attack. I don't think I will be coming back from that one. I would be happy to have a beer with Tim Allen and ask him why his show was so spiritual, there are no others like that on the air.

Media Avoidance and Bilderberg

I wrote a motion for a legislator today. It was pretty good and we will see if it achieves it's goal. The person who is making the motion has never met me and probably never will. I was asked to write it by someone else. I was told what everyone was attempting to achieve and just put it into words and provide background as an expert in the area in question. I enjoyed writing it and while I don't write these types of things very often anymore, it was still really easy for me. I don't get writers block and am very fast and strategic in my business writing.

Oddly enough one might expect that my business writing would not be as good as it once was; but, the truth is that this blog keeps me current and my writing limber. It feels good to know I still have it. My readers know that I read everything and I do it everyday. I know my readers don't have the free time to spend all day following the details of every news event so I try to do it for them and then provide links so they can check me and read the source documents if they so choose. That is the responsibility of anyone trying to inform people. I don't use unnamed anonymous sources because you cannot check them yourself.

The Bilderberg Group met today and that barely made the news. I didn't see the New York Times or the Washington Post talk about it. I think the first time the Washington Post wrote about it was in 2012 and the group has been meeting since 1954. For 63 years this group has been meeting with the biggest power players in the world and most people still have not heard about it. The media floods you with news about the Kardashians; but, almost nothing about these meetings.

The number of Democratic and Republican politicians who have attended this over the years is stunning and the number who have discussed it with the country is zero, also stunning. George H. W. Bush was a participant as was Bill Clinton and later Hillary Clinton. Gerald Ford was a participant and all of them did it before they became President and none of them talked about it. Many famous members of the media have attended these meeting; but, they haven't talked about the meetings either. They have time to report on what Trump ate for breakfast but not what the leaders of the world think about where we should all be headed.

Kings and Queens attend Bilderberg along with politicians, members of the media, academics and business leaders. The Bohemian Grove is a collection of the same types in a social setting. Bilderberg is not a social meeting, it is all business. So what is the avowed purpose of the Bilderberg Group? According to Andrew Kakabadse, ".The theme at Bilderberg is to bolster a consensus around free market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe". If you want to see what they talk about read their agendas, they are posted online and I posted their current agenda yesterday on this blog. Here is my question, if they believe the things they discuss are the most important issues then why don't they let everyone see and hear their discussions?

Bilderberg 2017 and the Logan Act.

Today the Bilderberg Group publicly listed a number of people scheduled to attend this year's meeting. The meeting will be held June 1 to 4, 2017 in Chantilly, Virginia. A list of participants can be found on their site. Bilderberg 2017 Participants. The Finnish Minister of Transport and Communication will be their along with Tiankai Cui, the Chinese ambassador to the United States, Sandro Gozi, the Italian State Secretary for European Affairs, Senator Lindsey Graham, Christine LeGarde (Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund) and assorted other officials from foreign countries. Their agenda is as follows:

1. The Trump Administration: A progress report
2. Trans-Atlantic relations: options and scenarios
3. The Trans-Atlantic defence alliance: bullets, bytes and bucks
4. The direction of the EU
5. Can globalisation be slowed down?
6. Jobs, income and unrealised expectations
7. The war on information
8. Why is populism growing?
9. Russia in the international order
10. The Near East
11. Nuclear proliferation
12. China
13. Current events

Remember when it turned out that General Flynn had talked to a Russian ambassador and the media started saying he had violated the Logan Act which forbids unauthorized people from negotiating with foreign governments. Heck, newspapers called for Trump's impeachment for violating it. Well, I wrote that I would bring up the issue again when Bilderberg met next. That is now. Let's play who can we put in jail. John Brennan of the Kissinger Associates, Senator Tom Cotton, Kenneth Griffin of the Citadel Group, David Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group, Eric Schmidt of the Alphabet Inc formerly called Google, and a variety of other Americans going there to discuss foreign affairs with foreign diplomats in private.

Will MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times or the Washington Post be reporting on the possibility that international affairs will be discussed in violation of the Logan Act? Nope, they won't even barely report on the meeting. Flynn was the incoming Secretary of Defense and he spoke to the Russian ambassador and they called for his head. Why is Eric Schmidt allowed to meet in private with the Ambassador from China, he has never been elected to office, does he have President Trump's authorization? If not, he is violating the Logan Act.

ALL the people who called for Flynn's prosecution under the Logan Act will say nothing about it now. Why? Because they are hypocrites? No, because they are flat out liars and know the Logan Act probably would not stand up in court today, just like it hasn't been used in about 200 years. That is the essence of this whole Russia Trump media game. Come back in five days and we will go over all those who call for prosecuting the American attendees at Bilderberg. You won't find anyone in corporate media doing it, not even Keith Olberman.

Now lets discuss the agenda for this year's Bilderberg meeting. Item one is a discussion of Trump and his administration. Yes, a group of globalists are discussing what they think of a nationalist. I bet they don't like him. They will also be discussing whether or not globalization can be "slowed down" and why populism is growing (as opposed to elitism). You see, your betters don't like it when you don't vote the way they want you to, they don't like the idea of democracy. The most telling thing they will discuss is, "Jobs, income and unrealized expectation". Short answer is they are discussing that there will be fewer and fewer jobs, the concept of universal welfare and how people will be pissed when they have no opportunity to get ahead (unrealized expectations). They will be discussing the things I have been writing about for eight years that are not discussed in the mass corporate media. They will be discussing the future or all of us and you will not know what is specifically said because nobody takes notes or repeats what was discussed there.