As IF Times

Source: Trump’s old Ferrari sells at auction for record $270,000 | WTKR.com

The underlying premise of this site has always been to point out the laughable presentation of news by the popular media.  Nowhere is biased and skewed reportage more rampant than in the political sphere.   Objective observers will note the great swing of the pendulum that took effect starting in November of last year.

From years of effusive lauding of the past President’s policies, starting with an awarding of a Nobel Peace prize just as he assumed office, but before having actually done anything, to the ongoing re-write of history as it pertains to race relations, the characterization of ‘accomplishments’ were laugh out loud funny, if they weren’t so conspicuously untrue.

The difference in characterization of the new President is to be expected given the natural lefty bias of the majority of media.  We recall the regular sniffy portrayal of George Bush as a primate and mental midget.  A whole new level of petulance and contempt is exposed as the media covers the new Trump presidency. In addition to the usual banal rhetoric about conservatives in general, churlish and petty attacks are offered daily as a way of de-legitimizing his tenure.  It’s as if there were prizes awarded to the outlet that can come up with the most puerile story.

The headline offered in the linked article seems fairly matter of fact, a simple story detailing the sale of an old Trump possession.  Obviously these folks didn’t get the message that there had to be a spin to every story concerning Trump.  Sure enough, another news outlet had this to say in reporting the car sale,

“Donald Trump’s Ferrari disappoints at Florida Auction”

So, despite the fact that the Ferrari sold at the highest price ever for such a vehicle, the reportage from this outlet was that the sale was ‘disappointing’ because it didn’t meet an original sale expectation.  It’s like saying that the New England Patriots won the Super Bowl but by less than the Vegas points spread and therefore was disappointing.  We’re awaiting a story about how Trump’s unfinished lunch sandwich is a slap in the face to hungry people everywhere.  We can’t wait until an effective replacement for the collapsing health care scheme ordered by the Nobel guy, finally gets implemented.  The criticism will be that it should have been done on January 21…on the year before he took office.  Don’t be surprised if the plan is considered a failure if it doesn’t address insomnia, post partum depression and male pattern baldness.

Source: How the Internet Threatens Democracy – The New York Times

This New York Times article bemoans the universal access to the internet and purports to warn of impending threats to democracy because of such access.  Again, it’s comical that left leaning factions are constantly warning of some existential danger to mankind.  If it’s not famine, it’s disease; if it’s not rising water levels, it’s too much sun; if it’s not white bread, it’s unsaturated fats.

So this guy now thinks that too much information, once lauded as a good thing, is now a danger to democracy. The last paragraph of this whiny article reads:

“…Our politics are vulnerable to nefarious influences — whether of the Kremlin variety or the Breitbart variety — not because our information landscape is open and fluid, but because voters’ perceptions have become untethered from reality. For reasons that are both complex and debatable, very many voters have stopped seeing government as a tool for the production of the common good, and have instead turned to politicians (and others) who at least make them feel good. Thus, the news we consume has become as much about emotion and identity as about facts. That’s where the vulnerability comes in, and its roots are in our politics — not in the internet...”

Oddly, I happen to agree with this premise. But while he laments in thinly veiled terms the gullibility of a public that’s been influenced by ‘nefarious’ sources, if we replace the words Kremlin and Breitbart with NY Times and CNN, the statement is equally valid.  Except that the influence of the Kremlin and Breitbart are just straws to be grasped at, whereas the political bias of the NY Times, CNN and for that matter, the Washington Post, have been on full partisan display for decades.  A recent Washington Times study indicated that fully 88 percent of all news stories on Trump during his first month in office, have been hostile.

For at least the past 8 years, his comment that “voters’ perceptions have become untethered from reality” has been the political norm.  With the support of the media sources named, the entire narrative of what was correct thinking was pushed in a direction that had to come crashing against reality and observable common sense.  In this previous 8 year period, the message was so effectively spun that voters handed their proxies to representatives that couldn’t possibly have achieved public office if there was the most basic IQ test requirement.  As an example, an entire congressional district was represented by someone who thought too many marines on an island would tip it over.

The narratives concerning most everything including civil rights, entitlements, foreign  and domestic policy and most importantly, health care and public finance were championed by people with increasingly obvious credibility issues. What the author bemoans is that the population were able to check reality with alternate information sources that were at odds with what they were being told by their governors and established media.

So now, to the chagrin of the media cabal that held a monopoly over the narrative for 8 years, the momentum has swung the other way.  Suddenly voices that were marginalized have now managed to manifest themselves into a political force to push back. The blame or credit does not lie with the Breitbarts or the Limbaughs of the world.  It lies with the establishment media that tried to push their distorted worldviews to an increasingly skeptical audience.  Again, I happen to agree with the sentiment in the paragraph above: “many voters have stopped seeing government as a tool for the production of the common good“.   That was for the last 8 years…and that’s why Trump is now President.