20 Ways to Destroy a Person

unless-youve-made-no-mistakes-in-life
It is rare nowadays in American politics to hear the pros & cons of current issues discussed in a respectful way. Instead, the focus is on making voters hate the opponent. They must be portrayed as evil, racist, sexist, homophobic, greedy, controlled by special interests, unpatriotic, or whatever makes it easiest to get elected. The weapon of choice is CHARACTER ASSASSINATION. Both major parties engage in it, usually with the help of rich donors and front groups that pose as media watchdogs, fact checkers, think tanks, charities, public relations firms, and other innocent sounding names. They use the billions of political donations to comb through every shred of your past for any perceived mistake. Like-minded allies in the media and on the web echo stories thousands of times. It’s all used in coordinated campaigns to create an image or caricature of a person.

The list below shows 20 different ways the media and political enemies can destroy a person. Politicians and celebrities create several times the information since they’ve been in the public eye. Who among us could survive a coordinated character assassination if enemies could cherry pick real or distorted pieces of information from all the following sources?

    1. Facebook posts, likes, and shares
    2. Twitter tweets, likes, and re-tweets
    3. LinkedIn, Snapchat, Instagram, Pinterest, MySpace and other social media
    4. Emails
    5. Texts
    6. Letters and memos
    7. Speeches
    8. Public debates and interviews
    9. Audio recordings (authorized and unauthorized)
    10. Video recordings (authorized and unauthorized)
    11. Pictures (authorized and unauthorized)
    12. School reports, term papers, thesēs, and other assignments
    13. Artwork
    14. Business associations (past customers, suppliers, investors, employees, etc.)
    15. Tax returns and financial statements
    16. Political donor lists
    17. Political voting records
    18. Fake internet stories, memes, and reports based on “anonymous sources”
    19. Interviews with relatives, ex’s, co-workers, and other past acquaintances
    20. Google and Bing search history

Think back to your own history. Are all these sources of information squeaky clean? Have you ever spoken a word, even while drunk or joking, that could be interpreted as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.? Have you ever said or done anything you completely regret when you were younger? What makes the character assassination especially bad is that information can be taken out of context or be completely made up, and once it’s echoed enough on the web and cable news, it becomes “fact” in the minds of many Americans. When truth and fake news are intermingled, you don’t know what to believe. If you favor one candidate over the other, you believe what you want to believe and ignore what you don’t want to believe. You seek out media sources that confirm your existing biases.

The political & media attacks not only create division and hate, they prevent potentially great candidates from even running from office. We Americans need to start rejecting the character attacks and focusing on the pros & cons of real issues. Realize politicians are often completely different from the way they’re portrayed. And it’s time to turn off and ignore the media sources that perpetuate the character assassination.


character-assassination-quote-charles-krauthammer
when-someone-keeps-chipping-away-at-you-all-you-need-is-one-wrong-chip-image-is-gone
news-now-time-to-go-over-carefully-selected-stores-to-manipulate-emotions-and-thinking
left-no-longer-makes-arguments-policies-effectiveness-only-argument-is-character-assassination-ben-shapiro


Other Links That May Interest You

11 Ways the Media Manipulates the Truth
Mainstream Media Meme Gallery
Media Research Center


Written by: Joe Messerli
Last Modified: 8/28/2018

10 Reasons Why Opinion Polls Can’t Be Trusted

cnn-latest-presidential-poll-hillary-97-percent-trump-3
It seems like every day we see some new opinion poll in the media. Rather than be used to support some other story, the poll results have become news themselves. But as we saw in the 2016 election of Donald Trump, they often are wildly inaccurate. In the 1984 presidential election, various polls showed Ronald Reagan trailing Walter Mondale by over 10 points. However, Reagan ended up winning 49 states in the election. Over time some polling organizations have improved the science and accuracy of their methods, but unfortunately even results from reputable polls are usually manipulated by the mainstream media. Let’s examine ten reasons why polls cited by the media can’t be trusted.

  1. Polls can use samples that are too small or don’t accurately represent the population; for example, over sampling democrats. The American population is pretty evenly divided, with about the same percentages self identifying as republican or democrat. So when the poll sample has 10 percent more democrats than republicans, the results are likely to be distorted by about the same percent.
  2. Survey questions can ask leading questions framed in a way to get the answer desired. For example, the survey questions “Do you believe children of illegal immigrants should be separated from their parents at the border?” inevitably leads to an overwhelming ‘Yes’ answer. However, if you ask, “Should children by separated and genetic tested at the border to stop possible child traffickers?”, you’re going to get a far different result.
  3. Large segments of the population may be left out by certain polling methods; for example, those who don’t use the web often or who don’t answer unknown numbers on calls. Large portions of the population, especially older adults, simply don’t use the internet very often. Also, with the standardization of caller ID, it’s easy to ignore calls from polling organizations.
  4. Poll results can be recorded in a dishonest or sloppy way. There will always be a human component to any poll, which means mistakes can be made. Plus, questioners have their own biases and may intentionally falsify answers if they desire poll results to swing a certain way. For example, if a questioner believes a border wall should not be built but poll responses are at 55 percent in favor of the wall, what’s to stop the questioner from falsifying enough responses to swing the result to the other side. Poll results usually factor into decisions by politicians, so they may use this to justify their deceit.
  5. Polls reflect only a snapshot in time that may be distorted by a recent event, such as a mass shooting or terrorist attack. Emotions can heavily distort results. If 30 kids are killed in a school shooting, gun control will receive more favorable results. Immediately after a terrorist attack, polling for increase defense spending usually is favorable. As time goes by, more information and discussion usually overtakes some of the immediate emotion, leading to more rational decisions and accurate poll results.
  6. Political correctness and militancy of prominent liberals often lead to answers that don’t reflect the respondent’s true feelings. Most people naturally avoid conflict. And when you see Maxine Waters, Antifa, and scores of other nutcases calling for violence and harassment of Trump supporters, some feel it’s easier just to give the safe, non-controversial answer. Plus, lives and careers are often destroyed if someone is perceived as racist, sexist, homophobic, or whatever. So many respondents will stick to the politically correct script rather than reveal how they truly feel.
  7. Polls can leave out possible answers, forcing respondents to pick from remaining answers that don’t include what they really believe. Are you a republican or democrat? That poll question leaves out all those who would identify as independent, libertarian, etc.; how do you rate Trump’s performance as president–Ok, Bad, Very Bad, Disastrous. That question leaves out all those who would answer Very Good or Outstanding. Do you support war with Iran, yes or no? Maybe your answer is ‘no’ unless they directly attack us or fund terrorist groups that do so. You get the idea.
  8. Poll results can be presented in a misleading way; for example, leaving out poll disclaimers or the impact of “undecided” & “no opinion” answers. The media loves to cherry pick parts of all poll and leave out key information. For example, say the poll asks, “Do you support nominee Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court?” The results may be 38 percent ‘yes’, 28 percent ‘no’, and 34 percent ‘no opinion/don’t know him’. Dishonest media people may report the poll showing only 38 percent support for Kavanaugh, leading people to believe 62 percent of the country is against him.
  9. The poll may not reflect the portion of the population that really matters; for example, a national poll doesn’t matter for a local election; a poll of “all adults” or “registered voters” don’t matter as much as “likely voters”. Nancy Pelosi approval ratings are usually in the teens nationally, but she easily wins re-election every time in her ultra far-left district. For a presidential election, half the adult population doesn’t vote or pay attention to current events, so citing polls of “all adults” nowhere near reflects what will happen on election day. “Registered voters” are a slightly better measure, but even a significant portion of registered voters don’t make it in on election day because they don’t follow current events, don’t like either candidate, don’t believe their vote matters, or don’t have the time to get there. “Likely voters” use experience and scientific methods to give the best approximation. You will almost never see a mainstream media outlet cite polls of likely voters since it gives the results they least like to see.  Many media sources were citing polls showing Hillary with 10-15 point leads the day before the election specifically for this reason.
  10. The media cherry picks which polls to present as “news” and which ones to leave out, choosing those that meet their story narrative objective. The Investors Business Daily presidential polls were by far the most accurate in 2008 and 2012 elections, so when their polls showed Trump slightly favored to win the 2016 race, you would think the media might include it in their stories, but it never happened. Even right-leaning Fox News threw out the IBD poll as an outlier in their predictive analysis. It simply didn’t fit what they wanted to present. The same kind of cherry picking can be seen on almost every political issue–immigration, gun control, Obamacare, and so on. If the media finds a poll that seems to back the narrative they want to push, they will use it. If it doesn’t, it will be ignored or attacked as non-credible. The media wants conservatives to be discouraged from even voting. They want to convince them they’re in the minority and that is something is wrong with them because the majority doesn’t agree with them.

In summary, take every poll you see in the news with a grain of salt. Polls have joined the fake & distorted mainstream media news propaganda effort used to brainwash the population to a certain way of thinking. Don’t fall for it. Follow your common sense and always think for yourself. Chances are that far more people agree with you than you realize.


mathematical-problem-poll
1979-reagan-carter-gallup-poll-only-poll-that-matters-is-election


Other Links That May Interest You

11 Ways the Media Manipulates the Truth
Mainstream Media Meme Gallery
Media Research Center


Written by: Joe Messerli
Last Modified: 8/18/2018

11 Reasons Climate Change is Propaganda Not Science


By: Joe Messerli

With the exception of possibly abortion, no political issue is as sacred to hard-core liberals than “climate change”, or what it used to be called “global warming”. Climate change has become a religion of democrats, liberals, and socialists around the world. It is more critical to them than the economy, immigration, national security, the national debt, and world hunger. I’m not a scientist and don’t plan to debate the seriousness or feasibility of global warming. But as these 11 reasons show, science has been completely removed from the issue, and propaganda brainwashing has taken over. The propaganda is likely a continuation of anti-capitalist efforts initiated by Russia, China, and other communist groups around the world. Research the Soviet/Russian “Active Measures” program to learn more about the birth of this propaganda.

  1. The terminology keeps changing. Back in the ’70s, “global cooling” was the craze of the media, with predictions of another Ice Age. In the ’80s and ’90s, the craze turned to “global warming”. Weather patterns change year-to-year, so the “we’re all gonna die” hysterics were mocked when record cold temps would hit immediately after dire warming predictions. About a decade ago, the term “climate change” started being used instead. Now, no matter what the weather or global temps, they can be “right” on their predictions.  Too much rain–climate change.  Drought conditions–climate change.  Hurricanes–climate change.  Record cold–climate change. Too much snow–climate change.
  2. Scientists who conduct research that reach alternative conclusions are always attacked, with the credibility and sometimes their careers completely ruined. Scientists and university researchers know their jobs are in serious jeopardy if they even question anything about climate change. Even if they agree with the warming theory but express doubt on the urgency, they may be finished. Here are seven recent examples.
  3. Proposed solutions are always anti-capitalistic. Watch politicians when they propose a “solution” to climate change.  They will always involve more government control and curbs on capitalism.  It is further evidence of the propaganda effort of America’s enemies. Obama’s Cap and Trade scheme was a recent example.
  4. Al Gore, Hollywood movie makers, and other liberals are getting insanely rich promoting climate change disaster scenarios. Al Gore is the most famous propagandist of climate change with his Inconvenient Truth “documentaries”. He recently became the first carbon billionaire. Other Hollywood liberals like Leonardo DiCaprio aren’t far behind. Their solutions always involve taxes & regulations on businesses plus recommended curbs on use of fossil fuels by average Americans.
  5. The mainstream media will never cover any research studies that show alternative theories to man-made global warming but will prominently cover research that does. Thousands of scientists and research studies have questioned the seriousness or feasibility of climate change predictions, but good luck finding any mention at CNN, NYT, Washington Post, MSNBC, ABC, or any other mainstream media outlet. On the rare occasion they do mention alternative research, it is always to attack the source, not give any serious discussion of the research. Prove me wrong! Facebook and Twitter have discussed suspending accounts those who question climate change. Google has publicly stated it will lower search rankings for those who deny the “settled science”. Try the search engine DuckDuckGo.com and compare to Google to see how Google is manipulating rankings to favor liberal ideology.
  6. Rich climate change proponents engage in lifestyles that go against everything they preach about controlling the problem. Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio burn more fossil fuels flying their private jets in one month than most average Americans burn in their lifetimes.  Rich liberals whining about the environment have multiple houses, limousines, sports cars, and yachts. Yet they want the peasants to drive a Prius or take the bus. They want businesses to jack up their production costs until they eat up their entire profit margin.
  7. Politicians or celebrities that question climate change are viciously attacked, ridiculed as “anti-science”, and branded with vicious names such as “climate change denier”. Some even propose jailing those who question the research. Psychologists will tell you one of the most effective techniques of brainwashing is peer pressure. If you follow the crowd, you’re praised and included. If you go against what the brainwashers want, you’re ostracized, attacked, ridiculed, and shunned. You see this constantly with prominent politicians and celebrities. An actor or actress who questions climate change hysterics likely won’t work again in Hollywood. Politicians who question the “science” or predictions are ridiculed by the media and comedians. Such politicians are painted as anti-science, anti-intellectual religious nutcases. “Climate change denier” is a recent term which compares skeptics to insane “Holocaust deniers”. It is all part of an effort to make any future skeptics afraid to speak their mind.  Most politicians, including Republicans, have found it easier just to spout out the usual “climate change is real” bullshit so they can move on to issues they really want to discuss.
  8. Terms such as “settled science” are used to discourage any further research, whereas real scientists know no science is ever really “settled”. If you say the majority of world scientists believe man-made climate change is real, it’s an accurate statement. If you say it’s “settled science” or “all scientists agree”, you’ve crossed the line to pure propaganda BS. Thousands of scientists are brave enough to express skepticism. Real scientists know no science is ever fully settled; they invite constant testing. Remember, scientists were once convinced the atom was the smallest component of matter, until further research eventually learned of neutrons, protons, and electrons. Scientists were once convinced the world was flat and humans were the first living creatures. For decades the government pushed the FDA “settled science” of the carb-heavy food pyramid. Like all real science, further research led to more accurate conclusions.
  9. Climate change predictions are about events so far in the future, no one living today will be around to find out if the predictions actually came true. The end-of-world prediction scenarios are usually set for centuries in the future. Some of the most hysterical politicians predict disasters in decades. But it’s all based on guesses backed by very imprecise, questionable science. Al Gore made a prediction about 15 years ago calling for the end of Arctic ice caps. Rush Limbaugh famously put a countdown clock on his website for over a decade.  That countdown ended five years ago. Yet, people still believe Al Gore is a scientist and never question his inaccurate predictions. Of course, we know what happens to people that do that, right?
  10. When for-profit corporations develop global warming solutions that don’t involve government control and socialistic policies, they’re attacked as meaningless. Corporations such as Apple, Google, GE, and others have developed low-cost ways of saving energy and protecting the environment. However, they’re almost always pooh-poohed by Democrats and the mainstream media. Every year new technology solves problems that were thought unsolvable, and climate change, if it’s really as big of a threat as liberals say, will also be solved by new technology. Despite the unsurpassed success of American for-profit innovation, climate change proponents insist on government-ran, anti-capitalistic solutions.
  11. Much of the latest hysteria comes from the highest concentration of communists in America–Hollywood. No one doubts that Hollywood has become a bastion of leftist politics. Much of that can be traced again to Soviet “Active Measures”.  Ronald Reagan wrote extensively about the growing communist influence in Hollywood when he was President of the Screen Actors Guild. Here’s a brief history of Hollywood communism if you’re not familiar. Nowhere do you hear more about climate change hysteria than California, probably the biggest center in the world now of anti-American communist propaganda.

Again, I’m not debating the particular science of climate change. It may indeed be a great problem threatening the future of our planet. However, as the above points show, a critical thinking human being must remain skeptical. Disaster, end-of-world predictions have been going on since the beginning of time, and they’ve always been proven wrong. The more Stalinist techniques that are used to counter alternative voices, the more it looks like “climate change” is nothing but an elaborate hoax. The Petition Project has over 31,000 scientist signatures who don’t agree with the man-made climate change hysteria.


Flashback: George Carlin on Climate Change

Founder of Greenpeace Silenced by Google

Patrick Moore has been a vocal critic of the climate change hysteria and Green New Deal. As part of the continuing propaganda effort, he must be destroyed.

patrick moore tweet erased from greenpeace founders google

Related Stories

GlobalWarmingHoax.com Links
Apple Killing Apps That Question Climate Change Hysteria
Follow the Climate Change Money – Stephen Moore
Wrong Again: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions
Fake Climate Science and Scientists – Paul Driessen
Youtube Illustrates Climate Change Propaganda Techniques – William Balgord
141 Scientists Sign Letter Questioning UN Climate Change Conclusions
Social Media Censorship and Climate Change
Climate Hysterics Skyrocket – Paul Driessen
Partial List of Scientists Who Disagree with Climate Change “Consensus”
Top 10 Most Respected Global Warming Skeptics
Facebook Page – InconvientFacts.xyz
Climate Change & Global Warming Meme Gallery


climate-change-global-warming-cooling-its-called-weather-chalkboard
al-gore-priest-climate-change-non-believers-threaten-my-income
weather-man-couldnt-get-24-hour-forecast-right-wants-you-to-believe-100-year-climate-change-destruction
what media manipulation looks like climate change greta
bill-nye-we-need-to-stop-ridiculous-cow-flatulence
artic-ice-grows-40-percent-climate-science
climate change scam mislead the public get big grant tell the truth lose your job
north-pole-will-be-ice-free-by-summery-2013-al-gore-global-warming
climate-change-will-cause-warmer-colder-winters-sign
earth survived 4.5 billion years but aoc beto kamala warren etc 12 years left unless vote democrat


Written by: Joe Messerli
Last Modified: 10/12/2019