Crossroads, Seem to Come and Go

“Now I have come to the crossroads in my life. I always knew what the right path was. Without exception, I knew. But I never took it. You know why? It was too damn hard.”
– Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade from “Scent of a Woman” as played by Al Pacino

These are indeed tough times for Democrats and my Left leaning acquaintances.  They have been experiencing a losing streak which makes Cleveland Browns’ fans feel good about their team’s prospects.  Initially, Democrats convinced themselves enough Americans would ignore the corruption and dishonesty of the worst Presidential candidate in history, but America was not “with HER”.  Strike One!  Then, they compounded their misfortune by throwing a two year temper tantrum – believing that such action would be appealing.  Strike Two!  Finally, they lose on almost every Supreme Court decision over the final two weeks of the term and Justice Kennedy retires.  Strike Three!   Despite being advised to stop digging their own graves, way too many of them have persisted to demonstrate with the unflattering emotion of children.  I do not have a lot of sympathy for them, but I do have empathy.

Why do I have empathy?  Well, people who did not vote for our current POTUS are not unique in experiencing electoral losses or the consequences that result from those losses.

For example, I was alarmed when the country elected Barack Obama in 2008 as I knew he lacked experience and was not the sweet talking middle of the road Democrat he pretended to be.  I was disheartened even more when, despite the economic evidence, he was re-elected.  I had thought the country might be able to survive 4 years of his policies, but unlikely to be breathing after 8 years.  The hits just kept on coming when Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a strict constructional jurist on the Supreme Court, died unexpectedly in February of 2016.  The noise surrounding the 2016 Presidential election made the odds seem likely that a progressive jurist would be selected by a Democrat President as Scalia’s replacement.  This string of defeats was a nightmare for Conservatives like me as I feared the Court would become an irreversible political arm of the far Left progressives and leave the USA circling the drain.  While all of this fundamental transformation was transpiring from 2008 thru 2016, my friends on the Left were on a roll and expressed little concern for my marginalized political views.  After all, those of us on the Right were supposedly on the wrong side of history – so who cares?  This experience was truly depressing, but I didn’t knit myself a dickhat and organize a nationwide pity parade because that would be – CHILDISH.  To the many of you who bet on the wrong horse, I know how you feel today.  News flash:  Losing sucks!

That being said, I’m not writing to gloat, but send an alert that you have reached critical decision time.

I’ve attempted to talk to Democrat friends to help them understand the electoral dynamics in play, but they appear to be too consumed with hate to think rationally.  If Democrats believe the last two years have been traumatic, just hold your hat.  The Democrat Party is now being openly guided by radical socialists and this has become obvious to more than just Republicans.  Trust me, plenty of Democrats who put country ahead of party will crossover and vote Republican this November and again in 2020.  You don’t think the polling supports that assumption?  Well, maybe having thug mobs attacking anyone who disagrees with the Left might cause people not to answer poll questions honestly.  Remember, the polls on the morning of the election predicted that Hillary had a 98% chance of becoming President.  The polls must have missed something – possibly people not admitting how they planned to actually vote.

Over the past month, while the Left has ratcheted up the rhetoric on illegal immigration, aided by their cable network PR arms, Trump’s approval rating among Hispanics has risen by 10 points.  Given what we know about people fearful of admitting to leaning right, the actual support has probably grown by more than 10 points.  Why?  Because many Hispanics see themselves as hard working Americans who want to play by the rules and live safely – just like other groups of Americans.  They have little interest in being condescended to as some victim identity group.  They also do not want to consider the idea of living once again under the Socialism which has destroyed many countries to the south of our border.

Think about this paradox:

Democrats believe we should simply open our borders to allow in people who are seeking refuge from South and Central American countries due to how dangerous life is in those countries.  Those countries are dangerous because they have been ruled by Socialist policies, yet Democrats believe we should adopt Socialism for the USA?  Huh?  People are fleeing the results of those policies.  The most popular Democrat flavor of the month, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, is advocating the same socialist policies for the US which have magically turned pets into dinner in Venezuela.

Soon, the Democrat Party will only be comprised of old white liberals, activists who make a living out of stirring the pot and college kids who haven’t paid any bills.  Blacks, Asians and Hispanics are migrating to the party which offers economic opportunity.

You are at a crossroads, Democrats.  You better drag your party back towards the center or you just might disappear.  To do so, would require backing off the Nazi talk and the prognostications of apocalypse over every public policy change.  Knowing how much you adhere to these intellectually shallow tactics, the right path will be damn hard.

Common Sense Social Media and Entertainment Control ?

"They brainwashed my great uncle
Brainwashed my cousin Bob
They even got my grandma
When she was working for the mob
Brainwash you while you're sleeping
While in your traffic jam
Brainwash you while you're weeping
While still a baby in your pram
Brainwashed by the military
Brainwashed under duress
Brainwashed by the media
You're brainwashed by the press
Brainwashed by computer
Brainwashed by mobile phones
Brainwashed by the satellite
Brainwashed to the bone"

 - George Harrison

Do you want to try to solve a problem or do you just want to shout past each other?  If one wants to have an honest discussion, I can't shout you down and you can't shout me down.  That's how it works - or doesn't.

Some of the back and forth I have seen over the past week since the Parkland shooting has attempted to address the critical question:

“How to do we work together to prevent future school shootings?”

However, too much of the discussion has resulted in people talking past each other – surprise, surprise! It is a sensitive issue and we have students exercising their free speech on the issue.  I applaud them for showing their collective anger - born out of grief for their fallen classmates and the terror they experienced.  However, that experience does not give license to a one way discussion.  I do not agree with many of their proposed solutions as they seem to focus specifically on the weapon used in the crime.  There are other factors beyond the weapon itself, but I believe the students are unwittingly being exploited by gun control zealots.

In an attempt to try to help those who line up on the side of gun control to better understand defenders of the 2nd Amendment, I will present an analogy.  Hopefully, they can identify the flaws in logic and shine the mirror back on their own positions.  Please note that just because someone has a different view on the issue does not make one "pro-school shootings".

Here goes:

My recommendation to prevent school shootings is to take a simple common sense approach.  I’ve seen friends posting links to brain studies which conclude that the brain does not reach maturity until the age of 25.  This particular study has been used to argue that people should not have access to an AR-15 until, at the minimum, they have reached that age.  Using that as a premise, I recommend the following:

• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to access social media platforms 
• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to watch TV, movies or music videos which contain violent content
• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to play violent video games

In short, no social media or access to violent entertainment media for citizens under the age of 25.

Over time, it has become obvious that young people are preoccupied with social media.  This obsession has created an environment where real physical human social interaction has been reduced and isolation among young citizens has been increased.  This isolation has led to more at-risk teens being ostracized.   The further these teens are banished from real life social circles, the greater the danger to the community.

Social media has also enabled ease of access to dangerous information.  Prior to social media platforms, a young sociopath had to seek out and fit into external groups in order to learn how to plan and plot destruction.  However, that information can be easily accessed today from a smart phone.  We must explore ways to make this information less accessible to young people.  Removing access to social media platforms will be a great step in that direction.

Another very dangerous condition created by social media is the ability of a person with no real accomplishments to exaggerate their self-importance.  A young, isolated outcast can create video content which can then be spread across the globe.  It was near impossible for the average young citizen to distribute mass propaganda prior to the advent of social media.  We must make the hurdle to achieve this notoriety much higher than what is allowed via social media.

Last on this list is the violent content in the entertainment media being pushed through channels which has helped to desensitize the immature brain and has also provided a road map to plotting mayhem and destruction.

Meanwhile, those who have enriched themselves working for social media and entertainment companies have known full well of the damage they have foisted upon the young.  Their blood money has been filling the pockets of Left wing politicians who have looked the other way while generations of our youth have been forever damaged.  Students should be marching and demanding that politicians stop taking contributions from these entities and should most certainly not allow George Clooney, Steven Spielberg and their kind to underwrite their protests.  That is, in the ironies of all ironies, an acceptance of blood money.

In summary, social media and violent entertainment media used by young people contributes to:

• Reduced human interaction and isolation
• Access to dangerous information
• Ability to exaggerate self-importance
• Desensitization
• Template for methods in plotting mayhem

I will call my recommendation:

Common Sense Social Media and Entertainment Control

Critics of my common sense recommendations may say that these proposals violate the free speech rights as defined in the First Amendment, but let’s get real about the First Amendment.  When the Constitution was written and, subsequently, ratified by a bunch of old white slave holders, they were concerned about printing presses and town criers.  There is no way that the founding fathers envisioned telephones, televisions, movies, computers and the ability of citizens to sit in their homes and spread information and propaganda over social media platforms.  Let’s stop pretending that the free speech guaranteed in a document from more than 200 years ago should apply to today’s technology.

I’m also sure that people under the age of 25 will feel that their rights are being denied, but let’s be clear that nobody “needs” access to social media and entertainment media.  Is their “need” worth the deaths of children in our schools?  Go down to the local coffee shop, shopping mall or playground and communicate one on one in real life with your peers.  If one desires to write and distribute commentary out to the community, buy a typewriter and distribute by hand.  If one desires to share photographs, buy a camera and take the negatives to have them developed at the Fotomat.  I don’t believe that photos of vainglorious lunches and desserts are worth another life.

And, yet, criticism of my proposal - funded by the oligarchs from the social media companies and the entertainment industry - will cite studies stating that 99% of the people under age 25 who utilize social media and the entertainment media do not contribute to ostracizing their peers or plotting mayhem.  That might be an interesting metric, but we must ensure that it is not accessible to the other 1%.  An all-out ban will achieve that goal – it is simple common sense.  If it just saves one life, it will be worth it.

Let’s be very clear about my recommendation:

1. This is not political
2. It is time to Do Something
3. Enough is enough!
4. If these measures save just one life, it will be worth it.

So, I hope you support common sense social media and entertainment control.  We must come together and stand behind this recommendation or you will have the blood of children on your hands.

NOW, I actually believe this proposal would help, but it would completely violate the rights of law abiding citizens - which makes it nonsensical.  Let's get rid of the political posturing and begin to work on a solution which uses real common sense.

Common Sense Social Media and Entertainment Control

"They brainwashed my great uncle
Brainwashed my cousin Bob
They even got my grandma
When she was working for the mob
Brainwash you while you're sleeping
While in your traffic jam
Brainwash you while you're weeping
While still a baby in your pram
Brainwashed by the military
Brainwashed under duress
Brainwashed by the media
You're brainwashed by the press
Brainwashed by computer
Brainwashed by mobile phones
Brainwashed by the satellite
Brainwashed to the bone"

 - George Harrison

Do you want to try to solve a problem or do you just want to shout past each other?  If one wants to have an honest discussion, I can't shout you down and you can't shout me down.  That's how it works - or doesn't.

Some of the back and forth I have seen over the past week since the Parkland shooting has attempted to address the critical question: 

“How to do we work together to prevent future school shootings?” 

However, too much of the discussion has resulted in people talking past each other – surprise, surprise! It is a sensitive issue and we have students exercising their free speech on the issue.  I applaud them for showing their collective anger - born out of grief for their fallen classmates and the terror they experienced.  However, that experience does not give license to a one way discussion.  I do not agree with many of their proposed solutions as they seem to focus specifically on the weapon used in the crime.  There are other factors beyond the weapon itself, but I believe the students are unwittingly being exploited by gun control zealots.

In an attempt to try to help those who line up on the side of gun control to better understand defenders of the 2nd Amendment, I will present an analogy.  Hopefully, they can identify the flaws in logic and shine the mirror back on their own positions.  Please note that just because someone has a different view on the issue does not make one "pro-school shootings".

Here goes:

My recommendation to prevent school shootings is to take a simple common sense approach.  I’ve seen friends posting links to brain studies which conclude that the brain does not reach maturity until the age of 25.  This particular study has been used to argue that people should not have access to an AR-15 until, at the minimum, they have reached that age.  Using that as a premise, I recommend the following:

• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to access social media platforms 
• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to watch TV, movies or music videos which contain violent content
• Ban citizens under the age of 25 from being able to play violent video games

In short, no social media or access to violent entertainment media for citizens under the age of 25.

Over time, it has become obvious that young people are preoccupied with social media.  This obsession has created an environment where real physical human social interaction has been reduced and isolation among young citizens has been increased.  This isolation has led to more at-risk teens being ostracized.   The further these teens are banished from real life social circles, the greater the danger to the community.

Social media has also enabled ease of access to dangerous information.  Prior to social media platforms, a young sociopath had to seek out and fit into external groups in order to learn how to plan and plot destruction.  However, that information can be easily accessed today from a smart phone.  We must explore ways to make this information less accessible to young people.  Removing access to social media platforms will be a great step in that direction.

Another very dangerous condition created by social media is the ability of a person with no real accomplishments to exaggerate their self-importance.  A young, isolated outcast can create video content which can then be spread across the globe.  It was near impossible for the average young citizen to distribute mass propaganda prior to the advent of social media.  We must make the hurdle to achieve this notoriety much higher than what is allowed via social media.

Last on this list is the violent content in the entertainment media being pushed through channels which has helped to desensitize the immature brain and has also provided a road map to plotting mayhem and destruction.

Meanwhile, those who have enriched themselves working for social media and entertainment companies have known full well of the damage they have foisted upon the young.  Their blood money has been filling the pockets of Left wing politicians who have looked the other way while generations of our youth have been forever damaged.  Students should be marching and demanding that politicians stop taking contributions from these entities and should most certainly not allow George Clooney, Steven Spielberg and their kind to underwrite their protests.  That is, in the ironies of all ironies, an acceptance of blood money.

In summary, social media and violent entertainment media used by young people contributes to:

• Reduced human interaction and isolation
• Access to dangerous information
• Ability to exaggerate self-importance
• Desensitization
• Template for methods in plotting mayhem

I will call my recommendation:

Common Sense Social Media and Entertainment Control

Critics of my common sense recommendations may say that these proposals violate the free speech rights as defined in the First Amendment, but let’s get real about the First Amendment.  When the Constitution was written and, subsequently, ratified by a bunch of old white slave holders, they were concerned about printing presses and town criers.  There is no way that the founding fathers envisioned telephones, televisions, movies, computers and the ability of citizens to sit in their homes and spread information and propaganda over social media platforms.  Let’s stop pretending that the free speech guaranteed in a document from more than 200 years ago should apply to today’s technology.

I’m also sure that people under the age of 25 will feel that their rights are being denied, but let’s be clear that nobody “needs” access to social media and entertainment media.  Is their “need” worth the deaths of children in our schools?  Go down to the local coffee shop, shopping mall or playground and communicate one on one in real life with your peers.  If one desires to write and distribute commentary out to the community, buy a typewriter and distribute by hand.  If one desires to share photographs, buy a camera and take the negatives to have them developed at the Fotomat.  I don’t believe that photos of vainglorious lunches and desserts are worth another life.

And, yet, criticism of my proposal - funded by the oligarchs from the social media companies and the entertainment industry - will cite studies stating that 99% of the people under age 25 who utilize social media and the entertainment media do not contribute to ostracizing their peers or plotting mayhem.  That might be an interesting metric, but we must ensure that it is not accessible to the other 1%.  An all-out ban will achieve that goal – it is simple common sense.  If it just saves one life, it will be worth it.

Let’s be very clear about my recommendation:

1. This is not political
2. It is time to Do Something
3. Enough is enough!
4. If these measures save just one life, it will be worth it.

So, I hope you support common sense social media and entertainment control.  We must come together and stand behind this recommendation or you will have the blood of children on your hands.

NOW, I actually believe this proposal would help, but it would completely violate the rights of law abiding citizens - which makes it nonsensical.  Let's get rid of the political posturing and begin to work on a solution which uses real common sense. 

The Things I Did Not Know At The Time

When I was a kid and my Dad used to tune in that awful Irish music on the AM radio on Saturday morning rides, I did not know that I would learn to really appreciate this music as an adult.

When the Beatles disbanded in 1970, I did not know that lovable Paul McCartney was actually the most disliked by the other band members and that George Harrison would blossom into the best song writer of the Fab Four.

When Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 due to the Watergate scandal, I did not know he had previously been Vice President under President Dwight Eisenhower from 1953-1961 and a staunch anti-Communist.

As I grew up in the 1970’s and read about Jackie Robinson and Roy Campanella of the Brooklyn/Los Angeles Dodgers, I did not know that the team name was due to their original fans having to “dodge” trolleys on the way to games in Brooklyn, NY.

When Ted Kennedy drove his car off of the Chappaquiddick Bridge in 1969 resulting in the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, I did not know that this was not a mythical extension of the Kennedy curse, but was the result of the actions of a reckless, soulless and unrepentant drunk.

While enjoying the band, the Eagles, in the mid-1970’s, I did not know that members Glen Frey and Don Henley were previously part of Linda Ronstadt’s backing band.

When Bill Cosby was welcomed into 1980’s living rooms as the fun loving and charming Dr. Cliff Huxtable, I did not know he was a serial rapist in real life.

When the Beach Boys reappeared on the music charts in 1988 with the #1 hit single, “Kokomo”, I did not know that the song was co-written by John Phillips of the “Mamas and the Papas” and Scott McKenzie who gained fame with the 1967 hit “San Francisco (Be Sure to Wear Flowers in your Hair)”.

When reading up on one of my favorite actors, Jack Nicholson, I did not know he was raised by his grandmother, but was told she was his mother when his actual mother was who he had been led to believe was his older sister.

When watching the 1990 movie, “Blow”, starring Johnny Depp and then researching the true story, I did not know that the main character, George Jung, grew up a mile away from where I grew up.

When watching Mariska Hargitay of “Law and Order: SVU” fame on TV for years, I did not know that she is the daughter of famous Hollywood actress, Jayne Mansfield (photo above).

When I voted for Meg Whitman (R) for CA Governor instead of Jerry Brown (D) in 2010, I did not know that I would be accused of being anti-women for not voting for Hillary Clinton for President in 2016 by people who had voted for Brown instead of Whitman.

Why do I bring up all of these examples of my innocent ignorance?

We travel through life with the facts – as we know them.  As we continue the journey, we get to become more enlightened if we keep our eyes - and mind - open and read a little more.  It is interesting to learn that some things were not as initially thought and others are provided with some fantastic context.

For people who were born after 1975, they probably are not very aware of all of the political shenanigans of the 1990’s. I hope for those of you who fit this category, you read up a little bit on the Clinton machine.  There are plenty of things that you may not know. There is soon to be a lot of new dirt to hit the airwaves over the coming weeks and months. My hope is that younger people will study and recognize the defensive modus operandi which has been utilized by the Clinton machine for almost 30 years and will be resurrected, yet, again.  Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice.........

The players will include the Clintons, their political flunkies from the DNC, members of the Obama administration, shills in the media and, of course, the “useful idiots” who will share all of their bullshit stories without investigating the veracity of their claims.  We are going to have dueling scandals: a) the payment for and use of the Trump dossier during the election and b) Uranium One.

Here are the steps for which one should be aware.  Watch carefully to determine if you recognize them as they are employed by the Clinton operatives:

1. Denial – initially deny everything (Sgt Shulz: “I know nothing”)
2. Obfuscate – indignantly go on the record denying something which is not relevant to the accusation (Kevin Spacey just failed spectacularly trying to use a version of this one) 
3. Shift – shift back and forth between a standard of what is morally ethical to a standard of what is legal
4. Old News – claim that the offense is old news and we should just “move on” (from where do you think MoveOn.org was spawned?)
5. Repetitive talking points – “opposition research” substituted for “Russian sourced information” will be a big one.  After all, using Russian sourced info to sway an election would be - COLLUSION !!
6. Everybody Does It – they will equate buying yard signs with breaking national security laws
7. Incompetence – this is where they claim ignorance, BUT they are smart about everything else
8. I Don’t Recall – when completely trapped, this is a golden oldie
9. Partisan Witch Hunt – blame the accusers when all else fails

There are more, but these are the main ones employed since the 90’s.

The reason 63 million voters chose not to vote for Hillary was not based upon her gender.  Many voted for a flawed candidate, Donald Trump, because they knew Hillary to be dishonest and corrupt.

The Clinton machine is SO good at what they do that their corruption may not lead to a conviction, but convictions are difficult when the FBI, CIA and DOJ are part of the machine and complicit in destroying evidence.  Nixon was a piker compared to this crew.  Watch as this scandal unfolds and it will become even more amazing that Trump was able to triumph with all of this power aligned against him.

Try to follow the facts and not the smokescreens thrown up on the television.  I highly recommend you watch and read both sides of the partisan divide to try to determine the truth. If you have no problem with the executives of a Russian state run company (Uranium One) donating $145M to the Clinton Foundation when the decision required to transfer 20% of the US uranium supply to that company was sitting on Hillary Clinton’s desk, then you are beyond help – forever lost.  We’ve seen it all before when Bill Clinton’s administration sold missile technology to the Chinese in the 90’s.

Be prepared for the media onslaught as the Clintons, once again, try to escape the charge of selling out the US national defense to pad their own pockets.

Soon, even the Bernie Bros will be chanting: “Lock her up!”

The Fog of Political War

War is the realm of uncertainty; three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty. A sensitive and discriminating judgment is called for; a skilled intelligence to scent out the truth.
— Carl von Clausewitz

I’ve written previously about the bitterness of those who supported the losing candidate from last November’s election.  This bitterness has made it nearly impossible to have an intelligent conversation between the sides.  Newsflash: the people who supported the losers of the last 2 Presidential elections versus candidate and then President Barack Obama were bitter, but they were able to get out of bed and conduct their lives without shunning everyone.  Regardless of which side you are on, few recognize how they are pawns on a chessboard.  The outrage machine gets wound up on one side and then the other.  The result is a food fight which creates a political fog.  People are so bent on believing their side is correct that they do not even understand the effects of their own positions.  If “so and so” supports it, then I am for it or vice versa etc, etc.  

Meanwhile, those with access to government largesse continue to profit while we fight over slop.  The Federal bureaucracy grows and the allocation of capital in the economy becomes less and less efficient which decreases the standard of living and restrains individual liberty.  

However bad the current situation appears, I am starting to see a silver lining.  For those of you on the Left, the country really needs you to engage in some critical thinking.  I get it – you despise President Trump, but why do you fear him?  He is the President, the chief executive of one branch of the three designed to govern our country.  Why do you fear this one branch?  I know that those on the Right fear the power that has grown in the executive branch and have been fighting to blunt it.  Maybe, just maybe, you can see now why this fear exists.  A few years back, there was talk of Texas seceding from the Union.  Now, we hear of California’s desire to secede.  Strange – two groups on polar opposites who share the same urge.

Looks like we have found something in common:  We do not want to be ruled by an over reaching and bloated centralized bureaucracy.

For example, I am not in favor of legalizing marijuana.  The voters of Colorado see it differently and voted in favor of it.  I live in California. I don’t believe it is up to me to tell Coloradans how to govern their State.  I don’t believe it is the Federal governments’ decision either.

You have heard of Brexit?  How about Catalonia’s attempt to leave Spain?  The same forces are at play where citizens want local control over how to run their own lives. People are weary of faraway bureaucrats making the rules of how we conduct every hour of our day.  In other words, we want power dispersed into decentralized government.  It is the same issue that drove the decolonization of the British Empire.

My desire is not to have all 50 States become 50 independent countries. We are stronger as 50 States within a Union, but the Constitution was written to limit the power of government.  It was specifically written to limit the Federal power over State power.  If it had not been written in this way, the States never would have ratified it.  However, the balance of power has shifted so much towards the Federal government over the last 100+ years that it has become ubiquitous and must be scaled back.

If we clear the fog, that is – stop hurling invective at each other, we may find that we agree on that one issue.  President Trump may forever stay in your Revulsion Hall of Fame, but his election may be the necessary agent to bring about the realization that the executive branch of the Federal government is too pervasive.

The Lady Doth Protest Too Much, Methinks

Do we have a problem that generations of American students are not required to read Shakespeare? No, I think it is more of a problem that generations of American students are unaware that Shakespeare even existed.  I do not claim to be an expert or scholar on the bard, but I have been exposed to his writings and the lessons that have been copied for around four hundred years.  Shakespeare was known for developing tragedies, satires and comedies.  Much of which we see in today’s entertainment is the same formula.  Have you ever watched a cop show and see how the detectives trick the killer? Shakespeare.

One of the devices frequently used by Shakespeare was the “play within the play” where the characters in Shakespeare’s play would stage a play as part of the plot.  In “Hamlet”, a play is developed by Hamlet in order to smoke out his father’s murderers.  The quote, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks” is said by Queen Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother, in reference to the actress playing the Queen’s role in the staged play who had just declared her love for her husband.

The quote has come to mean that there exists doubt in the speaker’s sincerity.    

If you follow politics, it is all a play.  Have you ever witnessed a more insincere group of SOBs than politicians? For a very long time, and especially since the advent of television, much of the American public has believed these media plays to be reality.  This started to break apart with great momentum when citizen journalists began to expose the poseurs by using personal video devices to record contradictions and, most importantly, distribute them via social media.  The phonies and frauds became much easier to expose.

So now, we have a very skeptical public who, understandably, trust almost nothing they see on television with respect to news coverage.  Protests are not organic which bubble up due to some emerging catalyst.  The protests we see today are plotted out like a script with heavily financed hats, shirts, signs, transportation and lodging.  In many cases, it is a profession.  Who the hell has time to march from town to town and act outraged?  Complicit in these events are the media who play along to push the outrage which supports their bias.  The media uses camera angles and distance to distort the size of events and edits the message for the viewers.

However, the jig is up.  Enough of the population has caught on and there is no trust in the press which had formerly held a position as objective arbiter.

Why was candidate Trump not diminished by saying, "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters"?  His voters know that he is playing a part just like the rest of the clowns who appear on your television.  With each new outrageous tweet or over-the-top pronouncement, his base is laughing at the reaction.  It is a bombastic show.

So far, the over reach by the Democrats on the Left in reaction to President Trump has been stupendous.  The pussy hat wearing marches, the Russian collusion saga, the constant Nazi references and the denial of speech for anyone with whom they disagree has been great theater.  There are plenty who do not realize they are in the show, but I equate it to “The Truman Show” starring what Stalin referred to as “useful idiots”.  The NFL decided it was time for their close-up last week and today we have the San Juan, Puerto Rico mayor who has been so busy dealing with an emergency that she has had no time to sit in meetings with FEMA, but had time to throw on a lovely lettered tee shirt and hold an “outrageous” press conference. It’s like an ABC Afternoon Special from the 1970’s. “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”

What does President Trump do in response to this faux outrage?  Moe hits Curly on the head with a crow bar. Yuk, yuk, yuk!

On the other side, we have the entrenched GOP pols who have earned the “Lifetime Achievement in Fecklessness” award.  They are flabbergasted that President Trump has triumphed with his act and, simultaneously, ashamed they had not been shrewd enough to pull it off themselves. Timid of their own shadows, they try to resume their Robert Young “Father Knows Best” role.  They pretend to be the “grown-ups” in the room while the house is burning down all around them.  We have useful idiots on one side and just ordinary idiots on the other.

Whereas, I can definitely identify the comedy and satire in all of this, we will have to wait to determine if we are watching a tragedy or not.  As Max Schumacher (played by William Holden) famously says towards the end of the movie “Network”:

“Music up with a swell;  final commercial. And here are a few scenes from next week's show”.

Put Down the Shovel

Let’s face it, the NFL peaked and is in the declining phase of the Product Life Cycle.  For some time, the fan base was able to separate the play on the field from the drinking, drugging, driving under the influence, whoring and domestic abusing.  Right or wrong, the fans would tune in for the 3-6 hours of escape on a Sunday afternoon or Monday night.

As some of the gridiron heroes of the past began to publicize the long term physical effects of playing the game, mainly the arthritis and the need for knee and hip replacements, the fans took notice.  The news of the frequent concussions leading to CTE brain disorders and the validation of the studies supporting it signified the end of the NFL.  It was not a matter of IF it would end, but just a matter of WHEN.  With kids now being steered away from the sport, the farm systems will dry up and the best athletes will no longer be playing football.  The quality of play in 10 years will pale in comparison to today’s game.

What DOES this mean financially to the owners and players?

Those sold out stadiums will be under capacity and television viewership will decline as the product loses its quality.  As that happens, the revenue to the owners via ticket sales, merchandise and ad revenue will decline.  As the owners make less money, the player contracts will become less lucrative.  These dynamics were baked in a few years ago, so the idea has been to suck as much profit out of the product as it heads towards its demise.

Then along comes Colin Kaepernick to lodge a protest against what he sees as injustice in today’s American society.  He is a US citizen and he is within his rights to protest, but he made a huge public relations error by choosing to disrespect the US flag and the National Anthem as his form of protest. There exists infinite ways to lodge an effective protest, but he chose one that alienates the majority of paying customers.  The idea of a protest is to grab attention AND gain support for one’s cause.  He definitely received the attention, albeit not the desired attention.  As noted above, the fan base is capable of ignoring a lot of side issues in order to enjoy the entertainment escape of the NFL.  However, his actions were an “in your face, big FU” to the fans who were given the choice of supporting the “spitting on the flag” or displaying unconditional support for the USA.  I’m certain this was not the plan, but that’s how it unfolded.  The fans chose the latter.

Then we were witness to an even bigger mistake as the NFL did not recognize the dynamics and the crisis at hand.  The 49’ers, who had the most to lose with the opening of a brand new stadium, should have nipped it in the bud. They simply had to demand that their employee could protest whatever issue he desired, but it would not be done in such a way as to alienate the customers which is exactly what was occurring by sitting or kneeling during the playing of the National Anthem.

The rest of the owners and the commissioner exacerbated the situation by allowing it to continue.  Remember, the NFL is a consortium of owners.  What happens to one franchise can affect all and they have the ability to control the overall product.  The result of doing nothing was declining attendance and viewers turning away.  The customer demographic wasn’t buying this form of protest and decided to send the only message they could by exercising their collective purchasing power.

The NFL had a product which was already in decline due to the CTE issue, but now the downward curve on that decline was made steeper.

Those players who may have been able to cash in over the next decade and a half before the NFL went bye-bye have been kneecapped.  Today’s millionaire players have just displayed their nobleness by sacrificing the future earnings of other players who will never sign that lucrative deal and never have the opportunity to use their star power to affect social change.

It is likely that the damage done to the product is irreversible.  I only see one possible solution which I doubt will be employed. If I were the commissioner, I would demand a complete mea culpa from the protesters that, in hindsight, the FORM of protest was an error in judgment and that, henceforth, every player will be lined up on the sideline with hand over heart during the playing of the National Anthem.  This tactic would have the effect of telling the customers that the company is listening to them and that the product attributes are being aligned to their demands. 

To be clear, the NFL is done in the long run, but this public relations tactic could save the next decade’s revenue stream and profits.

To quote the famous American philosopher, Will Rogers:

“When you find yourself in hole, quit digging!”