originally posted in September 2018
So let me get this right: Congress has a slush fund that taxpayers fund to pay off the women they’ve sexually abused and we, the taxpayers, are supposed to trust them as they judge over Brett Kavanaugh?
It just gets worse and worse. Just when you think we’ve come to the bottom of how low the government can go, we look at what we’re looking at now. The insanity and hypocrisy being pushed in front of our eyes are absolutely, incredibly unbelievable.
Once again, I rarely talk about myself using the word I when I write opinion pieces. But I have to say I’ve been writing fiction for about 50 years. One of the first rules of fiction is that it has to be believable. So writers talk about how the real truth sometimes cannot be written into fiction because when you see it in words in a piece of fiction, it becomes absolutely unbelievable.
The example I generally use is about the man who’s committing adultery (it doesn’t necessarily have to be a man) and goes into the very depths of a distant borough in NYC to meet his girlfriend at a restaurant for a dinner out. When I talk about this I generally use the borough of Staten Island because that one is pretty far out of the way for many people.
On the particular evening they are having dinner, the man’s wife meets up with her sister who has a friend that lives in Staten Island. The sister has plans to go and meet her friend and the wife tags along because her husband is working late. Lo and behold, don’t you know, they happen to walk into the same restaurant where her husband and his girlfriend are.
Now on some level, given that there are somewhere between twenty and thirty thousand restaurants in New York City, for the wife to walk in on the husband like that comes up to being almost-winning-the-lottery odds and therefore is pretty much unbelievable. Of course it could always be the truth and what really happened. But to a reader, the reader automatically thinks about the likelihood and says, “yeah, right.”
So we have a group of senators and congressmen who are telling us all this crap. The lefties attack the righties. The righties spend a lot of time defending themselves, which they should really stop doing, and then go on and accuse the lefties of playing the racist-sexist-all-the-other-ist cards, and on and on. At least a portion of senators and congressmen are guilty of all the same things they accuse others of. And as said up on top, we the taxpayers fund their slush fund.
No, you can’t really make this stuff up.
Into the mix come all the lefty bigwigs, Joe Biden, of course Hillary, and the great Pooh Bah Obama. Along with the biased media, they go on and make the most outrageous statements anyone could ever hear as if they are matters of fact. If this isn’t the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is.
So there you have it. I’m not even going to talk about the Kavanaugh issue. What’s going on with Kavanaugh is simply a reflection of where our country is at. We can look at the whole of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings as a metaphor for what’s going on in our society today.
I’m going to close with something that my father-in-law used to say: Man is by nature selfish and greedy.
What scares me most is that we’re beginning to see the true nature of what we are as a species. It ain’t pretty.
Pick up a copy of my published works here:
Books by Peter Weiss.
Doom and gloom!
For longer than two years now the only narrative we’ve heard in America is of the evil Trump presidency. More than 90% of all mainstream media articles about the President are negative. He is called every ist in the book and then some. His family is demeaned. The first lady is denigrated. His children are the subjects of vile threats and horrific statements that would never be tolerated if aimed at any left-wing politician.
Contrast that to the Obamas. The Obamas have always been treated by the media with kid gloves, respect and decency. There have been moments, of course, but they are few and far between. Michelle is treated like a queen. Barack is treated like a deity. Michelle and Barack’s children are never in the media and never were for as long as he was president and beyond. Their only media shoots were those their parents chose for them.
There’s something wrong with this picture!
What’s wrong with the picture is not about the Trumps or the Obamas. It is about the media. The media which was once a fair and honest media is no longer that. Because it is no longer that, because it is now a much-more-than-biased media, America is in peril.
Go to the land of dictators. Go to countries where there are coup d’états. The first thing any dictator seeking to take power does is blackout the media. S/he keeps the media blacked out until s/he controls it, and once controlled it is only allowed to broadcast what the new leader wants broadcasted.
The reason for this is quite simple. The incoming dictator knows that controlling what the people see and hear will give him/her power. Control the media, control what the people think. Oh, you might not control what the people think. But you can certainly control the information they receive. When information is controlled and limited, a great number of the people will surely follow the narrative being given. Control what is said. Say it over and over and over again, loud enough, often enough. Make sure nothing else is heard. This is the way to control people, to make them believe what it is you want them to believe.
Only in America can the news media hide under the protections of the Constitution, claim themselves to be a free and honest press when clearly they are far from that. For much, much longer than Donald Trump, the media have been selling the American people a left-wing narrative that is clearly false and definitely misleading.
The case of Jim Acosta and CNN is a metaphor for the biased press claiming to be a free, fair press. All one has to do is look at it, see Acosta’s behavior and listen to his words. Then one would see he is far from being an honest journalist. He is an opinionated hack hiding under the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The fact of the matter is the Democrats through the biased mainstream media control the narratives the American people are being fed. This is dangerous, more so than any external enemies. Thus it is one of the greatest threats to America’s freedoms.
Pick up a copy of my published works here:
Books by Peter Weiss.
originally written in 2013
No one disputes that humankind has evolved or that the first premise of evolution is survival. Typically, we think of survival on an individual basis, but few people are wholly isolated or individually apart any longer. Instead, we live in vastly institutionalized societies. Barnard (1938) compared organizations to living, breathing organisms and he extended his analogy to view an organization’s attributes as human in nature. After all, since human organizations are made by humans, they are innately human.
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Service’s Welfare programs inclusive of Food Stamps, Aid to Domestic Children, Section Eight, and most others, were begun with the best of intentions: an unequivocal desire to help the needy, the unfortunate and the unprotected in our society. But these intentions and desires have been usurped by survival. Staying alive, the simple rule of existence, has trumped and replaced original human concern and altruism. Along the continuum, the prime directive of these institutions has become survival, pure and simple, and just as the original main objectives of these institutions have been altered, so have their directions and, most important, so have their current effects on the very people they were created to serve. By far, these programs are now harmful to their clientele and detrimental to our society and the taxpayers who ultimately fund them.
Child Protective Services (CPS), although it has many names nationwide, under the umbrella of Health and Human Services (HHS), demonstrates a similar evolution. Formally begun in the early 1900s with the purest intention of helping children in need, CPS is now a vast, fifty-state bureaucracy that has deleterious effects upon the children and families it is supposed to help. The National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR) asserts that CPS has an 80% failure rate and that 75% of comparably maltreated children not removed from their homes fare better than those children placed in foster care. However, since a major part of Federal, State and local economies in the United States are financially dependent upon CPS subsistence, little is done to reorient it toward its original missives.
No matter what the acronym, CPS has a department or division in each of the fifty states. They all suckle on federal funding through HHS, Title IX and Social Security, and while this might not sound too bad at first, cost wise this is just the tip. Attached to this are all affiliate services, service organizations and all the connected State Agencies which are needed to enable CPS to operate. Below is a bare-bones, simplified chart to offer an idea of how CPS sits atop a mega child-industry, the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, supporting a wide-spread array of privately contracted agencies and other state agencies.

Prevent Child Abuse America (http://www.preventchildabuse.org/index.php) estimated that direct expenditure on child abuse and neglect for 2012 would be approximately $33,333,619,510. Indirect expenditure, it estimated, would be $46,926,791,578. The total cost of child maltreatment, according to Prevent Child Abuse America, was estimated at $80,260,411,087. (http://www.preventchildabuse.org/images/research/pcaa_cost_report_2012_gelles_perlman.pdf).
In sum, the total cost of child maltreatment in America is slightly less than 25% of the total United States budget, and HHS and CPS as the distributors of this fortune in tax dollars fails 80% of the time.

References
Barnard, C. (1966). The Functions of the executive (30th Anniversary ed.). Cambridge:
Benson, C. (Ed.). (2003). America’s children: key national indicators of well-being, 2003. Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics, Washington DC. Retrieved April 17, 2005 from http://childstats.gov/ac2003/pdf/ac2003.pdf.
Clark, M.A., Shreve, K., & Stone, C. (2004, December). Taking stock in children: collaborating to promote success for low-income secondary students. National Association of Secondary School Principals. NASSP Bulletin (88), 61-73. Retrieved July 8, 2006, from Proquest database (ID 788921681).
Crosnoe, R., Mistry, R.S., & Elder, G.H. Jr. (2002). Economic disadvantage, family dynamics, and adolescent enrollment in higher education [Electronic Version]. Journal of Marriage and Family 64, (3), 690-702. Retrieved June 11, 2006, from Proquest (146863841).
Deal, T. E., & Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dickens, W., Sawhill, I., & Tebbs, J. (2006, April). The effects of investing early in education on economic growth The Brookings Institution (Policy Brief No. 153). Retrieved July 2, 2006, from http://www.brookings.edu/ comm/policybriefs/pb153.pdf.
Fass, S., & Cauthen, N. (2005, September). Who are America’s poor children? National Center for Children in Poverty. Retrieved July 9, 2006, from Columbia University National Center for Children in Poverty website, http://www.nccp.org/pub_cpt05b.html.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


