Author: Steve Briscoe

Blogs, they’re everywhere and everyone believes their words are worth reading, and they are; but within the confines of today’s society very few people actually care enough to read anything longer than a bumper sticker. Why is that? The most prominent reason might be that after it is all said and done, “Your words don’t make no sense.” Another reason might be that you do make sense but your topic is trivial. Or maybe you’re just a lousy narrator—bad plot, bad grammar, and an inability to bring your idea to an acceptable conclusion. Possible answers all, but I think these reasons do not actually explain the substantial lack of interest.

Ever wonder where the word “blog” came from? The origin of the word actually explains why so many lack any level of interest in reading them. With the onset of online oratory came new words to explain the phenomenon. “Weblog” was one of those new words; like Captain’s Log or a personal journal. But apparently people lacked an ability, or were too busy, to say the whole word so “weblog” was shortened to “blog” thereby saving the time it takes to say “we.” One could write a number of paragraphs on the removal of “we” but we’ll save that for later. Everyone demands to be heard, but nobody cares to listen. Intelligence is a good thing, but without wisdom intelligence is not only worthless, it’s an obstacle. The application of both intellect and wisdom requires an ability, and a desire, to listen to all sides and formulate your own opinion; to be able to admit you might be wrong. You must be able to apply historical fact to your thought process, but we are re-writing and erasing history thinking it will go away… I may be getting off topic here. Let’s get back on the main road.  

“So, what are you doing today?” asked with a snarky attitude. “Well, I’m blogging.” “I’m a blogger.” “I blog in the morning, I blog in the evening, and I blog at supper time.” But to what end?

Face it, you get an idea, your write about it, you read it, edit, re-read it, edit again, and only stop re-reading and editing when another idea pops into your head and you know you must push on. You post your thoughts on personal site and compete with the thousands of other short articles posted within the last 3 minutes on tens of thousands of other personal sites. From time to time you check back to see who has read and commented on your previous blogs.

Based on reports from my weblog I have a very small following; around 50 people claim to follow my every word. OK, I’m being a bit sarcastic as I know nobody follows my every word and even fewer follow only some of my words. I have discovered the people who comment are usually the same few people. So, I ask again, to what end?

I live under no illusion that my words carry any philosophical treasures or answer any of life’s most elusive questions. It costs money to blog. Perhaps not much when compared to a college education but I’ve seen blogs from supposedly college educated writers and I have to wonder which college had the audacity to give that person a degree—in anything. My grammar is better than some and worse than some and, thanks to spellcheck, my spelling is exceptional. Not bad for a guy went through most of life with nothing more than a GED. I did spend some time at a Community College but the intent was to meet girls, not get an education. As it turned out I failed at both.

If you have the courage to write on a polarized subject you will be praised by some and called “too stupid for words” by others. Truth is, regardless of the subject or your abilities to articulate a thought, you are not worthy of praise nor should you ever be considered too stupid. The difference between the two ends of the spectrum is, those who “praise” you will never degrade you regardless of what you write, and those who call you too stupid for words will never offer a kind word even if you saved a puppy from a cobra. So take that into consideration when you adding worth to written critiques of your narrations.

Let’s bring this to a close. I’m not a philosopher, not overly educated, I have no hidden super ability to answer life’s most prominent questions, nor do I really care to be a philosopher, overly educated, nor do I have a desire to possess super powers. I write because I want to; it is my right to write; fight for the right to write… Someday—maybe—surely long after I am buried and forgotten, someone somewhere may see an old picture, or maybe see an old article I have written, or see my tomb stone in a rundown old cemetery and wonder, “Who was Steve Briscoe?” Reading these snippets will tell them who I was and maybe then my words will be worthwhile. Probably not, but maybe.

Of course, considering the speed at which indoctrination is growing, I suspect any media that proclaims the positive attribute of individual thought will be censored, erased, and deemed illegal by the ruling class. Rulers can’t rule if people think for themselves. Individual thought is the new bigotry.

I feel a need to make a confession here, “I think it would be kinda cool to have a super power; using them for the good of mankind of course.” I know what my super power would be, but I’ll keep that to myself.

Not sure when it started but it had to start in the schools at a young age. A grown person with a well-developed sense of right and wrong, an ability to formulate original thought, and at least a semblance of self-assurance, would never fall for such manipulation. But sadly, many do. So, it had to start in the schools that have twisted the education system from a world of academics to an arena of indoctrination teaching the new bigotry.

Gaslighting – covert attempts of psychological manipulation by a person or group to plant doubt in a targeted individual or group. The ultimate goal is to persuade the person or group to question their own memory, perception, judgment, or personal beliefs. There are always ulterior motives; a facilitation of change with dubious intent, a destabilization of a person’s self-esteem, or a desire to focus your attention elsewhere so misguided assertions go unnoticed. Tools used to “gaslight” an individual or group include but are not limited to repeated denials, misdirection, contradiction, disinformation, and outright lies. It is unfortunate that attempts to “gaslight” a person or group of people no longer needs a clandestine approach. If you call out an individual for gaslighting you are automatically labeled a racist (the new bigotry), mentally unstable, or intolerant. If you call out someone for gaslighting you will most probably fall victim to cancel culture.

Cancel Culture – is a modern form of ancient Athenian law, referred to as “ostracism” which allowed for expulsion from the city of Athens for ten years. Current practice calls for individuals who, prior to some perceived offense, were held in high regard, to be viciously thrown out of social or professional circles. There is no room for forgiveness nor will an acceptable explanation suffice; asking for forgiveness and offering an acceptable narrative will only compound the hurling of stones by the cancel culture. You have offended society, you must pay. Whether the “offense” was perpetrated intentionally or by mistake, your “casting out” will be complete, very public, and exceedingly emotional. The intent is not to correct, the intent is to inflict pain and embarrassment. A word, deed, or intent, considered acceptable when said or done, can cause a massive backlash years later should someone ferret out your past comment or deed. In truth, factual data is not required to be found guilty of an offense, a faulty perception is all that is required. A 40-year-old is “cancelled” because of something said 23 years before. Clearly, after a cursory glance, it is evident the ousted individual is guilty of some other offense that has nothing to do with the offense paraded under the spotlights. This is easily proven when the same offense, or one much more egregious, is ignored by the same crowd who are holding the signs in the parade or operating the lights glaring down on you. Cancel Culture will roll like raging prairie fire consuming everything in its path. I should mention here, the ones who are the loudest proponents of and ostracism as proper punishment are those who are recently woke.

Woke Culture – is a term that refers to a newfound abundance of arrogant awareness of social justice or social justice issues. I could write paragraphs about how “social justice” has been hijacked and manipulated to enhance gaslighting and cancel culture, but that’s a different blog. The term “woke” is not new, it can be traced to Abraham Lincoln’s Republican Party movement opposed to slavery known as Wide Awake and was made up predominantly of young people of all races. Being aware of events and injustices is not a bad thing, but when the manipulation by gaslighting and cancel culture are used as tools to motivate the Woke Culture then their “awareness” cannot help but be misconstrued and misguided; it will never end well.

There are some who see the use of any of these efforts as having great potential to serve a need, to serve the common good, but they are either delusional or intent on ill-conceived manipulation. The current use of today’s “acceptable” tactics is to gain power and control by tearing others down. Like the bully who will relish in the fear and humiliation of those tormented, so fearful people will see the bully is the real coward, so fearful people will see the bully is incapable of standing on their own, so fearful that people will someday see behind the bully’s façade. Individuals and groups who use this type manipulation for personal gain are not hard to identify. Unfortunately, regardless of the factual documentation in hand, when you shine the light on them, and show in exquisite detail their intent, the gaslighted will energize the woke who will in turn cancel you in quick order.

Gaslighting, Cancel Culture, and Woke Culture feed off of each other; one fuels the other. We’re being played by the puppet master.

A recent post on FaceBook made reference to a Senator who tested positive for COVID-19 and the multitude, rather than wish the Senator well, blasted the Senator for having ready access to the COVID-19 test kit.  Several comments made reference akin to, “…my friend’s mother knows a co-worker whose cousin read an article about a guy whose girlfriend had symptoms but couldn’t get a test…”  Obviously I’ve applied a bit of literary freedoms with that bit, but you get the idea.

I, being a person who has the right to an opinion, commented on the post…

“Understand completely and agree… hopefully those who want a socialist government are watching. If you think the government ignores you now, wait until we get the socialist government everyone seems to be pining for. You think it’s hard to get tested now, wait until your socialist government takes control of things. If you have no specialty, or are not ultra-special in some unique way, then you are of no value and are ultra-expendable. They will weigh the cost of care with what you have to offer in return. This is not fearmongering, nor is it doom and gloom prophecy, it is history retold again and again. And, most important, it has nothing to do with who is seated in the Oval Office; push the Trump Hate Train all you want, you’ve been played. Welcome to the new world.”

Of course, there was an almost immediate response that ignored the entirety of my comment, except “…the man in the Oval Office…” part.  The momentum of the “Trump Hate Train” cannot be stopped by truth or fact nor can it even be discussed using the rules of civil debate; one side always goes “junk yard dog” sooner or later.  We’ll ignore the responses as, like I say, they are fueled by Trump Hate and seldom use fact or conscious thought as a premise.

The premise of my comment was how a socialist government will treat you during such times. I’m not privy to any decision made about the purchase or stock pile of COVID-19 test kits or respirators.  However, common sense would, should one ever consider using it, lead to a belief that, like many other medical tests, the COVID-19 test is good for testing COVID-19 and not much use for anything else.  There may be some crossover for some, but not likely is there anything out there that is, “one test fits all” product.  However, the purchase of, or who was responsible for the failure to purchase are not really what I want to discuss.  Some of you are smart and, based on the title and the preamble, already know where I’m going with this.

History has documented over and over again, the population that is overwhelmingly controlled by the government (regardless of what kind of government), is the same population that will be ignored during a crisis; if you are not in the “inner circle” you are not considered and pushed aside (unless of course you’re armed).  As I stated in the comment that preempted this narrative, “…you think the government ignores you now, wait until we get your socialist government…”  This is a prelude that can, if you give it the chance, give you a glimpse of how the government is going to treat you the closer and closer we get to socialist rule.  A prudent person would give this a moment of pause and contemplate, for themselves, what is the probable outcome when one person has absolute power over another.  Don’t dwell on what you would do, dwell instead on what others will do given control over you; two totally different perspectives, two totally different outcomes.  I will also submit, if you do dwell on what “you” will do, you’re wasting your time.  Chances are you like your neighbor, chances are you get along well and share on a regular basis, chances are you would never consider hurting your neighbor.  But, if your neighbor has food and you do not and your neighbor stands between your child starving to death or living just one more day, then chances are you will see your neighbor as an obstacle that must be eliminated at all costs; comes from an ability to justify a wrong and see it as a right.  You might think yourself special, and caring, and all compassionate, but given the right circumstances, and no moral absolute, you would end your neighbor for a sack of rice. Let’s move on.

Even that part of the government the leftist cling to as their guiding light and the ultimate champion of their cause have set aside the “concern for public health” and are using the pandemic to impose controls that far outreach what the U.S. Constitution allows and, if imposed, will do nothing to curb, slow down, or eradicate the pandemic.  The hijack of the coronavirus stimulus should be a clear indicator of their ultimate intent… but it is not, many make excuses for their behavior.  An article in the USA Today laid it out clearly.  Of course, this is the European version of the USA Today so your USA Today may say something completely different; I’ve come to the conclusion the USA Today is not wholly owned by a single minded entity, but rather separately owned by an assortment of entities that span the spectrum from factual conclusion stemming from logical thought all the way over to confused utterances stemming from willful ignorance.

We have become so focused on the difference between the extremes of left and right, that we now believe everyone is at one extreme or the other and are the root of all calamity and deserve to be hated; there is no middle, there is no common ground. In our left or right focus we have forgotten there is actually an up and a down and there is a right and there is a wrong.  And, these “rights and wrongs” are absolute.  We’ve convinced ourselves there are no longer firm principles, but rather varying degrees of right and wrong; it may be wrong for one person, but depending on how they were raised, or a particular set of circumstances, it’s not wrong for another person.  “It was my right to attack my neighbor and steal what they had., my child was hungry.”  Contrary to this not so new revelation, a belief in the shifting concepts of right and wrong do not sway the factual bearing of where right and wrong reside.  If this confuses you, look up the word “Absolute” in your Webster.  I recommend using a Webster that is at least 30 years old.  Newer versions of Webster, and for sure and certain Google search engine, have modified definitions to accommodate the weak and gullible.  We must stop taking for granted what our chosen political party or our trusted news source tells us; if we are not capable of thinking for ourselves, regardless of which end or at what point within the scope of the spectrum we reside, we will all fall under the heavy yoke of tyranny.  That tyranny will see us as a commodity and if we, in their eyes, have no tradeable and reusable commodity, we will be considered sub-human and the controlling class will have no need to protect us, no need to feed us, and will certainly feel no obligation to provide us with medical care.  “They will weigh the cost of care with what we have to offer in return.”  In fact they may go so far as to make it illegal to fend for yourself if you do so without their permission.  See Germany, November 8th 1938.

There is no doubt in my mind this country will eventually embrace socialism either legally or by deceit and all these things will come to pass.  However, I do not now nor have I ever put my faith in our government, regardless of who holds the majority.  I put all my faith in the God who created me and His Son who showed me Grace; I’m good with whatever happens.

Final note:  It’s common knowledge that art imitates life; today’s science fiction is tomorrow’s fact.  Way back when the original Star Trek was televised in 1966 they carried a hand held wireless communication device in their pockets, volumes of data were stored on small plastic disks, computers answered you when you spoke to them, and they used prosthesis that could be mechanically manipulated by thought.  Pretty amazing when you try to comprehend such things using a 1966 mindset.  Barring WARP Drive and Teleportation, most of the fiction of yesterday’s Star Trek is now a part of our everyday lives.  Have you ever seen the movie Soylent Green?

I’ve thought long on this, but I can’t say I’ve thought long and hard.  I’m not going to add a bunch of links to support premises listed because, as you will see if you read this, people are not interested in facts.  They want only those bits of information that support their illusion.  Will also say, this turned out way longer than I intended.

#1 Main stream media proclaims, on a regular basis, that Trump lies about everything.  This statement may be true in several areas, only a fool would claim otherwise.  However, indications are that both Clintons (Bill and Hillary), Obama, and pretty much every person on the planet lies.  But, we focus on Trump lies and care not for Clinton or Obama lies.  Therefore, your indignation obviously has nothing to do with the act of lying; so why are you indignant?

#2 Based on social norms, it is improper to insult a woman about her looks, her size, or how she dresses.  Seems reasonable; it’s rude, adds no value to anything, and is meant only to demean a person or somehow redirect attention from your own faults.  So, why was it OK to shame Sarah Palin and why is it OK to demean our current First Lady?  Some have even gone so far as to make up falsehoods about Sarah and Melania, so they could be shamed about things that were not true. The media ran-amuck with stories about Sarah Palin’s daughter; was the child with down syndrome Sarah’s or her daughter’s?  Tell me how that matters, and what business is it of ours?  It doesn’t matter, but it made for great shaming material.  The real question should be, “Are you ashamed of how she was treated?”  There are claims Melania posed in the nude during her early modeling career.  Can’t say I’ve seen any of the pictures, so not sure it’s true.  Regardless of how factual it is, why do we care?  Madonna has been flashed her boobs at anyone who cares to notice and across the internet for years?  I don’t recall the media ever questioning her moral values.  If any made a single derogatory remark about Michelle, about anything whether true or not, they were automatically labeled intolerant, racist, bigot, chauvinist… the list is endless. Why is it OK to shame Sarah or Melania but not OK to shame Michelle?  The world I was raised in taught me it was not OK to shame anyone.  If you were indignant about those who shamed Michelle, but were not and are not indignant about the shaming of Sarah and Melania, then your indignation holds no value and is false and obviously meant to redirect attention from your own faults, or the faults of those you hold in high esteem.  Little side note here, the left has even gone so far as to try and shame Barron, President Trump’s son.  I’m curious, how low do you have to stoop to shame a 10-year-old boy?  (Point of order, Barron is now 13 years old as of Jan 2020)

#3 The left has been trying, since day one, to impeach President Trump.  Can’t say I can put my finger on the exact charges, because the official charges change on a regular basis.  But, facts state those who want to impeach have in fact committed the very crimes they want to lay at Trump’s feet.  The President is not above the law, neither are they.  When those public officials, who have committed crimes, stand before a court, then I will support the investigation of an impeachment process of the President.

#4 Any person in possession of any level of common sense would have to admit President Trump’s track record with women is, at best, faulty.  The left has taken his fault to an entirely new level of comical indignation, while completely ignoring and even defending the same fault of others.  President Clinton’s track record was no better, and in some cases worse, but there was little, if any, indignation or personal horror about the plethora of women who came forward to file legal action against him because of unwanted sexual exploits.  This clearly indicates to me a President’s conduct toward women is not the issue here.  So please, tell me what the issue is?

#5 Several legitimate data repositories, including official government sites, state the White House budget has been reduced over the past three years.  Rates of reduction range from 25% to 75% in operating costs depending upon which site you gather data.  I see, on a regular basis, main stream media will make mention of how Melania dresses, and the cost of those dresses.  Several sites state the Trumps pay for their clothing from personal funds.  Not sure how true that is, but what is true is, Trump donates his salary.  I don’t recall Obama or Clinton donating their salary, and it is a fact that taxpayers paid extravagantly for the clothing of Michelle and Hillary; and continue to do so.  I’m sure you will say something along the lines of, “Well, Trump is a millionaire. He should pay for things, and he should donate his salary.”  Yes, he is a millionaire. What I want to know is, how did Clinton and Obama become millionaires while in office?  That question can be raised about pretty much anyone in office.  The point here is the extravagance of Obama and the Clintons was ignored and the taxpayer paid the bill.  During the Trump years, that extravagance has been greatly reduced, but the left wants to portray the current frugalness as an extravagant waste perpetrated by the Trumps.  Just makes no sense to me.

#6 Let’s talk about how Obama doubled the national debt in less than eight years.  Now you can stammer and stutter, while citing a number of data repositories, and twist the figures any way you want, but the fact is, we are in excess of $19 Trillion in debt.  Here are some numbers to compare.  In 2007 the Debt/GDP ratio was 62%; 2008 – 68%; 2009 – 83%; 2010 – 90%; 2011 – 95%; 2012 – 98%… in 2016 it was 105%.  In 2017 it dropped to 103%.  In all fairness to facts, the Debt/GDP ratio went back up to 106% in 2019.  So, the 1^st 4 years of Obama, it went from 68% to 99%; a 31% increase, and a subsequent increase of 7% the following 4 years for a total of 38% increase.  Yes, 38% is not double, but that only accounts for the increase in borrowed money, the rise of taxes during the 8 years keep the percentage from increasing more than it did.  So, the extra tax money collected from the working class was spent (frivolously I suspect) to keep from borrowing money; but we did borrow money exponentially each year, as indicated by the percentages.  Take the adjusted percentages for each year and it doubled the national debt; Sep of 2006 it was $7.9 Trillion — Sep of 2016 it was $19.5 Trillion.  Again, in all fairness to facts, as of Sep 2019 the debt has risen to $22.7 Trillion.  In Obama’s 1st year he raised the debt by over $2 Trillion.  The debt has raised $2 Trillion since Obama left office but that increase accounts for three years of the current Administration.  The first three years  of the Obama Administration accounted for an increase from $7.9 Trilllion to $15 Trillion; that alone almost doubled the debt.  These are all facts that come from non-government-controlled entities; not from U.S. Government sites or Pro-Trump news outlets.

How would you react if Trump doubled our debt during his first three years?  How would you react if Trump demanded you purchase a product you didn’t want or could not afford?  How would you react if Trump said he was going to change a process that would save you 50% of what you pay now, but after it was done, the cost doubled?  Even after the cost doubled, Trump would then make you pay a fine if you didn’t buy the product and pay the outrageous fee.  How would you react?

Not so very long ago, U.S. Officials in Benghazi were attacked.  Prior to the attack, there were several requests through official channels to increase security and make needed security changes.  The U.S. State Department ignored those requests, and in fact, pulled a portion of security from the two sites in question.  The ultimate attack resulted in 4 dead U.S. patriots.  During the attack, multiple calls for help went unanswered by the U.S. State Department.  After the attack, the entire incident was blamed on a “vile” video that was meant to shame the Islamic religion; basically, the Obama Administration provided a viable excuse for the attack.  We know now, that story was a lie from the very beginning.  Hillary, herself, looked straight in the eyes of family members of those who were killed and knowingly lied (see paragraph #1).  The left defended her actions. They were OK with the Obama Administration’s lies, and were perfectly content with her decision to allow the attack to go unanswered, while U.S. personnel were taking direct and in-direct fire.  Let’s not discuss what she did after the attack to those who defended Benghazi with their blood and their lives; those actions are a matter of record that nobody cares about.

There are those on the left who claim Trump lacks a clear understanding of foreign policy as evidenced by his pulling support from the Kurds in northern Syria.  Does that mean you question Obama’s understanding of foreign policy when he pulled forces from Iraq allowing the entire country to be overrun?  What does it say about Obama when he relieved the many generals who did have an understanding of foreign policy, because they questioned his actions?  Asking for a friend.

I really lack the will to go on, as I am convinced it is a useless endeavor.  If you cared about truth, you already know these things.  If you willingly hide behind your façade, you are not interested in the truth and prefer to accept bits of information that support your illusion.

I want to go on record here and say I did not specifically vote “for” Trump.  I think he is arrogant and egotistical; most great people are, but that does not mean I think Trump is a great man.   I think he loves this country, and will do everything he can to make it prosper and remain secure.  He lacks vocabulary, but I’m not so sure that is either good or bad.  Obama had great vocabulary, if he was behind a teleprompter… the media portrayed him as a great orator, but honestly, I never saw it.  Regardless, vocabulary alone does not make a great president; it makes a person with great vocabulary.  I think President Carter had great integrity and was well spoken.  He was probably one of the nicest and most humble individuals to ever be president; those were the main reasons I voted for Carter.  But I was wrong; he was a lousy president.  During his presidency, this nation died as an economic power.  If you were of age during that time, you will remember businesses dropping like dead flies.  Iron and steel foundries, both big and small, shut down and disappeared across the country, home mortgage interest rates climbed as high as 13%, and in some places 18% during his presidency.  I’m not saying a man of integrity cannot be president; but in this case the man of integrity was the worst choice.  We’ll not discuss the Iran Hostage scenario.  Again, I did not specifically vote “for” Trump.  I voted against a socialist government. I voted against a government that intended to control my very existence. I voted against a government that felt it was their right to force me to purchase a product regardless of my desires.  I voted against a government who felt it was their right to lie to me so as to protect themselves or their dynasty.  I voted against a government that allows specified lawlessness to run rampant and unchecked for a select few within the halls of our Capital; I voted against a government that allows the same select few to bring charges against others for doing the same thing they do as a matter of policy.  I voted against a government that believes it is a fundamental right to kill an unborn child, while at the same time use the death of an innocent child as an avenue to demonstrate indignation when it suits their agenda.  I voted against a government that vehemently rejects a mention of Our Creator in their political platform.

Point of order about the portion on President Jimmy Carter.  The far right was quick to point out Billy Carter, the creator of Billy Beer, and Ruth (Carter) Stapleton the evangelical faith healer as “Carter” oddities.  Suffice it to say, isolated selection of ridicule is not limited to the left.  Plenty enough blame to span both ends of the spectrum.

Summary; it is obvious to me, the “act” is irrelevant; it is “who” does the act that matters.  If it is OK for one, then it is OK for all – if it is not OK for one, it is not OK for all.  Convince me otherwise and I will give you a dollar.

If your reply starts with anything resembling, “Oh Yea, well what about…!” then you have missed the point, and may very well be what plagues parts of this nation.  You cannot condemn an act of one, while ignoring the same act from another.

For those who may not know, tunnel vision describes an event when a person is so focused on a specific area they are oblivious to everything else around them.  This is very dangerous when you come face to face with a lethal encounter or if you inadvertently place yourself in an insecure or unsafe environment.  You are so focused on what you perceive to be the main threat that you are oblivious to the real threat, and in some cases multiple threats that are are solely focused on you.  An official definition uses the phrase, “…defective sight…” in the description.  Another definition, “…tendency to focus exclusively on a single or limited goal or point of view excluding any opposing vantage point…”  Other phrases associated with tunnel vision are, “narrow perspective, constricted vision, or tubular vision.”

In some cases there are medical conditions that case an actual restriction of vision; see your doctor for treatment.  In most cases tunnel vision, at least this particular aspect of tunnel vision, is self-inflected based on a strong, and often tainted, point of view formulated with the use of only some of the facts, half truths, and disinformation combined do not support your viewpoint.  With regard to self-infected tunnel vision there is no need to see your doctor; your doctor can’t help you, but there is a need to self-diagnose and act accordingly.  Most will not take the time to self-diagnose because, in their mind, they do not suffer from tunnel vision.  Therein resides the problem.  “I’m right, everyone else is obviously wrong.“

If you are courageous enough to self-diagnose and are courageous enough to seek a remedy then keep reading.

Our Nation is being ripped apart by self-serving, self-appointed, and often destructive forces.  These forces are not limited to the left nor the right of center.  Regardless of where you reside, relative to center, there is a danger of being used by these forces.  If you agree with the far left (White supremacy runs rampant!!!) you are compelled to hate the right, if you agree with the far right (Trump can do no wrong!!!) you are compelled to hate the left.  This compulsion is fueled by an agenda driven media from both ends of the spectrum; this cannot be denied.

Based on current mindsets, who in their right mind would spend millions on a movie (The Hunt) depicting “liberal elites” hunting down and killing “deplorables” (a term used to describe conservatives) for sport?  The only reason a movie like this would be made is to fuel hate and distrust.  Why would either side, left or right, allow such a thing to be created under the guise of “entertainment.”

We are being played and if we continue to allow it there will be serious consequences for us all.  I have to believe if a movie were made where conservative “red-necks” hunted liberals the backlash and outcry would be deafening; as it should be.

We suffer from tunnel vision and until we are willing to discuss, calmly discuss, our differences, our beliefs, our concerns, our misconceptions, and our personal views we will continue to suffer. Based on present day societal norms if we disagree on a single topic then those norms dictate we hate each other.   We are being played.

We are all intelligent enough to see the disparity, but are we intelligent enough to see our part in that disparity. Are we willing to back off, open our eyes to see the full spectrum of players, and discern the intent of all the players? We are being played… and we are better than that.
PS… If this narrative offends you then I would submit you suffer from tunnel vision.