
Get yourself something nice! You deserve it! Grab yours HERE!

Get yourself something nice! You deserve it! Grab yours HERE!
We are living through an age that has abandoned the dedicated pursuit of truth. Our politicians and news personalities talk about “the narrative.” Our academies teach young minds to accept “expert opinion.” Our philosophers argue that truth is “subjective.” Social theorists argue that truth is an “illusion” that powerful people use to control others.
Whenever I hear Democrat Senator Cory Booker all riled up on television, he’s talking about “her truth,” “his truth,” or even “their truth” – as if a hundred conflicting descriptions of the same event could all be truthful.
During Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings, Democrats called Dr. Christine Blasey Ford to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Ford claimed that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in 1982 when both were in high school. Kavanaugh vehemently denied the allegation and argued that many parts of Ford’s story didn’t add up. When Kavanaugh told the senators that the whole thing was a political spectacle being used as a weapon to derail his confirmation, Senator Booker shouted, “Are you calling her some kind of political operative?” Kavanaugh calmly pointed out, “The witnesses who were there [the party at which Blasey Ford claimed the alleged assault occurred] say it didn’t happen.” Kavanaugh then stated that, although Blasey Ford’s allegations were false and harmful, his “family has no ill will toward her.”
This is how Booker responded to Justice Kavanaugh’s total denial of the allegation against him: “She came forward. She sat here. She told her truth.” Her truth. Not the truth. The “truth” that was most likely to help Democrats “Bork” Kavanaugh’s nomination – just as then-Senator Joe Biden and fellow Democrats tried to do during Justice Clarence Thomas’s confirmation hearings back in ’91 when they brought in a witness who claimed that Thomas had made “unwelcome sexual comments” when the two worked together, a charge Thomas similarly and furiously denied.
What was revealing about Booker’s made-for-TV moment was his disregard for whether Kavanaugh had actually done anything untoward forty years earlier in his life. He didn’t care. The lack of any evidence that could credibly support Blasey Ford’s allegation didn’t matter. Nor did it matter that Kavanaugh flatly denied the allegation. For Booker, the only “fact” that mattered was that Blasey Ford was willing to testify to something that might sink Kavanaugh’s nomination. “Her truth,” even if false, made it compelling.
Booker’s flippant disregard for the truth was reminiscent of President Bill Clinton’s rationalization to a grand jury that he never lied about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky when he told his staff, “There’s nothing going on between us,” and Jim Lehrer of PBS, “There is no improper relationship.” As everyone who recalls Lewinsky’s stained blue dress knows, Clinton’s statements were lies. But when Clinton testified before members of a grand jury, this was his truth:
“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the – if he – if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not – that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.…Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said ‘no.’ And it would have been completely true.”
At that moment, President Clinton proved to Americans that he had no interest in truth. He did not care if he lied. He cared only whether the American people might catch him in a lie. Whether Clinton had “plausible deniability” mattered. Whether he could confuse enough jurors over the meaning of “is” mattered. But the truth? Well, the truth is for rubes and suckers. Clinton’s dissembling and Booker’s disregard for what actually happened in 1982 are symptoms of the same disease: our dishonest age’s abandonment of – and even hostility toward – what is true.
Politicians lie. That’s hardly breaking news. What is newsworthy, though, is that our society does not even pretend to pursue truth anymore.
During COVID, we were forced to follow government mandates that made absolutely no sense. Why was it safe for Walmart to remain open when small businesses were forced to close? How could paper masks, arrows painted on the floor, plexiglass walls, or six feet of space save us from microorganisms that don’t care about such things? Why should schools be closed when the virus posed the least threat to young people? Why should healthy people who had already acquired natural immunity be forced to take an experimental injection? The public was right to ask so many valid questions. Yet our government-run health organizations responded with juvenile insouciance: We’re working at the speed of science! That was the “scientific” equivalent of, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
We’re fifteen years into this gender-bender madness during which “experts” (including too many with M.D.s) claim that biological sex is not real and that what we perceive as male or female is nothing more than a self-imposed social construct. People who have refused to play this delusional game have been fired from jobs. People looking for jobs tell obvious lies.

“A civilization is defined by its ability to discern truth from falsehood,” writes ‘Camus’ (@newstart_2024) in a post on X.
So, what happens when every apparatus built for that purpose is systematically dismantled?
Bret Weinstein issues a stark warning: we are living through a coordinated sabotage of our truth-seeking institutions.
This is not a minor critique; it is a fundamental attack on the very mechanisms of a functional society.
He argues that the assault is comprehensive:
This is the realization of René Descartes’ deepest fear – that the very foundations of what we believe to be factual cannot be trusted.
We have been severed from the tools of the Enlightenment, left in a precarious state where anecdote replaces evidence and ideology replaces inquiry.
We are now navigating a world without a compass.
The predicament is not just dangerous; it is existential.
The question is no longer just “what is true?” but “how do we find out, when the paths to truth have been deliberately destroyed?”
“The Democrats are self-immolating on the altar of their own tenuous relationship with common decency.”
– Tom Luongo
It must be obvious that the incoming government under Mr. Trump has one primary duty overall: sorting out truth from lies so the nation can reestablish a baseline reality to function upon. America is so punch-drunk from official lying that many intelligent people who ought to know better now proclaim that reality is unknowable, which is just a surrender to nihilism — the rejection of moral principle, a belief that the human project is meaningless.
This awful condition has led to the point where you know for sure that “Joe Biden” cannot possibly discharge his duties as chief executive, and yet nobody cares enough to investigate who is running things behind the front he puts up. That would generally be the job of the news media, which is supposed to function as the public’s auditor. Now, of course, you are persuaded that this was never really their job, that it was a sham, but that is just another lie.
The news was not flawless, but neither was it presented as nothing more than opinion. The news existed to register what happened day-to-day. It was not so much concerned with why things happened, which was much more difficult to establish, and usually reserved for the pages labeled “opinion,” so that you knew it was somebody’s conjecture. I know this because I worked as a newspaper reporter in the 1970s. I actually found out what was going on about this-and-that, wrote it up, and saw it in print hours later. The facts.
Journalism had some simple rules for reporting the facts about anything — and it’s hilarious that anyone thought it required a graduate degree from some credentialing mill like the Columbia U. School of Journalism. The news was often meddled-with by interested parties, government and business, but they did not completely overwhelm the ant-like labors of x-thousands of reporters in the field, and the stream of fact they circulated.
Not all of it was subject to dispute, meddling, or opinion because it was self-evident: Joe Blow got shot. . . a helicopter crashed in Ohio. . . a volcano erupted in Peru. . . .
Only over time, the past thirty years especially, our government grew and grew and one of the things that grew out of it was the nefarious “blob” dedicated to protecting the self-enlarging perquisites and interests of that government. Blobs will absorb things they encounter, and in a predatory way, the US government blob absorbed the US news media. The blob transformed the news into an engine for suppressing the facts or spinning them narratively when they could not be suppressed, in order to maximize the advantage of the government and to protect the operations of the blob itself.
It is also a fact that this blob is aligned mostly with Democratic Party, because that party is most avid for the continuing growth of government, and its members overwhelmingly dominate in the officialdom that dwells inside the DC Beltway.
The numbers speak for themselves on the DC voter rolls.
So, a new government under Mr. Trump is feared cringingly by the news media.

New NPR CEO Katherine Maher gave a Ted Talk during which she asserted that “truth” is a “distraction” which is “getting in the way of getting things done.”
Calls are growing for NPR to have its government funding withdrawn after a series of tweets by Maher were uncovered in which she supported far-left causes, including endorsing racial reparations and making claims that the planet is “burning.”
But the content of the Ted Talk she gave is raising even more eyebrows.
Maher ludicrously suggested during the speech that far-left Wikipedia had a model “which actually works really well” in determining “what the truth really is.”
Acknowledging that Wikipedia writers are “not focused on the truth, they’re focused on something else, which is the best of what we can know right now,” Maher suggested the “truth” was not a priority.

Democratic Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett, a non-voting delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, said the quiet part out loud while appearing on MSNBC’s ‘The Inside Interview’ with former White House mouthpiece Jen Psaki on Sunday.
The U.S. government should define for America what the “truth” is and censor those Americans who don’t agree.
“Well, you know, first of all, they wanna talk about censorship,” Plaskett said. “That anytime you point out untruths, you’re censoring, you’re stopping people from speaking. It’s not that we’re not stopping people from speaking [sic], people can speak, but we’re also going to give the American people the truth so that they can have science and facts and history against wild, outlandish claims that the Republicans are trying to get. That’s not only going to keep them from going to the polls or suppressing vote or telling untruths, but is also really very detrimental to the American people.”
In other words, the U.S. government is going to stop people from speaking what Stacey Plaskett and her Democrat colleagues call “the truth.” Numerous times in the past ten years, the Democratic Party and the media have misled the American people on the truth. Whether it was false claims about Covid vaccines to the Russia hoax or racially incendiary police shootings, the American people have been pushed to believe in a damaging political agenda.
You must be logged in to post a comment.