The Worst of Two Evils

So here we are again, a nation readying ourselves for a presidential election.  Bantering back and forth, accusations flinging left and right, top to bottom, lies, half truths, misdirecting and insinuations; like many years of elections we are left to choose the worst of two evils.

A man who eleven years ago was recorded saying and admitting to sexist comments, disrespectful to women and actions towards women in most case any other man would have had legal charges brought against him.  Some call him a chauvinist, womanizer, sexist and/or racist.  A man’s arrogance, quick speaking before thought sometimes gets him in trouble and chances are it will in the future.  The man…. Donald Trump.

This same man says he will stand up for America, it’s people and the constitution. 

A woman who over the last few years has been riddled in controversy even as lately as a month ago, actions showing she believes she is above the law, doing this “her way” whether than following protocols and laws if her ideas went against her oath.  A woman who has bought her way through favors and a “pay for play” lifestyle to support her political ambitions.  A woman who has been caught in lie after lie, wrong doing after wrong doing, supported by not only big money but my media outlets twisting the lies verse truth even more than the woman herself.  The woman…. Hillary Clinton.

This woman says she will continue with current policies provided by our current administration which she so proudly reminds us, she was part of.

So here we are again, this should NOT be the norm.  The behavior and attitude should not be tolerated.  This is no longer just politics, it is laced with disrespect, holier than thou attitudes and actions, speeches only designed to give the people, us, the voters what we want to hear, words to convince us to vote for them, the elite, the powerful, hiding behind their money damned the laws we the people live by.

So there you have it, a choice as poor as it is, to choose between the lesser or more convincing of two evils.

R martin


Journalism, CNN No Bias

Journalism, unbiased reporting of news, events, incidents and note worthy topics. I am not including opinion pieces, as opinion and editorial pieces do not necessarily fall under the ethics of true journalism.

Opinions, well everyone has an opinion, everyone has the right to voice their opinion and opinions are not regulated by what use to be the teachings of journalistic ethics and standards.

Ethics and standards of journalism

The basic teachings (and seem to be most forgotten of late) include fairness, integrity, truthfulness, accuracy, and objectivity.  Through in accountability and professionalism to round off how a journalist is suppose to act.


Apparently, some at CNN feels they have the right to put words in someone’s mouth, i.e., Donald Trump.  Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated there is a need for profiling, such as Israel profiles when there is suspicious behavior. At no time did Donald Trump say anything about race, religion or sexual orientation.

However, CNN reported not only in an article but also in headlines using the word “racial” in his comments. Trump did not at anytime use the word racial or any word hinting at race or anything particular type of profiling other than saying to do it like Israel.

So did CNN stick to the standard of journalistic ethics? Was CNN’s reporting truthful? Accurate? Fair? Objective? No to all of these questions.

Once again the media did not represent unbiased reporting.  Once again the media openly supporting Hillary Clinton for president, throws out the race card. Again, as with the “Make America Great Again”, media jumps on a band wagon promoting false statements in an attempt to make someone out as a racist or their statements promoting racism.

CNN showed poor journalistic skills, flat out lied. CNN needs to report the truth, not insinuate or make it appear a person’s comment needs to be taken a particular way when it is not what the person said.

CNN is intentionally making false statements, reporting them as truths in the attempt to rally people against Donald Trump.

Why can’t the  media just do their job the way they are suppose to? Just give us the truth, unbiased, accurate and objective. If it’s going to be an opinion piece, fine, but state it as an opinion piece, not as fact.

R martin

Has Political Correctness Endangered US?

Is it a bomb or not? Original reports stated there was an explosion in Chelsea, New York and a second “device” was found near the area of the explosion.


The definition of a bomb: an item filled with destructive material, explosive material, gas, smoke or incendiary material designed in such a way to explode on impact or setoff by a remote control device, time device, or fuse.

The Device

The device found close to the scene of the explosion was a “pressure cooker with wires connecting a cell phone…pressure cooker containing with explosive material, bearings and bb’s”.

The item – a pressure cooker, the remote control device – cell phone, contents – explosive material, bearings and bb’s.  Looks like a duck, acts like a duck, it is a duck.  Looks like a bomb, acts like a bomb, it is a… BOMB!

Donald Trump

Presidential candidate came out publicly a bomb had exploded in Chelsea, New York.  Media has come out against presidential candidate Donald Trump for calling it a “bomb”; the media said there was no confirmation a bomb was involved despite the discover a second “device”.

Hillary Clinton

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton slammed Trump for calling it a bomb, yet within minutes she was calling it a bomb, before law enforcement (on live TV) said a “bomb exploded” in Chelsea, NY.

Media Bias

As Donald Trump was vocal about a bomb exploding and a second bomb being found, the media was quick to respond.  Not only providing news of the incident but the media also attempted to turn people against Trump by saying Trump had no evidence it was a bomb. In fact some media outlets reported the explosion might have been a gas leak even after law enforcement stated it was a bomb.  Media also chose the words “explosive device” instead of the word “bomb” while the media went on a rampage against Trump for using the word bomb.

Once Hillary Clinton used the word bomb (by mistake?), the media did not go after her for using the word bomb instead of the phrase “explosive device”.

To the media, to those wishing to be politically correct, and those thinking there is a difference, looking it up, “explosive device” and “bomb” are the same thing.

If you want to use the phrase “explosive device” or the word “bomb”, fine, great, it is what it is.  But don’t say an explosion with undetermined original is what it is even after law enforcement states it is a bomb or explosive device.

My Thought

Don’t go after any person political candidate or not when the person uses the word “bomb”.  Furthermore, if the media is going after one candidate for using the word bomb, then go after both.  If you don’t it is considered bias. And the some media, far, left liberal reporters say the media is treating Donald Trump with a soft touch.  Read the interviews, that is definitely not the case.