The Gaslighting of America

Gaslighting is a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, makes a victim question their reality. It works much better than you may think. Anyone is susceptible to gaslighting, and it is a common technique of abusers, dictators, narcissists, and cult leaders. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn't realize how much they've been brainwashed. For example, in the movie Gaslight (1944), a man manipulates his wife to the point where she thinks she is losing her mind. - Psychology Today.

It is becoming more and more obvious (except to liberal journalists) that some in the media and Democrat politicians are "gaslighting" Americans in their news stories and public statements.

Over at The Federalist, David Harsanyi noted:

In the past week, I’ve noticed a number of Democrats and liberal journalists refusing to concede inconvenient facts. 

No matter how many times, for instance, you quote the plain language of the Virginia or New York abortion bills, they won’t acknowledge that both legalize the procedure until the moment of birth for virtually any reason. No matter how many times you show them language in those bills that protect doctors who terminate babies who are born alive from prosecution, they shake their heads as if you’re indulging in some right-wing conspiracy theory. No matter how many times you provide them with data that shows more than 15,000 abortions of viable babies being performed every year––most, if not all, having nothing to do with “saving the mother’s life”––they say “no.” (I’ve experienced it personally.) 

The same game is being played with the Green New Deal proposal. 

“I really don’t like their policy of taking away your car, of taking away your airplane rights, of let’s hop a train to California, of you’re not allowed to own cows anymore,” Trump said in the El Paso speech. White House Bureau Chief at The Washington Post Philip Rucker let his 340,000 followers on Twitter know that this was “false” and that “no one” had proposed any such thing. David Weigel, another well-read political reporter at The Post, who had earlier co-bylined a piece with the misleading headline “Ocasio-Cortez retracts erroneous information about Green New Deal,” retweeted Rucker’s falsehood to his 450,000 followers. 

First of all, even if Ocasio-Cortez did walk back her pitch, it was proposed. This might be inconvenient, but it’s also indisputable. Simply because a politician pulls a proposal that’s been dragged across the entire internet and beaten senseless does not mean its existence has been expunged from the record. 

The authors of the Green New Deal were very clear that their plan was a “massive transformation of our society” with “clear goals and a timeline.” Those goals included eliminating “combustion engines” and air travel and beef. It was the bill’s authors who wrote about “economic security” for those who are “unwilling to work.” They simply hadn’t come up with all the nuts and bolts yet. And, yes, a bunch of presidential candidates endorsed these ideas, while the FAQ was up.

Yes, the media and Democrats are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. But thanks to some honest journalists and The Wayback Machine, the truth is coming out and showing that those liberal journalists and Democrats are trying to gaslight us. Even I was able to notice it, after having dealt with a gaslighting narcissist a few years ago.

To read more, go here.

"Green New Deal" A Socialist Fraud

The new Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her "Green New Deal" and a number of Democrats, including several presidential candidates, signed on.

But, as Mark Penn notes, it has more in common with Mao's "Cultural Revolution" than FDR's "New Deal" of the 1930s.

Above, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Penn wrote in Fox News:

The “Green New Deal” is not green at all. If anything it’s a raw, red deal. It calls for a government takeover of our wage, and of our energy, housing, health care and transportation sectors. It has more in common with Mao’s Cultural Revolution than it does FDR’s New Deal, which lifted millions out of the Great Depression. 

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announced this resolution with Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Marky and a bevy of supporting congressmen.
One wonders if anyone actually read it. 

One section says that in the spirit of democracy that only people from “frontline and vulnerable communities and workers” will “plan, run and administer” all of these massive green deal programs. 

Just as Mao’s Cultural Revolution empowered students over their parents, so this bill sets up identity politics groups as having power over the major sectors of the economy. It even calls for a national “mobilization,“ as Mao did. 

Referencing historical discrimination, this bill in effect does away with one person one vote, or democracy as we know it, since in this resolution, redress of the past requires that only these designated groups would have a say in running this plan, whose administration would in effect be the domestic policy of the country.

After people started examining her plan and picking it apart, Ocasio-Cortez removed it from her website and claimed people were mischaracterizing it. But thanks to The Wayback Machine, she was caught in a blatant lie, as The Federalist Papers notes.

To read more, go here. 

Prepping Up!

Last night, I was up to around midnight going through my files and paper documents in preparation for next week's taping of the Hot Bench court show of my case against Denise Santos. I spoke with the producer yesterday and their attorneys requested a few things (such as Hawaii pictures and proof of the engagement). So that got me started to get things located and organized in preparation for the show.

There were a number of things that I couldn't locate or had completely forgotten about. But, fortunately for me, my "honorary sister" came to my rescue, even though she was busy with a ton of work-related things.

She is a self-described "virtual packrat" and saves everything. She said, "The day after you throw out that "unnecessary" receipt or whatever, you will need it very badly with no warning.  That's just the way it is."

It wasn't all drudgery last night as we had some fun bantering about the events of the past few months (yes, I can now laugh about it). She said, "Hmmm, finding stuff to prove she is lying is SO much more interesting than [the stuff from work]. I think I can find you a lot more on the boobs even." 

In reading much of what she came up with and sent me, I am more convinced than ever that narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) was definitely involved. The things that happened with Denise Santos made no sense until I saw that video by Coach Corey Wayne on "I Dated A Narcissist". Now they do.

NPD is described by Wikipedia as:

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of understanding of others' feelings. People affected by it often spend a lot of time thinking about achieving power or success, or about their appearance. They often take advantage of the people around them. The behavior typically begins by early adulthood, and occurs across a variety of situations.

According to the DSM-5, people with NPD have most (or all) of these symptoms:

1. Grandiosity with expectations of superior treatment from others
2. Fixated on fantasies of power, success, intelligence, attractiveness, etc.
3. Self-perception of being unique, superior and associated with high-status people and institutions
4. Needing constant admiration from others
5. Sense of entitlement to special treatment and to obedience from others
6. Exploitative of others to achieve personal gain
7. Unwilling to empathize with others' feelings, wishes, or needs
8. Intensely jealous of others and the belief that others are equally jealous of them
9. Pompous and arrogant demeanor

Thankfully, she came up with many things that will support my case concerning "Thelma & Louise" (i.e., the boobs) and how California Civil Code 1590 applies to them. I also found much that I needed via the Wayback Machine. I had to delete a number of blog posts per an agreement that my Denise and I arrived at (that expires in August 2019). But, once things get on the Internet, things are really never gone forever. Just ask Hillary Clinton! 

It all boils down to convincing the panel:

 "Do you seriously think I would pay to get those done just so that she could leave me shortly after that surgery and show them off to other men, while abandoning her commitment to our marriage but leaving me to pay for them?"  

The stuff we came up with last night will go a long way to support my contentions.

I have a much better feeling about my chances of success on Hot Bench.

It is interesting that Denise agreed to go on the show. I am sure episodes are re-run in different markets and they are also available for viewing on YouTube. You can bet that our episode will be posted on this blog and all my friends will be passing on the link to it.

The way I see things these days: My fiancee died last April and a demon took her form. I am battling the demon.

The Wayback Machine

If one accidentally deletes or intentionally deletes a blog post, it still exists out there.

I was recently told of a website that archives things that anyone has deleted or changed (the original version is saved, in other words).

It exists not "in the ether", but at the Wayback Machine. The Wayback Machine takes a periodic snapshot of websites and stores them for posterity (or perpetuity?).

For example, here's the snapshot of this blog taken on January 9, 2016.

So, if your computer manages to crash, or for some other reasons, your lost posts (including photos) are still available.