Replies

We are being manipulated and destroyed by our own system.

IMHO much of it boils down to an egregious misunderstanding of the meaning and proper application of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an Establishment of religilon or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,
or the right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

If you look at its clauses in reverse order you can see its meaning and intent more clearly:

assembling to petition the government could hardly be more obviously political.
But in truth, speaking and publishing what the government might wish to suppress is also highly political; the framers weren't particularly afraid that medical textbooks would be banned!
And the governments with which the framers were familiar all entangled with the local churches; the king of England was "defender of the faith" and considered that title to be an essential part of the political legitimacy of his crown. Taking a man's religion to be the near-constant that we are familiar with, essentially freedom of religion protects the political franchise of people whose religion is discriminated against.

Also, the conceit that the government should respect "journalistic objectivity" is completely at odds with the First Amendment. That is, if someone appeals to the First Amendment in defense of their speech or writing they are not appealing not to the right to be right but to the right to publish their own opinion, right or wrong. Which means that everyone is equal before the law in their right to publish their own opinion at their own expense.

It is important to note that the FCC created broadcasting by giving licenses to broadcast at high power in particular frequency bands and censoring the transmission of "interfering" signals by the riffraff like you and me. Thus we see that the FCC is an evasion of the First Amendment. Broadcasting has essentially transcended the press as a medium of political discourse, yet nothing the FCC does would pass muster if applied to the press or to in-person speech.

And journalism is not--as it loves to style itself--either "the press" or "the first draft of history." Print journalism is part of the press--as are magazines and books--but government-licensed broadcast journalism is no part of the First Amendment "press" at all. Commercial journalism is entertainment, and as such is systematically negative and superficial towards we-the-people and our institutions.

So our melieu is saturated with anticonservative propaganda, and we wonder why. It is no accident. No accident at all . . .