In the wake of Facebook's News Feeds, we have this! AND IT'S AN OLD STORY.

WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR NEWS?

From Business Insider's Pamela Engle, Oct 21 2014.
News outlets like CNN and ABC News might have the biggest audiences, but they're not the most trusted across-the-board in America.

The most trusted news outlets in America, according to a new study from Pew Research Center, are actually British.

BBC and The Economist top the list of outlets that are trusted by every ideological group, while BuzzFeed and The Rush Limbaugh Show are at the bottom.

Conservative-leaning news outlets seem to be the least trusted among those with a mixed political ideology. Liberal-leaning outlets like Mother Jones and ThinkProgress also rank lower than major media players like The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times.

The news outlets that are considered trustworthy by every ideological group don't equate to the most popular outlets, however.
Americans say they get most of their political news from local TV, Facebook, and major networks like CNN and Fox News.
CNN and Fox News both had a high trust rating overall, but there is more of a dispute between ideological groups about whether they're trustworthy. For example, 88% of consistent conservatives said they trust Fox News, but only 14% said they trust CNN.
For the study, Pew surveyed a representative sample of randomly selected Americans.

DON'T BE BLUE

The Poisonous M&Ms Analogy

The Poisonous M&Ms Analogy has been going around for quite a while. It represents an idea that creates much opposition from the extreme ends of the spectrum. On one side you have the people who want to place limitations on recent events affecting society, or even past events. On the other you have people who do not want any limitations on those aspects of society affected by the events. Both can be right or wrong, depending on which side you are standing.

The Poisonous M&Ms Analogy goes something like this.
Someone says that you can have a whole bag of M&Ms, not a small bag, but the big party bag with 1000 M&Ms in it, but warns you that 1% of them are poisoned. Do you want to still have the free bag of M&Ms? (the actual scenario used 10%, but I feel that's much too high)

The analogy usually refers to something that is certainly meant to stir the emotions when it is referring to a minority of ideologies, like race, religion, ethnicity or any other defining notion.

There's the side believes that treating them all as suspect is validated by not wanting to eat an M&M from a bag were some of them are poisonous. The other side believes it can be used to prop up any kind of harmful stereotype about groups, such as genders, ethnicities, religious and political communities without having to engage the objections to unfair generalizations.

So we should just do away with all of the laws we've made in the past because they are unfair to people who want to commit a crime against innocent people.

The bottom line is this.
We have laws for a reason and the underlying reason is that a minutely small number of a given population has performed an unjust act on the rest of the population with something harmful, like death, in the beginning. It escalated to other less offensive acts that may not have killed anyone, but hurt the physically or financially. If we knew who they were, we wouldn't need the law, but they are hidden among us and acting like us and society is forced be reactive instead of proactive.

Now we are back to the Poisonous M&M Analogy. What if half of the poisonous ones were green, but only about 40% of them. Now you could throw out all of the green ones, but still have .5% poisonous, that’s about 4 out of say 800.

Here's the part they didn't tell you. If you do eat one of the poisonous ones, everyone standing next to you would also die and everyone within 10 feet of you would end up in the hospital, kind of like a virus. Now you have the bag of M&Ms, what do you do with them?

Of course all of the Skittles are free to eat, but what about the green ones?

DON'T BE BLUE

Those squirrels are onto something and George Washington Carver.

That’s what new research published in the International Journal of Epidemiology has found. For the study, researchers analyzed the nut and peanut butter intake of more than 120,000 adults aged 55-69 in the Netherlands, as well as their mortality rates years later.

They discovered that people who ate tree nuts (such as almonds, cashews, and walnuts) as well as peanuts, had a lower risk of dying from cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness, and neurodegenerative diseases — essentially all the major causes of death — during the time period of the study. The results were the same for men and women.

Participants needed to eat at least 10 grams of nuts or peanuts a day to see the benefits, researchers found. Luckily, it’s not hard to eat that amount daily.

While peanuts typically aren’t touted for their health benefits as much as tree nuts, researchers discovered that they were just as effective as other types of nuts at lowering a person’s risk.

Nuts are amazing, they're packed with fiber, have a form of omega-3 fatty acid that can help lower the risk of developing heart disease and can help lower cholesterol, and they contain flavonoids.

Peanut Butter? (best to make your own)
But while researchers found a link between living a longer life and nuts, they couldn’t say the same for peanut butter. The process of getting peanut butter from peanuts (which involves high temperatures) can destroy some of its health-boosting amino acids, and possibly some of the fatty acids. And unfortunately, it’s the same for natural peanut butter as well as sugar-added versions.

If you want the same benefits in Peanut Butter, you have to make your own. I make mine in a micro food processor and I find it best to use five different nut varieties with no peanuts. 

But just using peanuts is also fantastic. 

Keep them refrigerated.

It only takes a small amount to get the health benefits, an ounce of nuts is a serving, and all you should need on a daily basis.

George Washington Carver was born into slavery in Diamond, Missouri, around 1864. The exact year and date of his birth are unknown. He was a prominent African-American scientist and inventor. Carver is best known for the many uses he devised for the peanut. Carver went on to become one of the most prominent scientists and inventors of his time, as well as a teacher at the Tuskegee Institute.

Carver devised over 100 products using one of these crops—the peanut—including dyes, plastics, gasoline  --- and --- PEANUT BUTTER.

DON'T BE BLUE

Media news bias is ratings driven

Just another reason I rarely watch "Prime Time News" or nationally syndicated news shows like 60 minutes, they bend the news to drive up ratings, in some cases they will just make it up.

Why are the major media outlets content to manufacture or bend the hot news stories in order to drive up ratings?
It's because of the mentality of the old saying, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission"! Unfortunately the bastardized news stories last for days or weeks, if not months, and the asking for forgiveness by broadcast media never happens, or in the case of printed news, it's relegated to the back pages or a footnote.

Trayvon Martin didn’t deserve to be lying mute in an underground box at the age of 17. Nobody does. He committed no offense to warrant such a fate. He was simply returning from the convenience store and chatting on his cell phone with his girlfriend , a scene that could be replicated a million times across America on any given evening. http://themoderatevoice.com/142893/pictures-and-prejudice-in-the-trayvon-martin-case/

Here’s all we know for certain about the killing of Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman noticed the black teen wearing a hoodie while within the confines of the gated community, tailed him as a suspicious character, stepped out of his car to challenge him (despite instructions from police to keep on moving), exchanged words with Martin and they both ended up on the ground. Someone moaned for help around the moment that the gun went off, and Martin died on the spot.

Was the neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman out for blood or just taking his job a little too seriously? 

Why was the only picture used by ABC, NBC, CBS, the NY Times and every other major newspaper, from when Trayvon Martin was only 14 years old?
The contrasting photos of cute Trayvon and nasty George undoubtedly contributed to the call for vengeance.
Was the exposure on Zimmerman’s photo altered in some versions to make the half-Hispanic killer look “whiter”?
George Zimmerman is multi-racial. In fact, it’s been said that he has black relatives.

For most of the black community and the left-of-center crowd, it’s an open-and-shut case of a light-skinned racist murdering an innocent African American kid for the crime of “walking while being black.” The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton showed up to make racial politics, just to add fuel to the fire. The fact that Trayvon was wearing a hoodie has catapulted that essential item of hip-hop apparel to unprecedented glory as a political symbol of unjustly maligned black youth. By now, every Trayvon Martin sympathizer and his brother has been photographed wearing a hoodie. Congressman Bobby Rush was even kicked out of a congressional hearing because he showed up wearing a hoodie. He was kicked out because he did not adhere to the dress code for appearing before congress. Dress code? 'That' is a subject for another day.

NBC altered the 911 call by Zimmerman to make it seem as if Zimmerman was race obsessed, and every news story used it as part of their coverage. 

Photographs, videos, and recordings can be indispensable clues, but our biases, conscious or not, have a way of tampering with the evidence.
Neither man was all saint or all villain. Both should be given an equal chance to be vindicated or judged by proper authorities.

NBC News has since fired the producer who was involved in the production of a misleading taped segment about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida. On April 6th, 39 days after the maelstrom, it appeared as a blip in the news, but not on any prime time news broadcast.

The action came in the wake of an internal investigation by NBC News into the production of the segment, which strung together audio clips in such a way that made George Zimmerman’s shooting of Mr. Martin sound racially motivated. Ever since the Feb. 26 shooting, there has been a continuing debate about whether race was a factor in the incident.

Of course the damage has been done in the wake of a rioting public driven to the media frenzy,
 just as they wanted.

Sometimes you just can't help but be BLUE!

Who wants to live forever? Scientist sees aging cured!

The first person who will live to see their 150th birthday has already been born.

Space Age Retirement Homes?

A biomedical gerontologist and chief scientist of a foundation dedicated to longevity research,Aubrey de Grey, reckons that within his own lifetime doctors could have all the tools they need to "cure" aging -- banishing diseases that come with it and extending life indefinitely.
De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular "maintenance," which by then will include gene therapies, stem cell therapies, immune stimulation and a range of other advanced medical techniques to keep them in good shape.

That being said,
Does the government really want you to live, forever? Do you really want to live forever?
Retirement ages are getting longer, now it's 66, but in the next 20 years, will senior citizens be living in internment camps or dependent on their children? Social Security will not be able to keep up, but more importantly, Social Security will not be enough. What will the quality of life be like for the Old People? We may be able to advance medically to a point where many of the ailments that plague the aging are eliminated, but many people who retire, lose the willingness to continue. They don't really have a good reason to get out of bed.
We are rapidly getting to the point where the government takes all of your money and issues vouchers to pay your bills, especially if the redistribution of wealth programs become a reality. More to the point is that, if amnesty is given to illegal immigrants, our obligation to those who don't, or won't, or can't work, will quadruple our national debt.

DON'T BE BLUE

Shame on our own national news media! CBS NBC ABC

2010

With all the news that's not fit to print or broadcast, why is the significance of Cordoba not getting out to the people?

"I was watching the news the other day and noticed a familiar occurrence."

A reporter was talking about new parking meters in Los Angeles and that there would be tens of thousands of them going up in the next few months. His emphasis was on the technology; card readers in the machines, you don't even need cash or coins anymore and there is a sensor that will send a signal out to a central processor when the time expires that will get a parking enforcement officer over to write up a ticket.

What he failed to mention at any time was that right on the meter there was a big label, "$3 for each 15 minutes"! Nowhere in the story was there any mention about the cost to park. Luckily I don't need to go to Los Angeles and fight for parking. I don't really know how much it costs today or if the $3 per each 15 minutes is a new increase. It wasn't reported.

It's what isn't mentioned in the news that is getting my attention more and more, especially when part of the story is right there in the background or foreground or hanging around in the ether. Not that some stories are not getting aired, but the stories are incomplete. 

I don't know if it's a carryover from the Dan Rather debacle where the news was being manipulated, as well as outright fabricated, by the news organization or that there is still too much political correctness going on and they are just afraid to bring out the whole story. Most of the news on TV and in the newspapers is so skewed to the left, mostly, or at least leaning that way or over the top to the right, occasionally, that there are hardly any newscasts or newspapers worth watching or reading. The news should be balanced and fair, or maybe justified, but certainly not steered. That's mainly why I don't watch the national news broadcast on CBS, NBC, or ABC. They are not interested in both sides of the story. It's also why I don't read the Los Angeles Times or New York Times or any of the big newspapers. All of the current national newscasts and newspapers are blatantly biased. Those big stories will get out somehow, on the internet, where you can decide how much to read, but most of the real story on any national news broadcasts will be lost in the bias.

It's kind of ironic that when an event happens that will impact not only the local region but broad reaching enough to tug at the heartstrings of America and possibly the world, the national news stations will broadcast those stories all day, every day for a week or more, until the next "big headline news event" comes up. Even news stories like the oil spill in the gulf, airplane disasters, the kidnapping of a child or finding the kidnapped child, trapped coal miners, devastating storms and the downing of the World Trade Center in New York City, are "sold" to the audience in how they are told, or not told. Questions go unanswered by both the news media and the government. It's so very interesting that with all the competition for the audience of viewers and readers that the news media is trying to attract, they don't even understand how to make shock media work for them. They certainly know how to make it work against them. How many times do you see the nauseating effort the media takes to make you see someone cry on national TV or invading someone's privacy with an army of reporters and news vehicles camped at a victim's or suspected criminal's house, yet alone someone convicted of a crime.

Just think how more time could be given to real news stories if all that was said was "there was a drive-by shooting in Los Angels or New York or Detroit today, but no one died", read about it on our web site", or some other quick 3 second blurb, and then get to real important news. 

No one cares about the celebrities and superstars on again off again escapades or lack of social grace. It belongs in its own news show or program. Olbermann, Stewart, Beck, Limbagh, and O'Reilly aren't news people, they're news entertainment pundits disguised as political news activists, but that’s where people are forced to go if they want the rest of the story that started on national news and was left unfinished on local news. We shouldn't be relegated to getting our national news from CNN or Fox News and no one watches MSNBC anyway. Although Olbermann, Levine and Savage may be in the basement of the political pundit tower, the elevator isn't going anywhere worth stopping. if you are looking for the real story behind those "breaking headline news" stories. There isn't one local or national newscast about bad things that happen to good people that should be longer than 30 seconds, or better yet if each event was cut to one sentence. Then you could get to the news that actually impacts the city, state, nation or world, from the national news programs (ABC, NBC, ABC) that both the left and the right should be watching.

Where's the GOOD NEWS being reported by the news media?

If the National news really wanted viewers to flock to their broadcast, they would let the news happen, give a short summary and then ask the question everyone wants to know, and then go looking for the answers. There are far too many news stories about drive-by shootings and minor crimes that are allowed way too much airtime. We glorify gangsters and criminals, even overpaid unappreciative super stars, by making them the headline in the news, so much so, that 80% of the news is either negative or driven by entertainment gossip. In fact, victims should, BY LAW, be given 3 times more airtime than criminals, and the story should never be more than 6 seconds long. If there needs to be more time, they should be directed to a 'special' news program.

News stations and newspapers will see a resurgence of listeners and readers, if they took a more proactive, but unbiased, approach to the real news. News stories should be politically unbiased, as well as editorially unbiased. Most news organizations are politically bent, they all need to straighten up, or at least announce they are the voice of the left, or right, and see how their audience responds. That way we could have some fantastic news media battles that may actually get the whole story out and let the audience decide, or at least let them be informed enough to decide if they care enough to watch or read tomorrow's news.

Ask a politician a question, and the last thing that will come out will be the answer, which won't be understood by anyone anyway. Politicians always ignore the question. Their main objective is to get THEIR message out first, because air time is so short and costly to them. Usually the question never gets answered and the news reporter on the scene or the interviewer in the studio, also short on time, lets them off the hook. The first sound a politician should make when asked a question, must be about the answer. Give them 3 seconds to start the answer or cut them off. You could then have a standard disclaimer, "another long-winded politician that can't get to the answer". The politicians will be screaming, but it should be, answer first - stump second. Everyone knows the news anchor is just really an overpriced news reader anyway; give them something they can sink their teeth into. Congress is currently trying to silence the news that everyone wants, under the guise of "equal air time", anyway, let the battle begin. Politicians would then get more air time than they would probably want, if they had to answer the question first, then stump, because there would always be questions that need answering.

The news media could easily put the challenge on politicians, government officials, superstars or the Corporate CEO, and drive up interest in viewing or reading their news. All they have to do is say, "We invited so and so to come on and answer these perplexing questions, but they have declined our offer", and keep repeating it every day. When they do come on, then it's, one question - one answer, stump later, if there is time. There would always be some important news going on in-between the hard hitting world and national catastrophes that occur. The news stories wouldn't have to be dragging on ad nauseam until the next "breaking news" happens.

So with all the news that's apparently not fit to print in our fine national newspapers or broadcast on our upstanding national news broadcasts, why is the significance of Cordoba not getting out to the people?                                         

Watch and Learn!

And it took a non-American to point it out!
Shame on our own national news media! 
Shame on CBS, NBC, and ABC.

APR. 30, 2014

Developer Sharif El-Gamal says he has downsized his plans for the $100 million, 15-story Muslim Community Center near the World Trade Center site that became a lightning rod amid the national controversy; he says he will now build a smaller, three-story museum dedicated to Islam, and has commissioned French architect Jean Nouvel to design the building and make the plan more attractive to neighbors. NOW CALLED PARK 51

Sharif El-Gamal is an American real estate developer. He is the chairman and chief executive officer of Soho Properties, a Manhattan-based real estate company.