the start of the peel

People really dislike comparing trump to hitler for some reason. The parallels are stark for me. If you can't see it then you aren't looking. 

Fascist - tick. Popular - tick. Hateful - tick. Sneaky - tick. Followed and adored by idiots who are only concerned about feathering their own nests - tick. Wrote a book - tick.

Of course trumps book was called - the art of the deal and in it he explained how he diddled so much from so many.
NZH

This is also a very old game for Trump, who has spent more than 40 years extravagantly and publicly lying in order to burnish his reputation, mislead the public about his track record as a businessman, and draw attention to himself as a man-about-town.  

Trump partially owned up to this during his early ascent as a national celebrity, when he and his ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, published "The Art of the Deal" in 1987. Trump described repeated falsehoods, doublespeak and exaggerations as tools he used to get ahead in business and life, and labelled them "truthful hyperbole."

This is where the alternative facts worldview comes from - way back when trump realised the DEAL is the goal not how you get to and close the deal. THE DEAL itself is the be all and end all.

Over the last week, Conway has tried to rebrand "alternative facts" as "alternative information" and "incomplete information." The latter two are unlikely to be the phrases that stick, however. Even so, Conway continues repackaging Trumpisms with brio, telling the Hollywood Reporter this week of her zeal for her role and the power Trump has invested in her. "If you see me on TV, it's because he wants me there," she said. 

Spinning takes energy, however, and it requires unpeeling some moral glue to do it day after day - especially in the Trump era, when misdirection and lies are likely to be regular occurrences. For his part, Trump has done this for decades and it hasn't appeared to take much of a toll on him. 

But the White House's machinations are likely to take a toll on Conway, Spicer and Trump's other advisers (as it did on some of their predecessors in decades past) if they decide to stay in the presidential arena for long. Proximity to Trump can be corrosive.

yep corrosive indeed - watch these events take place and imagine being way back in the 1930's in Germany - we are all living in history.

sinister confusion

The 'alternative facts' from the idiot trump's team are starting. Lies are not lies, not falsehoods, not deceptions - no they are alternative facts. And that is the softening up process so that any of the idiot trump's idiot supporters will do any idiot thing - not yet now, but a wee bit later on - based on alternative facts.

NZH

If there is one video clip that describes the new reality for the political media - and for the truth - during the President Trump era, it is the one above.It's a discussion about White House press secretary Sean Spicer, on his first full day in that job, having taken to the podium and made easily disproved claims about the size of President Trump's inauguration crowd."Why put him out there for the very first time, in front of that podium, to utter a provable falsehood? Chuck Todd asked Kellyanne Conway, a senior aide to the president. "It's a small thing, but the first time he confronts the public, it's a falsehood?After some tense back and forth, Conway offered this:"Don't be so overly dramatic about it, Chuck. You're saying it's a falsehood, and they're giving - our press secretary, Sean Spicer, gave alternative facts to that. But the point really is -"

Good write up by Anthony Robins on The Standard about the size of the marches and the deliberate and sinister messing with the facts bullshit from trump and his minions.

the silo is too small

I'm interested in what post truth actually means. I'm going to trundle around this - it is only an aspect, a slither, an angle. I'm also using terms that I don't wholly like - like authority - in the learned sense.

In the past authorities and experts were generally accepted as authorities and experts and the knowledge and conclusions they reached were considered accepted. Not all of the time and of course there were always plenty of counter arguments placed. But the reason people get labeled as expert or an authority (knowledge) is generally because they knew a lot about the subject - they had studied and analysed it, they had contemplated and come to some conclusions, they had extrapolated and modeled.

In our new interconnected world it is a lot harder to accept authorities or experts - whoever they are.

The reason is that pretty well anyone with the net can  be (pretend or self delusional) an authority and can quote or link to other authorities or experts. You can find anyone who is (in the past) an accepted authority or expert - like a scientist for instance, in any area and saying anything.

we are all Spartacus now...

In effect what these myriad of authorities give us is confusion and uncertainty. The EX prime minister john key showed this quite well a few years ago on HardTalk when he embarrassed himself and us.

Sackur: But he is very well qualified, isn’t he? He’s looked, for example, at the number of species threatened with extinction in New Zealand, he’s looked at the fact that half your lakes, 90% of your lowland rivers, are now classed as polluted.
Key: Look, I’d hate to get into a flaming row with one of our academics, but he’s offering his view. I think any person that goes down to New Zealand ...
Sackur: Yeah but he’s a scientist, it’s based on research, it’s not an opinion he’s plucked from the air.
Key: He’s one academic, and like lawyers, I can provide you with another one that will give you a counterview. Anybody who goes down to New Zealand and looks at our environmental credentials, and looks at New Zealand, then I think for the most part, in comparison with the rest of the world, we are 100% pure – in other words, our air quality is very high, our water quality is very high

Yes another one that will provide a counter-view - this is post truth in action.

This gets very complicated when we consider that, in general, authorities or experts have lost a measure of their authority because of vested interests, money and funding, bogus deliberate falsehoods and outrageous claims, individuals without morals and scruples and so on. Who the hell can we actually trust? In this world of immediacy, of wiki and blogs and commentators and commenters - who can we trust?

I don't think we can trust many.

The reason is that all of us tend to find people that agree with us, authorities that see the same issues and propose solutions that fit well with what we think could work - in other words we get silo-ed. The internet is increasing this trend I think. As more and more voices get added to the mix and as everyone quotes and links to some authority or expert - we are actually listening less, learning less and being reinforced in our views more. We are in a silo.

The answer isn't to listen to other people's experts or authorities, the answer is to be aware of how self referencing or perhaps self authoritating works and to understand how we are affected by it.

Another really sad aspect is that just because someone was an authority or expert about an important subject in the past, or indeed today, doesn't mean they actually are an expert or authority about the burning issue of today. Guess what - humans are human. Leading journalists, scientists and experts are human - they make mistakes, they get things wrong and they have their own bias and self referencing apparatus in play.

We have seen this all in play around global warming and climate change, 911, trump, 1080, the middle east conflicts, the environment, economics, - you name it and we have seen it.

In all of these discussion areas someone's expert is pitted against another person's expert - it is just a competition where repetition and hard headedness are the key and the goal is to win. Of course there is nothing actually to win other than an argument with another anonymous internet user.

The competitive element of expert/authority use is very right wing - the left do it too but the right love it. It destroys debate, lowers the tone, and muddies the waters and these are all 'nice to haves' for the right. The dirtier the water the less people want to swim and the same is true of voting, at least for anyone other than the right.

Post truth means that there is very little that can be pinned down in online debates and even when the pin is in, somehow it gets pulled out and poked somewhere else. It can be frustrating. We have to learn to live in this post truth world and we do that by first knowing ourselves.

the cut key

Prime Minister John Key has been caught telling lies. It sounds bad and it is bad. Politicians are often circumspect with the truth, they weave and dodge as the case may be - but lying is bad form and being caught lying, even worse, and then telling more lies to get out of the first lie, oh dear things start unwinding then. That is what is happening to John Key at the moment, he is under pressure, so much so, that he has taken a desperate gamble - He has said he will no longer take anything other that written questions lol - he has packed a real sad.

Stuff

he will no longer answer questions about his actions without warning, following controversy over his role in the appointment of spy boss Ian Fletcher.

During an interview on Radio Live, Key described those reporting on the story as ''knuckle heads'' and said he would change his approach to answering questions both in Parliament and to the media.

Without warning? What is that - the sound of one hand clapping. That just shows he is vacuous, vain and full of hubris, he is.

Denying accusations that he had lied by omission, he said he had only had ''15 seconds, with no warning, on a process that happened 18 months ago'' and he should have taken time to research the answer.

''What I should have done, and what I will be doing in the future, is saying, well, the member needs to put that down to me in writing, and I'll be doing that to the journalists as well,'' Key said.

''Coz if you want perfection of everything I have done, two, three, four, five years ago, I will get you all that information for you, but I'll get you the whole lot and give it to you,'' he said.

Hey! we aren't talking about 2, 3, 4 years ago, remember your mate, the one you rang to let him in on the job as our top spy? Remember how you said you knew him vaguely but then we find out you've sat and ate with him three times, and you were pushing for him to be in on a top job in 2009? And we're not going to forget Kim Dotcom.

I hope the public take a long hard long at our Prime Minister because as they will see the truth about him, that will tilt their ship enough that we can stop there exploitative agenda and force them to back down on so many important issues.

I think The Standard have done a great job with revealing details and facts to really question the appointment entirely. Eddie with Cronyism got it rolling, plus Vance asks the right questions on Key cronyism and then Karol posted some really good ones, The CV of a Spy Boss, then, Rennie: Key vetoed the shortlist?, and Fletcher GCSB Change Manager - and QLD.

Rob too with Key needs time to egt his story straight. That is the way to deliver the information and all of it quality. The Standard is one of my favorite sites - the debate is robust and sometimes very funny, identities get irritated by each other and sometimes end up if feuds, then a post comes along when you find enemies agreeing on something else and away it goes again. There are the fact finders, the stirrers, the trolls, and the regulars, semi-regulars and the many lurkers. A lot of fun and jeepers you learn a lot, most of it very interesting. So if you don't already, go visit the site I recommend it.

I also saw a really good roundup  in NBR by Bryce Edwards in NZ Political Daily on the scenario that unfolded. Highly recommend that one, although I was disappointed that The Standard wasn't even mentioned yet others were, who were frankly not really up to it. Bryce misses a few key bits that are there when you read The Standard bloggers. Anyway, don't want to give any that visit here a swell head and all that, it can often be irritating and can make you really shake your head..

The latest where Key is only going to take written questions is laugh out loud funny - he can't get out of it easily anymore. It is embarrassing in so many ways, to have him as the Prime Minister of this country. We can't right the wrongs with this type of person there. He tells lies in parliament, on camera and to everyone. He pretends to himself. It is not good enough to have a PM who does that and says he will only take written questions thus bringing into ridicule the whole office of PM. Come on, this emperor has no clothes.

Yhanks to all th journalists who's articles I linked to and to Blip for their extensive list of lies from key on The Standard,

brownlee - the camel's back is broken!

energy minister (what a misnomer that is) brownlee has been caught in a lie.

He should resign now

From the Standard

"Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee is denying he trimmed a South Island conservation park after being lobbied by mining company L&M. However, documents posted on The Standard and No Right Turn show he was lying."

From the Press

"The Oteake Conservation Park, set up last year, was to have included a 200-hectare Crown-owned block in the upper Manukerikia Valley, but the area was kept out of the park, as requested by Christchurch-based coal company L and M Mining.

The area overlies the Hawkdun lignite coal deposit, one of 10 lignite deposits in Otago-Southland.

Brownlee was adamant there was no pressure from L&M:

“We had no representations from L and M Mining. I want to make that very, very clear. There was, however, a proposal to place … 70,000ha into the Oteake Conservation Park. We made the decision to keep 200ha out on the basis that it may have significant mineral deposits, mainly lignite.”

The document posted on The Standard however shows very clearly that Brownlee knew about L&M’s interest in the area. The company already had a prospecting permit, and we know from the official advice that Brownlee talked the issue over with then Conservation Minister Tim Groser.

Idiot/Savant at No Right Turn here and here and the standard are on this one - go to the links and read the full sordid story. Good work in getting this out there.

How can a minister just lie like that - HE HAS TO GO.