The New CNN and Who Replaces Cuomo

Will CNN Become the FOX of the left?

There has been much debate about who will replace Chris Cuomo on CNN at a time when the network is about to have new owners again. Discovery - owned primarily by media mogul John Malone, is taking over from AT&T. The new company will be headed by CEO David Zaslav another career media savvy entrepreneur. I know little about these men but they face many challenges

Chris was one of the top guys at the network and will be hard to replace. He was brash - some might say aggressively so, opinionated and well spoken. This is ideal for his type of show. I am enjoying the current strategy of slating a variety of talented guest spokespeople in the cherished 9:00 pm slot. I have been impressed by Michael Smerconish; Laura Coates; and Brianna Keilar to date.

Articles I read pointed out that morning audiences are a lot different than evening ones. Perhaps their states of mind change throughout the day - lighter stuff in the morning. Brianna for example was not doing well in the morning slot but she has been refreshing as a stand-in for Cuomo. CNN has a large cast of talented personalities who could do the job including their regular guest speakers and analysts.

Apparently the decision will be on hold until the new owners weigh in. This makes good sense. Some big picture decisions remain.

Should they give the nod to a woman? Almost any of the existing prominent CNN females could do a great job. Should there be another person of colour in the slot or both - like Laura Coates. So far the indications are that the new owners want to preserve the CNN image of high integrity news - not the entertaining but often blatantly false and fake diatribes posing as news on FOX among others.

I watch CNN a lot throughout the day and evening and have criticized some of the following areas in the past. How about changing:

- Cutting guests off for giving views that are too right and not what the CNN bosses or sponsors want to hear. Most CNN people are guilty of this - Chris was notorious for it. If you invited them let them finish their point.
- Repetition of the same old stuff over and over. Different viewers won't be able to watch until later in the day but knock off the continual "Breaking News". It might be breaking when it is first broadcast but after that it is just today's news. Things happen 24/7 so there are lots of opportunities for each time slot to "break" some news.
- Not giving credit to the Republicans and other networks if they are correct about something. Keep your leftist views but report rightist views as well without making out anyone who supports them to be crazy. Your own viewers know where you stand overall. Give them credit for having the grey matter we know some FOX fans lack!
- Don't choose Don Lemon to replace Cuomo. He is better where he is - then we can choose to retire or listen to his often maudlin melodrama. Personally I am tired of it.  Lemon is in my opinion over-rated and very predictable. His show has become a soap opera.

All networks face the same big problem as politicians the world over. The majority of TV viewers don't want to have to think - they just want entertainment. For example this is what drives the huge advertising dollars for sport. When they vote - same thing. They vote on last minute emotion and a candidate's charisma and appearance. It is sad but true.

So CNN and other legitimate media companies can still serve a useful purpose. For a democracy to work, the truth must be available to the people who actually think before they vote. There will always be liar networks and liar leaders. People who don't want to think or are incapable of it will occasionally elect liars and cheaters from both sides of the aisle. My hope is that when a thinking electorate gets the facts and elects a thinking leader, the chances of them making good decisions which benefit everyone are better than the alternative. In the long run the average person will experience these benefits.

In summary to Donald and co.: "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."

If I'm wrong, America is toast.

#thebrewsterblock

 

Ukraine and Russia

Could the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict Start World War III?

I can't answer this question - it is well beyond my grasp of history and peoples' patriotism. Try to Google the history of the Ukraine even since the start of World War II and your brain will feel like it is watching a Wimbledon final. What I read was full of back and forth, separation, unification, corruption, conflicts, death etc.

What it does make clear to me is that we in North America are mere babes in arms, barely weaned from mother Britain. Almost any European country has a history as long as your arm which only historians could detail. So understanding the emotions involved in the potential invasion of the Ukraine by Russia is difficult.

If Great Britain attacked either Canada or America with a view to taking them back under her reign, you would have a small taste of what citizens over the pond have experienced for centuries.

Here is my attempt to place this in perspective:

Let us assume - and this is not entirely unrealistic - that Texas declared its independence from America. I don't know if that is possible legally but if they wanted it badly enough the law would not matter. Let us also assume that they succeeded without war erupting between Texas and the other 49 states. Soon Texas might want to join NATO as a full member, expecting support if America crossed its northern border.

It is likely that America would try to get Texas to re-join the union. Now let us say that Russia, or China, or North Korea for example then sent massive forces to the northern border of Mexico in support of Texas, even though there was no Texan / American state of war.

America would have a 100% butt out attitude. This seems to be what Russia is saying. There are those in the Ukraine who want to re-join Russia and those who do not.

Not long ago America would have sent massive military forces to take on Russian troupes. Would that happen today? I doubt it. There would be economic sanctions but Russia would never give back territory it overtook. Also many European countries need Russian oil and other resources.

In this one area Trump had it right. Most Americans no longer want thousands of their sons and daughters losing their lives on behalf of yet another country. America would finance most of it. As usual many other nations would fail to contribute their share. 

Although there have been Ukrainian referendums before on whether to join Russia or not, perhaps another under international control is needed. Then whatever action others took to support Ukraine, it would be tougher for Putin to justify his actions.

He will likely be happy to follow the old policy of taking one small territory at a time calculating that none of the small actions is worth total war. Eventually he or his heirs will succeed

There again Biden could promise help on condition that Zelensky give up some dirt on Trump!

#thebrewsterblock

Is Population Control Inevitable?

Against Vaccination? What about Sterilization?

I have touched on this topic before. I do so again because it is one of those looming problems which nobody will address - no democratic leaders at least - until it is too late. This makes it just like the stop sign that never arrives until "enough" people are killed or some kind of gun control until...well let's not go there again.

This is right up there with climate control. It will not cause the imminent demise of all humans in our lifetime, so it is not our problem. Careers and reputations would be on the line for anyone who brings this to the table, so don't! Bury your head(s) in the sand. Who knows - much of the world might soon be covered by it.

The world population as of this writing for 2022 is 7.9 billion. In 2024 it is projected to be 8.1 billion (world population january 2022 - Google Search). We have all seen images of the most populated cities on the globe, especially in the poorest countries - deplorable.

As well we have all seen images of the melting ice caps and glaciers; rising ocean water levels; forests and other arable land being destroyed by fire, drought, volcanic eruptions, and mankind. The latter is always to make a buck - often at the expense of others.

All of this means fewer places to live and grow food or raise livestock. One way to both reduce this loss and reduce the need for the food and accommodation is to control the population.

China has tried it. It was not popular. People couple up to reproduce for the most part! So do animals and the only reason I have not included them in this post is because mankind controls them. It is usually for food or sport but animal population control is why this is not part of our overcrowding problem. In fact some animals no longer exist.

How can that be applied to Homo Erectus? Simple - no more erectus! There is another big problem. Should the man be sterilized or the woman? We all know what men's choice would be. I can't see it being voluntary. The rich will go berserk at the thought of being told that they can not have more kids. Many religions will echo their cry. "Why should I suffer because others have too many kids and can't afford them?" Sterilize the poor but leave us alone! What do you do with the over-the-limit children? Unlike fish you can't throw them back! I guess they would have to be adapted by couples who can't have kids - up to the limit naturally!

If sterilization were to be mandatory it would have to apply to everyone, world wide,  to be effective. Good luck with that. Too bad because it would likely work.

As for the stars, I can't see it. Some day there might be a small colony on perhaps Mars. It would be totally dependent upon Mother Earth however and what happens when she is destroyed? I could see it working far beyond in another solar system where a planet very like Earth existed and I have not doubt they do.

The 1st problem is - how do you get there? The second is what kind of reception will there be by whomever or whatever has evolved on that planet? If they are indeed like us they will hopefully want to know how we got there.

On the other hand of they are some kind of weapon lovers they will probably shoot us first. We will be their Roswell and if there is anyone left here we will never find out their destiny.

Happy New Year

#thebrewsterblock