Why The News Is Fake, And Liberals Rely On Racism

Love him or hate him, President Trump has woken the masses to the truth that the news is often inaccurate, and occasionally blatantly false. When called out, reporters wail in their feeble response, “It was an honest mistake, and we retracted it!” The truth is, the news media have little interest in being accurate or unbiased, instead their goal is to procure ratings for the purpose of receiving advertising revenue. Profit is their master.

By analyzing data from Google and Youtube, we now know scientifically what we have always assumed anecdotally, “If it bleeds, it leads”. Violence and catastrophe has always been the driving factor in editorial decision making. As a result, mildly unfortunate events are made to appear as if they are massive catastrophe’s and in the absence of a convenient cataclysm, shocking events are occasionally staged. The news is not “reporting the facts”, it’s info-tainment. The news NEEDS you to be either outraged or terrified in order for you to tune in and consume the media. If you don’t consume…then they don’t have a business model. Keeping you angry and afraid is how they make money, which is why they will assassinate the character of anyone who dares to contradict their story line. They have to attack in order to survive.

State sponsored news such as RT, or the CBC are not any better. In addition to catering to their advertisers, they also have to appease the governments who fund them. If either Putin or Trudeau need help from their state run broadcasters, …they get it. Media CEO’s know who butters their bread, and they know how to keep their high paid cushy jobs. If you’re looking to the news for the truth, you’re looking in the wrong place.

Mainstream media is dying. The information monopoly which provides the media with breath is being choked to death by the free flow of information on the internet. No longer do people rely on being force fed their information by those with questionable motives. Instead, we all have alternative sources available in abundance.

Podcasts, and independent news commentators have supplanted the paternalistic talking heads we are accustomed to seeing, anchoring the evening news. VIA the internet, sagely voices from the wilderness have found their way to the mountain tops to expound their wisdom to eager ears, which has the media backed into a corner and fighting for it’s life.

And now for the rest of the headline…

Those with aligned goals tend to be friends. If I help you, and you help me…then our symbiotic relationship is something that we will both endeavor to protect at all costs. The media and leftest politicians coexist with such a relationship.

Leftist identity politics is a one-trick pony which relies on outrage for it’s very existence. Their brand identity is steeped in the fight against racism and inequality. Though it has a noble face, this strategy wasn’t born out of altruism. Liberal politicians recognized long ago that if they could be seen as avengers of civil rights, that they could win a lot of votes…and until recently, the strategy has worked quite well.

Racism in North America has been on a dramatic decline since the late 1980’s. Racist jokes which were once acceptable to share around the campfire, or in the locker room are now received with shock and disdain…and rightly so. Could you imagine if the Brocket 99 Cassette tape was made today? The backlash would be immense, the creators would be publicly flogged, and the news would be covered globally. Racist parody is no longer tolerated, and minstrel shows are extinct. As society has progressed, leftist politicians have lost leverage. Now that racism has been largely eradicated…what possible strategy could the leftist parties possibly use to retain their power? Far left politicians NEED racism to be a problem so that they can be the hero’s, so where there is a vacuum, they will find a way to fill it.

Bigotry, misogyny and homophobia are all unacceptable anymore, as they should be. This however has created a big problem for politicians whose entire political platforms have been branded as being the saviors of the oppressed, so as these issues became less prevalent, climate change has helped to fill the void. Once again, a valid issue is being used not because of a sense of environmental responsibility, but instead because there needs to be a boogeyman under the bed. But still, the cries of racism ring out across the land at the slightest provocation.

Of course racism is still an issue of sorts, but it’s nothing like it was fifty years ago, and to pretend otherwise is a slap in the face to all those who have suffered through the horrors of it.

Racism is an issue today, because liberal politicians and the media need it to be a problem. Both fuel the flames of hatred and division, then blame conservatives as the propagators as is seen in example after example. Fortunately people are waking up to the fact that most news is nothing more than lefitst propaganda. #Blexit, and #walkaway are gaining steam, and the liberal grip on our society is starting to slip, which they find terrifying.

To fight back, riots have been encouraged, and even indirectly funded by the Democratic party, all in an attempt to destabilize society, and claw back their power and influence. There are no lengths they will not stoop to in order to regain control, and the media is largely in lock-step.

Before you decide to attend a protest, or throw a brick in a riot, ask yourself who it is that you are actually fighting for. Chances are, your fighting for the wrong people without knowing it.

Mark Meincke
403-463-4313

This article was originally published on June 26, 2020.

Buy the Home Seller’s Bible by clicking HERE

Buy “Why not Me?” HERE

Meincke Show Podcast

Operation Tango Romeo

For more stories, visit Todayville Calgary.

Related Topics:feature Mark Meincke media politics

Up Next

I Think The Wexit Movement Is A Knee Jerk Reaction Based In Fear Of A Changing Situation

Don't Miss

The Votes Tell the Story

Mark Meincke

Father, Professional Development Trainer, Author

Follow Author

Why We Remember

Alberta / 5 years ago

Being a Cop has Always Been a Thankless Job

Calgary / 6 years ago

Why The News Is Fake, And Liberals Rely On Racism

Alberta

Calgary’s new city council votes to ban foreign flags at government buildings

Published on December 23, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Western Canada’s largest city has put in place what amounts to a ban on politically charged flags from flying at city-owned buildings.

“Calgary’s Flag Policy means any country recognized by Canada may have their flag flown at City Hall on their national day,” said Calgary’s new mayor Jeromy Farkas on X last month.

“But national flag-raisings are now creating division. Next week, we’ll move to end national flag-raisings at City Hall to keep this a safe, welcoming space for all.”

The motion to ban foreign flags from flying at government buildings was introduced on December 15 by Calgary councilor Dan McLean and passed by a vote of 8 to 7. He had said the previous policy to allow non-Canadian flags to fly, under former woke mayor Jyoti Gondek, was “source of division within our community.”

“In recent months, this practice has been in use in ways that I’ve seen have inflamed tensions, including instances where flag raisings have been associated with anti-Semitic behavior and messaging,” McLean said during a recent council meeting.

The ban on flag raising came after the Palestinian flag was allowed to be raised at City Hall for the first time.

Farkas, shortly after being elected mayor in the fall of 2025, had promised that he wanted a new flag policy introduced in the city.

It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.

Despite Farkas putting forth the motion, as reported by LifeSiteNews he is very much in the pro-LGBT camp. However, he has promised to focus only on non-ideological issues during his term.

“When City Hall becomes a venue for geopolitical expressions, it places the city in the middle of conflicts that are well beyond our municipal mandates,” he said.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, other jurisdictions in Canada are considering banning non-Canadian flags from flying over public buildings.

Recently a political party in British Columbia, OneBC, introduced legislation to ban non-domestic government flags at public buildings in British Columbia.

Across Canada there has also been an ongoing issue with so-called “Pride” flags being raised at schools and city buildings.

Alberta

Calgary mayor should retain ‘blanket rezoning’ for sake of Calgarian families

Published on November 17, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson

Calgary’s new mayor, Jeromy Farkas, has promised to scrap “blanket rezoning”—a policy enacted by the city in 2024 that allows homebuilders to construct duplexes, townhomes and fourplexes in most neighbourhoods without first seeking the blessing of city hall. In other words, amid an affordability crunch, Mayor Farkas plans to eliminate a policy that made homebuilding easier and cheaper—which risks reducing housing choices and increasing housing costs for Calgarian families.

Blanket rezoning was always contentious. Debate over the policy back in spring 2024 sparked the longest public hearing in Calgary’s history, with many Calgarians airing concerns about potential impacts on local infrastructure, parking availability and park space—all important issues.

Farkas argues that blanket rezoning amounts to “ignoring the community” and that Calgarians should not be forced to choose between a “City Hall that either stops building, or stops listening.” But in reality, it’s virtually impossible to promise more community input on housing decisions and build more homes faster.

If Farkas is serious about giving residents a “real say” in shaping their neighbourhood’s future, that means empowering them to alter—or even block—housing proposals that would otherwise be allowed under blanket rezoning. Greater public consultation tends to give an outsized voice to development opponents including individuals and groups that oppose higher density and social housing projects.

Alternatively, if the mayor and council reform the process to invite more public feedback, but still ultimately approve most higher-density projects (as was the case before blanket rezoning), the consultation process would be largely symbolic.

Either way, homebuilders would face longer costlier approval processes—and pass those costs on to Calgarian renters and homebuyers.

It’s not only the number of homes that matters, but also where they’re allowed to be built. Under blanket rezoning, builders can respond directly to the preferences of Calgarians. When buyers want duplexes in established neighbourhoods or renters want townhomes closer to work, homebuilders can respond without having to ask city hall for permission.

According to Mayor Farkas, higher-density housing should instead be concentrated near transit, schools and job centres, with the aim of “reducing pressure on established neighbourhoods.” At first glance, that may sound like a sensible compromise. But it rests on the flawed assumption that politicians and planners should decide where Calgarians are allowed to live, rather than letting Calgarians make those choices for themselves. With blanket rezoning, new homes are being built in areas in response to buyer and renter demand, rather than the dictates of city hall. The mayor also seems to suggest that city hall should thwart some redevelopment in established neighbourhoods, limiting housing options in places many Calgarians want to live.

The stakes are high. Calgary is not immune to Canada’s housing crisis, though it has so far weathered it better than most other major cities. That success partly reflects municipal policies—including blanket rezoning—that make homebuilding relatively quick and inexpensive.

A motion to repeal blanket rezoning is expected to be presented to Calgary’s municipal executive committee on Nov. 17. If it passes, which is likely, the policy will be put to a vote during a council meeting on Dec. 15. As the new mayor and council weigh changes to zoning rules, they should recognize the trade-offs. Empowering “the community” may sound appealing, but it may limit the housing choices available to families in those communities. Any reforms should preserve the best elements of blanket rezoning—its consistency, predictability and responsiveness to the housing preferences of Calgarians—and avoid erecting zoning barriers that have exacerbated the housing crisis in other cities.