It wouldn’t be a Monday without wanting to slap people

To start off, it seems that SNL is dead set to follow Hillary into obscurity. After the election, and while countless liberals run for their safe spaces, tweet their disbelief, or demand America just give them what they want, SNL had Kate McKinnon singing the late Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” and crying. I never knew much about Cohen, but from the response, I’d guess he wouldn’t like his music associated with a criminal not getting what she wants. I remember growing up in the 1980’s and loving SNL. Even as the shift to the left started, and we saw far more raunchy jokes, digs at the GOP outweigh even an unkind word about the DNC, it was still funny. Now though, it’s just like the rest of NBC, CNN and so many other networks, an open shill for Hillary and the rest of the DNC. While I can hope their ratings will show that people don’t agree, I’m not holding my breath, as I really don’t want to see SNL end, just go back to comedy for comedy’s sake, and leave politics to the news pundits.


Moving on, if you thought we were rid of Michael Dukakis in 1988, you’d be wrong. Now, he’s declaring war on the Electoral College. Unlike many of the others doing this, at least he’s demanding it be undone legally, rather than the many people tweeting or just screaming for the Electors to go against the results and just hand the White House to Hillary. Funny isn’t it, that when their candidate wins, it’s “they won, it’s how the system works” but when they lose, it’s time to demand people just do as they say, change everything, tear down the “broken system.” I’m not going to try to claim I didn’t take to my blog, or Facebook, or another medium to express my “displeasure” with either of Obama’s wins, as I firmly believe the man to be seeking the destruction of the United States. Ignoring that I believe him to not be a Natural Born citizen, we have quotes from him that he wants to “fundamentally change” the country, while Michelle is on record as saying that during his time in office was the first time she was proud of America. She’s not a young girl, so that literally means that until she became First Lady, she was never proud to be an American. I’m not going to even suggest that Trump is perfect or blameless in his life, but he is far more American that Obama will ever be. As for the Electoral College, I’m going to give you a short description of this institution. Most people see the map showing the states and see that California went blue, but it didn’t. LA and San Fransisco, and the very few other cities that are extremely densely populated turned the state blue. Yes, a handful of cities/counties are able to control the rest of the state’s vote. What this means, is that if you look at the map by county, the country is far more red than blue. Yes, there are more people that voted for Hillary, but this is the point of the Electoral College, it prevents a population center from controlling more than their state. Yes, there are writings from the founders that hint that they didn’t trust the average voter, and set up the E.C., and yes, it may be time to end that institution, but do it legally. This would be a change to the Constitution, which requires a Constitutional Convention. This, like the Second Amendment, can’t “just be changed” because someone doesn’t like them. This is one of the reasons Hillary did so horribly in some states, as people are very much going to protect their rights, and she flat out said she’d use an Executive Order with regards to the Second Amendment. In layman’s terms, she said she’d just issue an order to make owning guns far more difficult, if not illegal, for private citizens. Let’s put that another way. Let’s say that a candidate said they’d use Executive Orders to “fix” the First Amendment. Would you be upset that they want to remove your right to free speech, or assembly, or to force the press to report as the government dictates (openly, as opposed to CNN and the others that march to the DNC’s tune?) So, put that way, much like the Second, it can’t “just be changed” or done away with. If you are that serious about it, call for a Constitutional Convention, get the States there, and DO IT RIGHT!


Finally, is anyone surprised that Sweden is blaming gender equality for a massive SNAFU after their first big snow of the year. Recently, a policy (law?) requires sidewalks to be cleared before roads, to allow for “gender equality” because women walk more, and men are “over represented” among drivers. Naturally, this caused a massive problem, as no one could drive, so businesses and schools were closed, greatly impacting everyone. Naturally, it’s not because the roads were to be cleared last, it’s “a lack of gender-equality” in snow clearing that caused it. Now, I’m all for treating women and men equally, but I have to call this what it is, an act of complete idiocy. If a snow storm is bad enough that, when the roads aren’t cleared, no one can drive, is anyone really going to go out other than in their car? I realize I’m just a dumb Texan, and our “cold” is a warm summer day to someone in Stockholm in the winter, but this just seems to make sense. First clear the roads, and if you must, send out the walkway clearing crews right behind them, because guess what, THEY HAVE TO GET THEIR TO CLEAR THEM! Yes, I know the world isn’t perfect, and yes, discrimination still happens, be it based on race, sex, or any of a number of things people are biased about. But, to institute policies like this is just insane! We’ve seen this in other places, where policies are put in place to “ensure equality” only to have them cause far more problems, or be attacked just as vehemently. The true solution is to just ignore the whiners until they go away or grow up. A good example of this is a company I worked for in 2003/2004, and their hiring policy. The application has no mention of sex, gender, race, religion, etc, and any applicant that lists any of those items anywhere else is summarily rejected. The next two rounds (interviews) are entirely automated, and not only don’t mention race/sex/gender/religion/etc, in these, it’s impossible to list them as the “interviews” are done via a touch tone phone. Only in round 4 (application, interview, interview, round 4) are your race/gender/sex known, as only then do you meet someone in person. Even with this in place, they’ve been sued for not hiring someone because they’re black, or female, or gay, or what have you. Granted, they win each time, because they can show that those people were never interviewed by a person, but filtered out by the automated system. Much like the people in Missouri screaming that the Fire Department test is racist because they failed it, ignoring that very few people pass that test. I’m sorry, but we have to stop pandering to these people and doing stupid stuff like Sweden did, or we’re just going to see the world collapse and anarchy will take over. But, what do I know, I’m only a History Teacher from Texas, I didn’t get a Masters in Women’s Studies from Berkley, so I don’t know anything about politics, do I?


Enough from me, what do you think?

Leave a Reply