“Believe women” is the new “obey me”

We’ve heard nothing else for weeks, just “believe women” from liberal after liberal, but when you bring up the woman who, 20 or so years ago, Cory Booker admitted groping, while drunk, after she pushed him away, or Bill Clinton, or Weinstein, you’re shouted down. Why must women who accuse some men “just be believed” while others could create time travel and show you the assault, and they would be silenced? The answer is, sadly, very simple, power and control.

The Democrats held power for so long, they firmly believe it’s now their right to control the country. They call tax cuts “theft of public resources,” they call border security racist, and they have nothing but lies and hate to back them up. Ford, through the entire hearing, gave no details, while everyone she said was there has no recollection of the party even happening, the house is even in question due to the layout being wrong, but we “just have to believe her.”

After the testimony, they cried and wailed about “needing” another FBI investigation, and had their sycophants threaten a Senator in an elevator until he agreed with them, but now that the FBI has stated they cannot find ANYTHING to corroborate Ford’s story, it was “rushed” or “rigged” or “too fast” or “too limited.” Every stall tactic, every accusation, every demand for obedience is just another step in their war to destroy the Constitution. They decry partisanship while praising a woman so partisan she should be the face of the DNC who has been on the court almost longer than I’ve been alive!

The answer is very simple, and like 1982, we are likely to see a paradigm shift in American politics. Reagan, despite the DNC starting the day he was elected to find something, anything, to impeach him for, he galvanized a country, put people he needed in Congress, won re-election by landslide, and went on to preside over an economy that we may see finally bested, and the DNC can’t stand that their politics of division, racism, sexism, and hate, aren’t able to just give them power back.

So, will you stand with the people demanding you bow to them and submit fully, or will you stand as a citizen and refuse to be their pawn? The people seen “protesting” are the same every time, they pay for large crowds, smiling when celebrities join them, but it’s still less than 1% of most city populations, let alone a state or the country. They crow over their numbers, and demand “see, so many want this, you must” while ignoring that real people can’t just drop everything and go to DC to protest for days on end. Make no mistake, the DNC hates anyone who doesn’t obey them, and will work, until kicked out of office, to crush those people under their boot, will you bow for them or stand freely?

The danger of setting a precedent without thought

The recent confirmation hearings and Senate testimony from Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford prove, once again, that the U.S. Congress needs a large dose of common sense re-introduced. The Democrats, with their attack dog protesters, are quickly trying to set a precedent that mere allegations, with or without proof, are enough to fully convict someone, while at the same time fighting against that very situation for Rep. Keith Ellison, who is accused of abusing his ex-girlfriend in MN. The differences in these situations couldn’t be more stark, as Ellison’s ex has a police report, hospital reports, and more, but because she cannot provide video proof that he beat her, Ellison is all but exhonerated and apologized to, while Kavanaugh has multiple people, named as witnesses by Dr. Ford, who refute her story and support him, but is still ordered to step down from the nomination, and just give in.

The U.S. Justice system, formed after watching for generations as Kings and Queens just demanded someone be imprisoned or killed, was founded on the presumption of innocence, or “Innocent until Proven Guilty,” which ensures that you can’t just accuse someone and ruin their lives, although that happens more often today than previous generations, as we seem to hear at least a few stories a year about man released from prison after the woman who accused him of rape/sexual assault, or some other heinous crime, is found to have lied, but even after release little changes and his life is still in ruins.

So the question is how do we stop this trend, and the answer is both very simple and very complicated. Matt Damon, who just portrayed Kavanaugh as a man not fit to sweep floors, once stated that today, due to social media, if someone accused him of something he did not do, especially near a movie release, he would “go scorched earth” and would spend “$10,000,000 and ten years in court” to defend himself, yet he demands Kavanaugh just give in and let the liberals win, because he wants a liberal/socialist on the bench.

In the short term we cannot give in when fought against, and must force the light of day to expose the people who demand that just being accused is enough, but we also must fight to ensure those on the liberal side of the fence, who are credibly accused of something, or in the case of Cory Booker, who admit it in print, are held to their own standards. Ellison, until proven guilty, is presumed innocent, yes, but the current DNC stand is that “credible accusations” mean you must step down and allow the investigation to finish, so Ellison should resign from the House and withdraw from the race in MN for AG. Booker, who has admitted he groped a girl in the 90’s, after she pushed him away, should resign from office and never run again.

Only when liberals are forcibly held to their own standards will we finally see their true “rules are for you, not me” attitude come out. The people who embraced “all animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others” as something to work toward will fight you tooth and nail to stop you enforcing the laws they feel they are above, but as long as they’re fighting that, they’re exposing their disdain for the very country they serve, and give you more and more evidence and ammunition to use against them to free the country from the grip of would be tyrants.

To destroy a nation

We’ve heard for over 20 years how we “must believe” this or that person when they bring forth an accusation, only to then hear “they’re lying, there can be no doubt” about others. Look to Justice Clarence Thomas, accused by a very liberal activist, of horrible things, yet it was always just Anita Hill’s word against his, and we heard no end of “how can you demonize a woman who has been traumatized and assaulted” as if her merely saying something made it undeniable fact, but then when Paula Jones or Juanita Broaderick accused Bill Clinton of RAPE, they were dismissed as liars from the start, told to basically produce a time machine to go back and view the event live or admit they were lying, and forced into obscurity. Why “must” those accusing non-liberals “just be believed” while those accusing liberals, such as a woman who has copies of Police Reports regarding being assaulted more than once by Keith Ellison, be ignored unless they can actually force you to witness the assault as it happens?

Despite the media prevaricating endlessly about how horrible this or that person is for their “obvious guilt” or how horrible this or that person is for “obviously lying to tarnish a great leader” we see it’s all about power. When not in control, the Democrats resort to lies and more to stall until they can take power back. We’ve seen it since 2014 when the Republicans took the majority and again in 2016 when they added to the majority in both houses, and also won the White House. Almost within hours of Donald Trump being declared the winner, we had calls to “just do away with” the Electoral College, threats on electors, and calls to impeach before he was even sworn in! Prominent liberals tearfully called for Americans to “stand up and demand justice” or to “protect our democracy” by demanding the Constitution be violated.

When they couldn’t force their will on the country, we then had accusation after accusation, akin to throwing pasta against the wall and hoping it would stick. First it was Russia, then it was Stormy Daniels, then it was racism, then it was sexism, then it was not caring about the people of Puerto Rico, and it’s once again Russia. At this point, I expect the President to make all classified information public, proving Hillary and the other Democrats are all guilty, only to hear liberals cry over “using classified information to target Democrats” and ignoring the actual guilt. How much longer before we actually hear “Do not talk about anything done that isn’t exactly legal, we’re doing it for the greater good, but if they do it, they must be destroyed.” How long before “I DON’T CARE WHAT LAWS ARE BROKEN, I AM YOUR GOD YOU PEASANTS, OBEY ME OR DIE?”

We are, as so many say, at a crossroads, it’s only what our choices are that differ from the media’s description. We have the choice to retake our government, exercising the power given to We The People 230 years ago, or we can totally surrender and become slaves to an Orwellian state, or we die fighting the second path.

Until Congress is forced to admit we are their boss and they cannot order us to give up anything and everything they don’t want us having, we will have no peace or justice in this country. Visit us HERE or on Twitter as @COSProjectTX and @COSAction to join the push for an Article V Convention to impose term limits on Congress, require fiscal responsibility and require the Constitution only ever be “interpreted” as it is written.

We have a crisis of the heart in this country

We have learned in the last several days, of a “prank” where a young lady pushed another young lady from a height of about 60 feet, into a pond/river. The young lady who was pushed is now in severe pain from injuries suffered due to her uncontrolled fall from such a height. Naturally, the immediate response after making sure the one who was pushed is going to recover, albeit slowly and painfully, was to hold the pusher accountable for her actions. What many did not expect, although I did to some degree, was the sheer volume of the “it was just a prank” side of the argument. I worked for several years as a Volunteer Firefighter, in a very small community which often meant we were first on scene of medical only calls, so I know a thing or two about injuries, and this is one of those lucky to be alive situations. A fall, uncontrolled and likely flailing wildly, from that height into standing water, would feel like hitting concrete at impact, it just then lets you sink under rather than just lying there bleeding.

The core of the situation though, is the attitude from so many people, that the pusher should not even be talked to harshly, but should just be allowed to go on about her life, which is wrong. When you were a child, if you pushed someone down while at recess and they just got a bit dirty, you were talked to sternly and told not to do that again. When a teen if you drove too fast, or otherwise were reckless, you were told in no uncertain terms how dangerous that was. The problem today, simply, is we have a generation now entering the adult work, and another behind them, who have been taught by participation trophies, not being cut from teams, and so much more, that no matter what, they aren’t ever wrong, and that has now almost led to a death. Had this girl died at impact or from her injuries, the young woman who pushed her would be facing at least involuntary manslaughter charges, which would ruin her entire life and likely end with her in jail.

The issue goes deeper though, and has wider reaching effects than most know. Not long ago, people were running around Central Park, wearing scary clown masks, and swinging very real looking weapons, to scare people. If I remember correctly, at least once this resulted in one of them being punched to stop the perceived attack, and I know I remember an off duty Police Officer drawing his sidearm and in both cases, the response was “IT WAS A PRANK, DON’T BE A JERK” or something to that effect. The people who, moments before, were running at others with what appeared to be a very deadly weapon, now cry and scream about people reacting any way other than abject fear or running. They could not understand at all that people would defend their lives with violence when faced with violence, and still can’t.

Fast forward to 2018, and we have an explosion of “I have a right to…..” with that group also saying no one has a right to stop them or even say they can’t do something. Former VP Candidate Tim Kaine’s son has a criminal record for assaults associated with the group antifa, and other members of that group are outraged that their photos are now public record after their arrest for assaulting people who were no danger to them. This last weekend in Charlottesville, Police Officers were assaulted for simply being Police Officers, yet we still hear from the media only that these are “protesters” who are “anti-fascist” even as they employ fascist tactics right out of the darkest parts of history. What will happen then, when one of these antifa rallies attacks the wrong person, and fearing for their life, they draw and fire a weapon, killing their attacker?

The simple answer is chilling, but I can all but guarantee it is right, the victim of the attack, who was fearful they would be killed, will be charged with murder, and likely convicted. We already have groups that regularly find and publicize private information to dox those they don’t like being able to speak against them crying when they aren’t allowed to hide behind a mask. How long will it be until we hear, in a court of law, “I did not authorize any recording of me, so that surveillance tape is not valid as evidence” when a video is showing of one of these “protesters” almost killing someone? How long until we hear “I don’t authorize you to show that” in challenge to evidence of guilt, and it working? We live in a world where people regularly commit heinous crimes and are let go with a slap on the wrist, so now they believe they have rights no other person has. College students try to have professors who won’t just give them a better grade fired for “harassing them,” others scream to drown out speech they disagree with, and still others brutally assault others over mere disagreements, when will we wake up and begin working to stop all of this?

The simple answer is, unfortunately, when we go over the edge of sanity and are forced to claw our way back. The longer answer is, unfortunately, when someone is gravely injured or worse. The riot in Charlottesville in 2017 saw someone killed when a vehicle that was fleeing those trying to harm the driver struck them. Naturally, the rioters took that as their cue to become more violent. Police have been ordered to stand down, people actually protesting peacefully have been told to leave or have been arrested because their peaceful presence somehow caused the intolerance in those bent on subjugating all to their will. We’re nearing the end game, we will see these mental midgets try to overthrow the government, fail, and the media cry about the “political persecution” of not letting them have their way, we will see one of them try to murder someone at a riot and their intended victim will be armed and fight back, and we will see the media cry about a “murderer going free.”

This is no different than 2000, 1992 or 1980. Congress worked to obstruct and remove Reagan, GHW Bush and GW Bush, as they can’t stand not having 100% backing to do all they want. Definitions are changed, documents re-interpreted, and history edited to fit their agenda. The goal is the same as with every government in history, cement their power and control, and prevent anything that threatens the loss of their iron grip on their country. Thankfully, we live in a country where the founding documents give We, The People, the right to circumvent those trying to control us. Article V of the Constitution lays out how our Constitution may be amended, and gives two paths. Congress may present an amendment if two thirds of them agree to it, then three quarters of the states must ratify it. But, if Congress proves to be useless, two thirds of the States may, in their own legislatures, call for a convention of states, where amendments may be presented, and if ratified by three quarters of states, they are accepted. We can limit Congress to very few terms, we can require a balanced budget, and we can even point blank say that what the Constitution says is what it means.

We will face opposition, people like Robert Reich, spread lies and whips people into fearful mobs about how a Convention of States could accidentally destroy the entire Constitution. He cries about “rogue conventions” and works to silence all dissent to the left, demanding submission and subservience to the benevolent masters who simply want to make everyone equal, except for themselves, who will be more equal than those they rule. We must stand up and say NO MORE LIES AND HATE! We must demand the Police arrest the “protesters” who destroy property and assault all who do not praise them for ruling over us. We must demand Congress do their job instead of demanding others do it for them. We must stand up to the lies being spread and tell the likes of Reich that just because he doesn’t like the idea of the States working where Congress won’t, doesn’t mean he can order the country not to do anything.

We, The People, truly hold the power in this country, but if we don’t use the power we have, it will be taken from us in the not so distant future. So, the question is very simple, are you going to be led silently into the box cars as the left continue to add to the list of what you aren’t allowed to do or say? Or, will you stand tall, look them in the eyes, and say you will no longer be subjugated to those who are scared of words? It’s your choice, and while common sense and common courtesy are super powers today, they aren’t totally gone from the planet, yet.

Join us today at https://conventionofstates.com/?ref=29238 and let your state legislature know you support calling an Article V Convention of States. Together is the only way to go forward.

Let’s try to simplify something

You live in a very dangerous part of a very large city. In your area, there are two very active groups of people, each claiming they were the first to arrive in your city. Group A, while not passive in any way, has yet to instigate a fight, while Group B will start a fight, then when retaliation comes, they scream about innocents they specifically staged. After a while, Group B is recruited by a third party that hates Group A for some reason, and together, they wipe out more than 50% of Group A and anyone who associates with them minimally, until Groups B and C are finally stopped. The Government (City, State and National,) in response to this, officially declare a new city is formed with Group A given leadership. They decide that, rather than always fighting throughout the city, they’re going to work to fortify the city limits borders, only to have Group B constantly attack those borders, lobbing grenades at city civic centers, working to kill everyone they can.

Eventually, the city is celebrating a milestone anniversary, and Group B decides to start lobbing grenades again, but the Police are staged and ready, and stops their attacks. Following this, it’s revealed the people throwing hand grenades over fences had brought children with them and those children were hurt by the Police responding to Group B trying to blow up homes and city buildings.

In an ultra simple form, this is exactly what happened yesterday. The Israeli people have, for centuries, claimed Israel as their home. The surrounding countries, the majority of citizens being Muslim, do not dispute that both lines are descended from Abraham. The Israelis, citing historical documents, show that Abraham left all he had, land, money, etc, to Isaac, his second child and only child by his wife. Ishmael was born to a servant, and later cast out, but they claim simply because Ishmael was older, Abraham’s wishes must be disregarded.

In the 1930’s and 1940’s, many Muslim countries sided with Nazi Germany and helped kill as many Jewish people as possible. When Hitler was defeated in 1945, the U.N. gave the land now known as Israel to the Jewish people to form a nation, and instantly, Israel fell under attack by people demanding the Jews give up their homes, and ultimately, their lives. This, to me, shows two types of delusional attitude. First, the people demanding Israel be utterly destroyed and all Jews killed, not only actively deny that the Holocaust happened, but also that their ancestors didn’t take part in it. On the other side of the coin, the very people crying over “innocent protesters” being harmed when the IDF responds to attacks by those “protesters” are the same ones who demand the U.N. be obeyed without question, yet when told the U.N. created Israel and now those who are attacking Israel are defying the U.N.’s orders for Israel to be created 70 years go, just shake their heads and demand Israel give up everything because they don’t like them.

In short, above you see the modern liberal, someone who can demand an un-elected and un-accountable body be obeyed, then demand that body was wrong 70 years ago and now should not be obeyed, but only in part. These are the same people who demand that charity is something people should do more, but who fight tax cuts because “people aren’t charitable, so the government must be,” yet pointing out that being taxed to the point I can barely feed my family means I can’t be charitable only gets a dirty look as if to say “so what, you’re evil, starve and give away what little you have.”

The unspoken truth is very simple, the very people screaming about tolerance, diversity, and inclusiveness, are the ones who are the most intolerant, non-diverse, and who will exclude all who don’t praise them 24/7. So the question is this, and it’s very simple, do you stand with a country that stopped a violent terror attack, or with the terrorists who attacked? Are you a liberal, or do you recognize that you can’t reason with terrorists or criminals, and letting them have their way by disarming and removing protections, only creates more victims.

Netanyahu said it best – If Palestine laid down their weapons today, there would be peace. If Israel laid down their weapons today, there would be no Israel.

Millionth verse, same as the first

I thought I’d seen the height of lunacy possible from liberals, only to be proven very wrong today, by two different law enforcement agencies. First, in Great Britain, parents are begging a hospital to allow them to take their child to seek treatment elsewhere, only to have a judge order them to watch their child die, and Police are actually enforcing that order. On top of that, they are actually telling people social media posts about this situation may be investigated. Not only did a sitting judge, who was told that treatment at an Italian hospital stands a good chance of helping the child, tell parents they must watch their child die, but Police are actually enforcing that order.

Move to Parkland Florida, where Kyle Kashuv was taken from class, to a closed room, and questioned by multiple Resource Officers and at least one school administrator, as to why he went with his father to a firing range and posted about it on social media. No laws were broken, no school rules were broken, no one was threatened, and simply put a father took his son to the range to instruct him on firearms use, something millions upon millions of fathers have done for decades. This school, however, decided that since the media made their anti-second amendment screamer their darling, they would try to intimidate this student into silence. That’s strike one, but they did this without informing the student’s parents or letting them be involved. That’s strike two, and strike three is the laughably inept report file, where the officer cannot articulate much, or spell correctly, as if this was an official report, legitimizing the possible charges the family can now press against the school and Sheriff’s Office.

On top of the horrible actions taken by the school and law enforcement, people are still criticizing this student for going to the range with his Father, and actually saying they “don’t care about his rights” or that his actions were legal. We have people actually arguing that we should give up rights because people might not like us exercising our rights. We have people saying “oh don’t do that, it’ll offend me” as if that’s a legitimate reason to order someone to change their life! I was about 8 or 9 and wanted to shave my head for the summer, as my hair is VERY THICK, meaning if I don’t shampoo with strong dandruff shampoo twice a day, sneezing looks like a blizzard. The day I got my head shaved, a lady from our church wrote me a letter that was many pages long, telling me I shouldn’t have done that. She is not related to me, and I wasn’t really close to either of her kids, but she felt it was OK to tell me I shouldn’t have done what I did, because she didn’t like it. This was 25+ years ago, today it’s only gotten worse, as we have people calling the police on people because they “feel threatened” by a t-shirt’s message or something equally asinine.

This is the problem today, we have an entire segment of society so assured of their infallibility that they will all but stake you to the beach at high tide to silence you when you point out their idiocy. I’ve been told I need to learn more when I pointed out, rightly, that Hogg’s ranting and screaming “speech” at the march for disarming Americans, was almost a direct copy of the mannerisms and speech style of Adolf Hitler, with of course the #BanAssaultWeapons hashtag thrown in. When I then demanded that “assault weapon” be defined, I was ridiculed, as if it clearly is and should have my home raided by the Marines to protect my neighbors. To be perfectly clear, the AR-15 platform weapons are not assault weapons. This is for a very good reason, there is no single design/configuration of an AR-15. I’ve seen them use rifle and pistol caliber rounds, with and without rails, different length barrels, and so many other things, that saying to ban the AR platform is demanding multiple different weapons be made illegal, simply because it “looks scary.”

We are at a tipping point and if we don’t step back, we will lose everything, and that loss will be after a bloody conflict. The Founders were extremely intelligent in how they framed our Constitution. Freedom of Speech, at the time, was who could hear you, quill and ink on parchment, or very rudimentary printing presses. Arms at the time were mostly flint lock muskets, but repeating rifles and even crew served automatic weapons were available, and the word used specifically was to ensure that future politicians couldn’t say “that’s not arms, give it up” yet we have people demanding we do just that.

Simply put, criminals will never stop because something is illegal, laws are in place to stop those who respect law and order from doing things contrary to the good of a free society, and to provide a framework to use for deciding how to punish those who break the law. Using a firearm to commit a crime cannot be stopped by making more and more things illegal. If all firearms are made illegal, criminals will still have them and their victims will be far easier to control while committing their crimes. We need to do several things, first we need to stop the jump to “ban this or that” when a criminal misuses a tool. Toronto saw a terrorist purposely drive into civilians, killing people using a motor vehicle, should be ban assault vehicles? Knives are the dominant weapon at the moment in London, and their mayor has actually made possession of a knife outside your home a crime, to the point you must not only show you purchased new cutlery for your home that day, but explain why you did! Criminals are rolling around laughing as they watch government officials make things easier and easier for them, and until we kick the useless idiots out of Congress, put people in their place who will work for us, this will only get worse.

Check out www.cosaction.com and sign the petition to call for an Article V Convention of States, as we need Term Limits, Fiscal Responsibility, and to protect our Constitutional Rights, and we know Congress won’t do any of those things.

It’s been just over 20 years, and we’re nearly completely doomed

I turn 41 this year, meaning I’m now 23 years post High School, although only 8 post College due to being “too smart for my own good” in the mid-1990’s. I can remember not only being taught civics, forced to debate counter to my beliefs, hearing about WWII from those who fought and survivors of the nazi regime, and no matter GOP or DNC, my classmates are generally well adjusted adults. We don’t always agree on politics, but we don’t shout each other down and demand obedience.

Today, however, we have people graduating High School and College, so assured of their own superior intellect, they can’t accept that they aren’t given total and complete control over every aspect of life on the planet. We watched in the 80’s and 90’s as the USSR and all their subject nations languished in poverty until they finally fell, yet students today, watching the same thing happen in Venezuela, defend communism so vehemently that to disagree with them is treated as an attempt on their life!

Starting in 1991, while I was still in a Middle School building, I was earning credits for my high school graduation. Ninth grade English Lit saw us reading Animal Farm, 10th grade was 1984, then Brave New World was over the final two years, as the language from 1930’s Britain was a bit difficult to get through for us, so we had a bit longer. Yes, there were students who actually argued for each of the societal models we read about, but they were a vast minority.

Brave New World – Society in the 1930’s is in a depression, but Henry Ford’s assembly line would revolutionize the manufacturing world, and beyond. Just 700 or so years AF (after Ford) all life outside of “savage reservations” is engineered in a lab. Embryos are carefully controlled, not only to eradicate disease, but to stunt mental or physical development, creating a caste system. Controllers rule the world, the Alpha Plus and Alpha caste below them, with Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Epsilon below them. Each caste is programmed from birth either via aversion conditioning or sleep programming. Babies are shown flowers or colorful books, only to be shocked when they reach for them, toddlers and up have programming played to them as they sleep, so even the most subjugated of people actually defend their place in the world. Sex is common place, birth control is mandatory, and abortions required if any pregnancy occurs. Drugs are used to keep people docile, entertainment is plentiful, and in general, people are so doped up and entertained, they would fight to remain slaves to the controllers.

1984 – Written almost 20 years after Brave New World by George Orwell, Huxley’s nightmare vision of the future is turned on it’s ear. Rather than the over entertained, programmed from birth, doped out of their mind people, Orwell saw a world where a global police state comes to be. Phrases similar to the “See Something, Say Something” campaign of a few years back are common, children are encouraged to inform on their families, and fear rather than blind ignorance to subjugation and tyranny rules the world. Yet again, those running the show are above all people in more than their job, they live separate lives. As in Brave New World, the rules don’t apply to the controllers, nor in 1984. Those making and enforcing the rules disregard them without a second’s thought. This type of world can be seen in the movie Equilibrium, a not so big hit for Christian Bale, where people are required to take a dose of Prozium regularly every day. Emotion is banned, “Sense Offense” is punishable by death, and books/art/etc are destroyed so as not to provoke responses from the people, while those in power, as always, do as they please.

Animal Farm – The shortest by far of all three, Animal Farm is a tale about animals when the farmer goes away. At first nothing seems to be amiss, but the longer the farmer is gone, the more each species notices things aren’t right. The pigs first bring this up, forming a council of animals so that work gets done, food is provided to all, and life can continue. Rules are laid down, but soon edited. As they find they are “running the show,” the pigs begin to officially exempt themselves from rules, until the one rule is “All animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others” explaining the “do as you are told without question” attitude that takes over. Before long animals are sick or dead, but the pigs don’t care, as their new life of luxury is not affected, until the farmers come home, and the book ends.

Each of these books is a cautionary tale, all three warning against the traps of socialism/communism. Granted, Brave New World is a kind subjugation, as people are entertained and, via drugs, happy, but it’s still subjugation. All three societal models also spring up from a desire to avoid ills and other problems in society, but in the end, bring only more trouble and strife into being. All three also depend on an ignorant populous, Brave New World by simply outlawing all books or other items that are about “the old ways,” replacing them with meaningless things. 1984 is a society controlled so totally, people literally just eat, sleep and work, while Animal Farm is a mixture, with the pigs keeping the other animals so busy they don’t have time for anything else.

We are, sadly, seeing views like the photo above coming more and more to the fore, despite mountains and years of evidence that it won’t work, because education is now just about indoctrination and preparing students for standardized tests. One to two in three millennials today honestly does not know what Auschwitz or Buchenwald are, or that millions died in those places or places like them. Millions believe the Holocaust never happened, and students are being taught that “gun control” is the answer to every crime they hear about. After Parkland on 14 Feb 2018, we saw a student give a speech, complete with hand gestures, that only differed from a 1930’s Germany speech in the language it was heard in.

We are at a crossroads, and this may very well be the last we get before it’s too late, before our choices are Obey or Death. We have cities, counties and states now banning firearms solely because of their looks, as none address the Mini 14, a rifle that uses the same magazine as an AR-15 that’s chambered in .223 or .556. People are being told to surrender private property, with little to no compensation, or they will be fined, or worse. Students and even adults are so convinced that the Second Amendment is only there to protect muskets, that even when shown that Italy had repeating rifles and the Puckle Gun was first built 70+ years before the Constitution, that they will explode with righteous indignation if and when contradicted. Yet, in the next breath, they will proudly state how intelligent the Founders were to phrase the First Amendment as they did so it encompasses new technology for speech, then go on to state a cross on a public patch of grass is tantamount to their being cuffed and forced into a Church for the Sunday sermon. They not only don’t care, but can’t even see, their hypocrisy, nor will they ever admit their goal is totally disarming all Americans, opening the borders so everyone can come in and thus, more crime will happen, so in the end, 1984 will cease being a warning, as it will have become their playbook.

I wish I was delusional, I wish I was dreaming this while in a psyche ward somewhere, but I’m not. I’m watching the world around me inch closer and closer to tyranny, and seeing millions cheer our slow march to our own death. Far too many did not learn from History, and now we’re all doomed to repeat the worst mistakes of humanity.

Business as usual

To listen to liberals, nothing is ever their fault, nothing is ever their responsibility, and they are the ultimate authority on everything. When Obama admitted that DACA was un-Constitutional, but that Congress wasn’t doing what he wanted, so he was going to do it anyway, liberals cheered and praised his action to open the floodgates of illegal immigrants coming into the country. When Trump said the same, that DACA was un-Constitutional, so he was ending it and telling Congress to do their job, liberals demanded he not do that, saying he wasn’t allowed to, ignoring that their messiah Obama said flat out that it was an un-Constitutional move.

Over the last week or so, the topic is gun control, although they will happily lecture you on how “since Obama issued the executive order on DACA, it must be allowed to stand” they’re demanding that “something be done” with hashtags like not one more, or never again. What they don’t do, ever, is tell you what should be done. They demand that “assault weapons” be banned, while admitting they can’t define “assault weapon” they demand that certain people be prevented from gaining firearms, and ignore that there are already laws on the books doing just that, just demanding that “something be done.” I have personally said “OK, let’s say there’s a law saying it’s a felony, punishable by jail time, for me to slap you” they nodded and I slapped him, lightly. Naturally, he screamed that it was illegal, then I just slapped him again while a friend said, he’s breaking the law, how do you stop him? He ranted and railed that I should be arrested, only to be told “no, just do something, pass a law” at which point he just stormed off.

Confronted with the lunacy of “just do something” he refused to continue the conversation, and later I found that he’d been lying to others, saying it’s legal to walk in and buy any gun you want, no paperwork needed, and screaming at people who told him he was wrong. I realize this nut job is an extreme case, but it shows the lunacy of the liberal argument. You can tell them the law is already in place, so we need to fix law enforcement, reporting, etc and you’re called an idiot. You can prove it and they’ll storm off and lie to others.

You will not win an argument with a liberal, nor will they even admit that you had anything good to say but stood and lied to them. So the question now is simple, while Trump is demanding the actual work needing done is done (fix reporting and enforcement,) how do we fix the issue of the lies being told other than by pointing out the lies when they were told?

Just what is “common sense” reform?

Valentine’s Day 2018 was, as we can all agree, visited by tragedy in Florida, showing the best and worst of humanity. From a JROTC Cadet who died helping students get into a room, two other JROTC Cadets who saw a way to protect others and took it, to a Coach who sacrificed his life for his students. As happens after any tragedy, well most of them, the liberals in Congress and the media jumped on the gun control wagon, with their gunsense hashtag and demands to “regulate assault weapons.” There’s one glaring problem with that goal, the definition of “assault weapon.” A new twist though, is that yes, the term “assault weapon” was used in marketing many years ago, but not for any of the modern firearms that the rabid liberals want all but melted to slag.

Yes, marketing executives used that term to sell rifles, and yes, they stopped when the first “assault weapons ban” was introduced, but there is no standard of what liberals call an assault weapon is today, and worse, the glaring holes in their knowledge is staggering, and I’m not just referring to calling a magazine a clip, or a rifled barrel firearm a gun. We’ve had many press conferences from liberals referring to “ghost guns” and “barrel shrouds” and those are the least of the idiotic things said. When Shannon Watts became the public face of Everytown and Moms Demand Action, the lies and unintelligent drivel was instantly on public display. From claiming that “many of their members are gun owners” to her claim that no one needs a gun that fires ten rounds a minute. The tweet that got her to ban me was when I told her I can walk outside at any time, find and throw ten rocks, one at a time, in under a minute, should my arms be banned?

When confronted with a well reasoned and logical argument, there is also the standby tactic of either calling the person who shuts a liberal down a nazi, bigot, racist, or “literally Hitler.” I have a dubious honor though, as I actually fought that line with historical knowledge I worked years for in my undergraduate studies, to the point where the idiot actually laid hands on me, prompting me to use a simple hold until the cop in the common area took it over, but that’s a story for another day.

You see, I hold a Bachelor’s Degree in History, and specifically, military history since the American Revolution. My Great Uncles and Grandfather inspired that, as they fought in World War II, with my Great Uncle Coleman landing at Normandy and going on to fight Rommel in North Africa, while another died in the failed air drop on D-Day. You see, I know Hitler and the tactics he used well, and those very tactics are being emulated today, just not by those the screaming snowflakes claim. You see, “anti-fascist” was a group in the Nazi regime, used to fight anyone standing up to them. Before that was formed though, Hitler knew he had to garner national support, so health care, education, and such were first. By claiming to “have the best of plans” the people rallied to him, and he was among the most charismatic people to have wreaked havoc on the planet. Once he had them in the palm of his hand, he then moved to disarming the public, playing on the old standby that the Police and Military were there to protect them, they should be trusted. Once that was done, we all know what happened, from Krystalnacht in 1939, to Auschwitz and Buchenwald, and the millions killed before 1945.

Moving back to 14 February 2018, Cruz committed multiple crimes before he even left for his attack. You see, the federal background check requires disclosing many things, which had he been honest, would have meant no sale of any firearm. He threatened his ex’s new boyfriend, and even said he would be a “professional school shooter” in a YouTube comment, and his profile there was under his legal name. Police were called out to his home so many times one wonders why he wasn’t either in jail or a psychological institution well before his attack. So the question isn’t about gun control, it’s about mental health. When an actual professional says that Cruz displays classic signs of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, why wasn’t he already known for his crimes?

Now, being a student of History, I cannot sit idle while disinformation and blatant lies are spread, as I can counter them all. When people go on and on about how the AR-15 is the “weapon of choice” for criminals like Cruz, I point out that Oswald and Whitman used bolt action rifles, and in Whitman’s case, a sawed off shotgun. The only reason that Dallas in 62 wasn’t a mass shooting is that Oswald was only interested in Kennedy, but Whitman’s shooting lasted so long because he found excellent cover and with long range not an option, the Police had to get to him, which prompted the creation of the S.W.A.T Programs virtually every city has today. I’ve brought this up many times, and thus far, only one person has actually remained logical and civil in their conversation, and has now agreed it’s about the person, not the tool used.

To explain that last sentence, let’s look at the AR platform. The most common caliber for the AR-15, is .223/.556, which to be honest, isn’t that large a round. In fact, most hunters prefer either .30 .30 or .30 .06, or even larger. I’ve fired a 308 Winchester and a 300 Blackout rifle, and trust me, they are more powerful than my AR ever will be. To be honest, I bought my AR because I want to add a new competition to my belt. I’m already likely in the top 25% of pistol shooters, I’ve not been beaten at Skeet in 20+ years, so now I’m moving to rifles. The AR platform allows me to quickly change optics for short or long range, to add a flashlight if I’m in a room clearing stage, or to add a bipod for lane shooting. Even were I hunter, and I prefer to hunt with my debit card at HEB for my meat, although for chicken I’ll soon have a pen full of them, I wouldn’t use an AR to hunt.

Let’s look at this logically though, which requires looking at the Mini 14, which aside from the look, is just an AR-15 made of wood, as it fires the same caliber as most AR’s and can use a 30 round magazine as well. You see, the argument against the AR-15 is not about it’s capabilities, it’s all down to the look. The desire for an “Army Gun” likely started in the late 1960’s with Vietnam, as we now had live reports on the war, and saw the Soldiers using the M4 and M16, so the manufacturers came up with ideas to mimic it, just not completely. You see, the M4 and M16 can be Select Fire, or in some cases, Fully Automatic. Select Fire means you pull the trigger once and three rounds are released, while of course, Full Auto is where you “spray and pray.” An AR-15 is Semi Automatic only, as when you pull the trigger once, one round is released. This is true for a high percentage of firearms today, from pistols to rifles to even shotguns. Only bolt-action, pump, and single action revolvers are not Semi-Auto, meaning you must manually chamber a round, or cock the hammer, to fire again.

So, with the massive evidence, complete with legislation from the 1980’s which means only the “ultra rich” can buy a true machine gun legally, the question has to be, what true common sense reform can be done. It’s ultimately a simple answer though, and one those screaming don’t want to hear, it’s not about guns, but the users. Cruz, Lanza, Whitman, Oswald, all were mentally unwell, and honestly, should have been under treatment for a good while, possibly their entire life, but the focus on the failures of an industry that makes so much money they can literally buy legislators, isn’t one that is wanted. Cruz was on psychotropic drugs, but HIPPA means that it’s very rare when Doctors report this, at least to the level required to flag a background check. The Sutherland Springs shooter received a Dishonorable Discharge from the USAF, and had a domestic violence charge, but neither were reported in time to stop his purchase. So, as the background check already addresses both situations, they had to lie to get their weapons, and only the lack of reporting and lack of regulations allowing Doctors to legally break Doctor/Patient confidentiality failed here, not the laws in place.

To wrap up, we don’t need to regulate the tools used, but the users. President Trump has undone an act that simply said if you received Social Security Disability, you’re a prohibited possessor, as that could mean if I lose a leg and can no longer work, I’m now disarmed, while if you’re in a psych ward, you also lose that right. This is of course, touted by liberals as “President Trump made it easier for criminals to get guns” which is a bald faced lie. We have the laws needed to ensure you cannot purchase a weapon if you are a felon, domestic abuser, or the like, so we need to look at how those things are reported. When these things are not reported correctly, the person who was to report them should be charged as an accessory, even lightly, to any crimes committed. Doctors should be able to, confidentially and only to law enforcement, report those they feel are not mentally stable to own even a staple gun, perhaps via an office that will include medical experts who can help determine when it should go to law enforcement. I’m not an expert on public policy, or writing laws, although were laws written in layman’s terms, I’m sure I could craft a good many that would help the world. The final step is twofold, dumping most, if not all of the career politicians in Congress today, and enacting term limits and possibly even a mandatory retirement age for the House and Senate (and definitely a retirement age or allowing Doctors to force retirement on SCOTUS, as Ginsberg isn’t able to stay awake now) so that we have turnover to keep new blood and new perspectives among those we elect to lead.

So, my question to you is, what would you do other than jumping on the gun control, ban this or that, bandwagon? Oh, an keep in mind I hold a degree in history, am a politics/history buff, and will find any and all source material to destroy anything that I can, even if I end up destroying my own argument when pushed to start research.

Art imitates life, again

When I first found Texts From Superheroes it was just a goofy site to me, but as the election season ramped up last year, it became a bit prophetic. As with every election, the Hollywood “elite” began their “you must vote for so and so or you’re a racist/sexist/bigot/etc” schtick and I, as always, ignored it and voted as I felt I should. What changed last year though was the use of everything those not voting for socialism or Hillary said in a twisted sense to make us look like demons. The images below are an excellent illustration of that (pun intended.) You see, I’ve read Captain America and Punisher comics since I had money of my own to buy them, so it’s well over 30 years, so I feel I know the characters pretty well. Now, of course liberals hate Punisher because he uses guns, so they ignore him, but Cap is a different story.

This image is a perfect example of what would not be said. Yes, Captain America would be saddened to see neo-nazis marching in the street, but he would be standing between them and who they’re screaming (and who’s screaming at them) and helping arrest both when violence broke out. The problem is, though, that the left has decided that not agreeing with everything they say/want/demand is “nazi” or “fascist” behavior, and they are actively assaulting all who disagree, and now are using things like this stupid comic as “proof they are the real patriots.”

On a similar note, this one is calling for banning of those embracing Constitutional rights, based on mere political stance. Also misleading, the cowards in masks who call themselves antifa are the ones assaulting people in almost all cases, at least until arrested, at which point they cry and complain about “brutality.” But it’s the same point. Look at the super-heroes as they were depicted in the 80’s and 90’s, and you see general heroes, no politics save maybe from Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne as they are millionaires. Superman only was a government stooge in a post-apocalyptic world and it was Batman that woke him up, but now it’s all politics. Movies are all about showing how evil anyone who isn’t liberal is, while they scramble to hide the perversions we now know they’re guilty of. Comics insult a duly elected President, and more.

Yes, I realize this was a “geek rant” as I know not everyone is into comics, but it’s not just this, watch for the parts of pop culture you still enjoy that have changed. Check each one and I’ll bet you’ll see the “hero” is liberal, maybe even full bore socialist, and the “villain” is the one portrayed as a nazi for not wanting to silence people, or for not wanting to give away his salary, or the like. This is Pravda level propaganda, and being fed directly to children, and should scare all of us.

The myopia of the left, and how it hurts everyone

Starting in November 2016, there has been no end to the screaming from the left side of the aisle, from Russia to sexism to racism and more. But what they ignore is what is going to end up hurting them the most, that their own heroes are often the most guilty of the crimes. The latest in their arsenal of complaints is Net Neutrality, and how it’s repeal is going to “end the internet.” This is just par for the course, as ending only the mandate in the ACA will “kill millions,” lowering taxes will “bankrupt” various groups, and now this. At this point, I’m not going to be surprised to hear that enforcing the law “disenfranchises millions,” or some other idiotic claim.

Simply put, removing regulations does not “end anything,” rather it’s going to be a good thing. The internet has been around for 20+ years, and Net Neutrality only 2, but this is ignored because Net Neutrality allows the left to call anything offensive, or racist, or what have you, and with it being “wrong,” social media and other online services are running to ban and block so as not to be accused of being that. By removing regulations, there is no government presence waiting to hit a provider or online service with a fine or punishment for anything the left hates, meaning that they can’t scream “racist” at the drop of a hat and get someone banned, and they hate that.

There’s an old saying, “If you want more of something, make it illegal. If you want less, tax it.” This works here too, as if you want more innovation and creativity in an industry, get the government out of the way, while if you want less, regulate that industry. Internet access is not a human right, nor is having a cell phone, but those can be used to control a population, as it will become “oh, you don’t have the health care plan we approved, well that means you don’t get 4G speed this year.” Or, if you’re a “known agitator” (read, conservative) who they want to silence, your “crimes” go public and you’re not allowed to be online as much as those who tow the party line. It’s a simple process and couched in “neutrality” so as to not be recognized.

Simply put, Barack Obama appointed the man who just voted (along with another person) to end a massive government regulatory practice, so it’s all because of Trump. Barack Obama named the seven countries we are currently not accepting travel from, but because Trump signed the order, it’s a Muslim ban. Trump could follow Obama’s playbook to the letter, and because it’s not their savior doing it, all would be horrible. This is what we see every time government moves to lessen restrictions, taxes, etc. Because we now have less of big brother, the left loses their mind because they can’t control us. They know that the vast majority of Americans actually paying taxes aren’t liberal, so the “charitable” work they do (Planned Parenthood and other liberal organizations) will be lessened, and actual charitable work (soup kitchens, food pantries, etc) will go up, but those are “bad” because they’re run by Churches. You know, those evil organizations that teach you that your actions have consequences?

Look back to the 1980’s and Reaganomics. I was only 4 when he was first sworn in as President, but I do remember that gas was cheap, food was cheap, we didn’t want for much at all, and what I did “want for” were things my parents said no to, not due to money, but because they decided I didn’t need it. This, however, is the perfect example, as being told no is what liberals can’t stand. They are the eternal toddlers, screaming for ice cream for breakfast, then crying and throwing a fit when given anything else. They’ve grown up being told that conservatives are evil because they don’t “tolerate alternative lifestyles,” when in reality tolerate is the perfect word. I count myself a rather conservative person, and while I believe that homosexuality is a sin, and thus, without repentance and working to no longer choose that lifestyle, will result in the person spending eternity in hell, I don’t let that color my judgement when I look for people to hire, contractors to use, etc. I’ve worked and gone to school with people I know are gay, I’ve supervised them and been supervised by them, and never had any trouble, as them being gay never affected work.

What I have had happen is I’ve been propositioned by men, only to be told I’m homophobic because I said “I’m not gay” because I wasn’t willing to “try it.” I looked one in the eyes and said “I thought it wasn’t a choice? I thought you just are or aren’t, but you’re telling me I need to try it? Are you saying it is a choice?” When I threw the big argument back into his face, he hissed and almost attacked me, but eventually lied to try to get me fired, only to be fired himself because he’d been coming on to all guys in the store since his hiring. He then sued for “homophobia” and ranted when the evidence proved him wrong. His attitude is that the world must do all it can to make him happy and damn everyone else. When told no, he couldn’t accept it, and did all he could to force those telling him no to change their course.

This is the same with Net Neutrality, liberals got a golden ticket to report everything they hate as “hate speech,” or “offensive,” or “racist,” for two years, and now they can’t handle that the government is saying they can’t. They’re screaming that it’s the end of the internet, when in fact it’s a new beginning, as without it, sites like Gab can actually compete with Twitter (I know I didn’t link Twitter) rather than be choked by government regulations, meaning their safe haven is now in danger of being driven down by a competitor, and they can’t have that. Oddly, the very people driven away by their reports are the ones going to competitors, but that’s only bad because they don’t just want us gone, they want us completely silenced, and without big brother to help, they can’t.

So, the ultimate question here is simple, if you own a business of any kind, do you want more government intrusion or less?

THE SKY IS FALLING!

Today the FCC voted 3 to 2 in favor of reversing regulations put in place just over 2 years ago. Just as with any attempt to repeal the ACA, the left is going overboard on their predictions for what will be next. This time, rather than MILLIONS WILL DIE, it’s THE INTERNET AS WE KNOW IT IS DEAD. Personally, I am a fan of as little government as possible, and this, so far, has proven to be the best course of action as long as I’ve watched. Health care existed long before the ACA, and will exist after it, just not funded by tax dollars. In the early 1970’s, my parents had my Sister, later I came along, then my Brother. I don’t remember ever hearing about my parents having to pay off their bills from the hospital from this, nor was it horrible if I chipped a tooth, got sick, one of us got hurt, we just went to the Dr/Dentist, our insurance covered a huge portion of the bill, and we paid the rest, normally out of pocket, not being billed. For example, I had to have my wisdom teeth removed around 2003, and while the procedure was very expensive, needing an oral surgeon and anesthesiologist, I paid under $100 for the entire thing, including the pain killer I was given for the first few days. Fast forward to 3 years ago, I needed 2 teeth extracted, no surgeon, but I was knocked out, and I was billed, after insurance, over $500. The only real change, the ACA passed in 2012, and as many predicted, costs went up for the consumer.

Now, look at 2015, when Net Neutrality was enacted. At the time, we didn’t have any option but a small cable company, but we paid about $30 a month to our ISP, now it’s almost $60. Regulations put a burden on the provider, and they will always pass costs onto the consumer. Yes, it’s possible that ISP’s may decide they don’t want to make it easy to watch Netflix, or that they don’t like certain websites, and I don’t agree with that practice, but the market should decide, not government, what a business may or may not do. What if the provider notices that between 5 and 8 at night, their speed is killed, and most customers are on Netflix. They see that they don’t have the ability to handle that traffic, so they limit speed to compensate, choosing to limit www.netflix.com so as to not burden those working, or doing other things. What if a college is their own ISP and chooses to limit Netflix so the library and other public terminals don’t see a slow down? In this case I’m for it. The common thread, their customers should be who decides what happens. In the first case, their customers complain, the company gives the equivalent of a shrug, their customers start switching to another provider. This ISP sees their actions losing them money, they either reverse the change, or they suffer and eventually go out of business. Think back to AOL. They censored e-mail messages critical of them, blocked some competitors’ sites/apps, and more. They are now gone, with only the holdouts with aol.com e-mail addresses as proof they once ruled the internet. Comcast decided they wanted to limit Netflix so users had to use their VOD service, now customers, instead of whining to the government and getting them to force Comcast to do what they want, will just need to switch. The advent of fiber and other technologies, simply put, means no more “we’re your only choice” for customers. The second option? The college says they are giving free internet access to help with course work, with Net Neutrality in place, the government tells them they aren’t allowed to block or limit sites even though they don’t charge, students force a college that gave them free connections to reverse a good practice. Without Net Neutrality, the college can say “we’re giving you free internet to use to study, you want Netflix, you can pay for the connection” and the students can whine and moan, but the college keeps a good practice.

Simply put, deregulation is a good thing in my mind. It always starts small, by the government simply getting out of businesses’ way, but look at the two industries most affected by past deregulation, telephone (not cell phones) and power. Growing up we had no choice but to use Southwestern Bell and TXU. Our bill could go up without notice, and they just grinned and said their costs went up. Deregulation happened, and now we have one company running the infrastructure and many running the service side. SBT, ATT, and others pay the line company, just as TXU, Reliant, and others do with Oncor in North Texas, and then sell that to consumers. As they have to compete, and the delivery company doesn’t have to worry about pricing and such, both sides benefit. TXU sells at a price low enough to entice people away from the other guys, just as SBT or ATT does, and they make some profit in the process.

Well, cable TV/Internet is the dinosaur in this scenario. Fiber is still very new on the scene, and DSL or other telephone delivery options are dying, as they should, as a technology. Sadly, only one cable provider is available in an area, for my area it’s a tiny company, while the majority of my county is Charter with a portion of it being Time Warner. As there is no competition other than Satellite/Internet for TV, they’re pretty safe. They lose my $40 or $50 a month TV plan, they still get my money for internet, which I need to watch my new TV provider. Google is working to come into new areas with Google Fiber, but having to install all the infrastructure, they’re putting out a lot of money, so they aren’t really competitive. They also are doing the same as cable companies, charging based on your speed. If Net Neutrality happens the way it’s cheerleaders want, they’ll all be told you can only charge one price, and have one package. Do you think they’ll choose the highest speed at the lowest cost? Of course not, they’ll find out the lowest speed they can get away with delivering, and charge as much as possible for it.

Yes, there will be growing pains, such as Congress having the ability to tell the FCC they can’t remove a regulatory and financial burden from companies, or those companies deciding to limit what is the most taxing on their servers, but rather than tell the government to “make it better,” why not look to the Elon Musk’s of the world and ask for a better option. In a climate so totally controlled and locked down by the government, ingenuity is stifled. Why come up with a better way to do things when you’ll not be able to afford to sell it? With this move, Musk is free to come up with a better option and sell it cheaper, which means the other guys start trying to beat that tech and sell it cheaper. The free market works people, it always has. Health care before the ACA was as cheap as possible, because Aetna knew if they didn’t treat me right, I’d switch to BCBS or another provider. ATT did me wrong on my cell plan, so I went to Sprint for 20 years, until they did too, and I moved to another provider.

Aside from wanting the government out of as much of my life as possible, I can also attest to the fact that it works not only socially, as I don’t like being told I must buy an approved health care plan, which is all but useless, but also the plans cost less, and have the needed amenities. Net Neutrality being gone means your provider must now earn your continued business, the crutch of “regulations require us to do this” is gone, and now they have to prove they’re going to do what the customer wants.

I’ve said it on every thread and story I see about health care or Net Neutrality, socialism fails every time, not because the idea is flawed, but because mankind is, and whenever you have anything socially controlled, someone at the top decides that because they’re running the show, they deserve more. Huxley warned us about dependence on technology, while Orwell warned of socialism and big brother. Sadly, both were right. We’re now so hooked on our devices for everything, that we believe the socialists when they tell us we have a “right” to be equal, so they regulate the crap out of an industry, while of course none of the rules apply to those running things. They don’t apply to the “leaders” because, simply, the “all animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others” mantra has become entrenched into the minds of those in power.

We need to get a completely new group of Representatives and Senators, and keep them as short a time as possible, to avoid that mindset, and we need to tell those selling us our daily fix of entertainment that we can get along without them, showing them that if they want us to pay, they need to make it very enticing. I’m perfectly willing to go back to books and music for a year or so, to show the Comcasts of the world they aren’t entitled to my money, only to sell a product, and hope I buy it. I’m just sadly fighting an uphill battle where the stone slips every time against a population of people half my age, dead set that I’m wrong, and evil for not agreeing with them, in fact some days, trying to inject common sense and logic isn’t preferable to pushing that rock and failing every time.

And yet again, the reaction to everything is…..

We saw it with the ACA and now we see it with Net Neutrality, and even more telling in the push to rule the U.S. as tyrants is shown in Alabama as what the left wants is demanded at all costs.

Starting last November, as we saw in 2000, only louder, was an instant demand to do away with the Electoral College, which would allow NYC, LA and a few other cities to decide for the entire country every four years. When the GOP led House and Senate began introducing bills (that failed until recently) which would repeal the ACA, especially after the election which gave the GOP the House, Senate and White House, the screaming was intense that they “weren’t allowed” to do it.

Tuesday’s election in Alabama is rife with corruption, such as a city with barely 1000 people seeing 26,000 votes cast, yet any attempt to get the fraud out, and allow the people of Alabama to elect who they want is called “voter suppression” or “denying the voters who they wanted.” Videos are all over social media where people admit they came from out of state to vote, but as the left wants Jones, they scream that it’s over, get over it, let them have what they stole.

Move to Net Neutrality, which is NOT going to be the FCC doing anything than taking the reigns off, and they are already emailing out “the FCC voted, let’s overrule it.” That’s the exact subject of one I just received, blatantly saying “let’s change what they did legally to what we want.” I’ve said it many times, but I’m likely nowhere near done as people don’t listen when the message isn’t “here’s everything you want” so I’ll keep saying it. The internet was around before 2015 and no ISP banned sites or gouged on price based on what sites a customer visited, at least not in the U.S. What didn’t happen though, was what we’re seeing on sites like Twitter or Facebook, where conservatives are targeted and “shadow banned” or outright banned from the site, because liberals report them for “hate speech” while ignoring people actively calling for assaults and worse. With the regulations in place, Twitter is free to stop me saying I’m pro-life because some snowflake decides that’s “a violation of their first amendment rights” or some other idiocy. With the regulations gone, the FCC is not going to just say “good luck” and leave, but rather will do what they were created for, actually working to police censorship and abuse, which comes almost completely from the left side of the aisle.

But of course, any deviation from the liberal mantra is cause for your death. I have been with my company for 5 years, and in that time I’ve learned one thing, I don’t discuss much at all at work. I’m fairly sure that 99% of those I work with voted against President Trump, and are in complete agreement with all that the DNC says, as I’ve been hearing nothing but “now they’ll charge you more to use Netflix” and the like. Only one person has spoken in defense of the decision to shrink the government, and he was all but laughed out of the building. So, I’ll say it one more time before I end, ending “net neutrality” is NOT going to mean that your bill will be 10 times higher because you want to watch Netflix, you will not be censored for being a non-white non-male. This is not the end of the world, we had internet for years before this, now we’re just going back to it, which will be a good thing!

The not so new attitude about everything

It’s been over a year since millions of people collectively demanded that America not follow the Constitution, and just hand the Presidency to the person they wanted. When that didn’t happen, we began to see a massive uptick in acts of violence and charges of bigotry, racism, sexism, and other name-calling, in an effort to get their way. Sadly, we saw a prime example of what they’re willing to do to get their way just days ago, when, funded by the mega rich Democrat donors, Doug Jones won the Alabama senate seat. Even before Tuesday, many were already talking about voter fraud, as there was a lot of chatter about “volunteers” being brought in from out of state, yet there is little chance to prove it after a court order requiring digital records to be kept was stayed, allowing those records to be destroyed. This, of course, is just more that is being used to argue for voter fraud as the left screams about their “victory.”

From net neutrality, sexual harassment/assault claims, health care, and elections, we’ve seen mountains of proof that the left is no longer content to simply call those who don’t agree with them names, they are now actively working to force the world to do as they want, and damn anyone who dares suggest that as they’re the minority, they should not get to demand that. What is being ignored, or worse, actively censored, is what we need to discuss, that the left is stealing elections, forcing government bloat, and more. Two simple items that are happening in DC will show this, with a very simple argument.

The ACA mandate repeal, part of the tax bill recently passed, is being heralded as Republicans “taking away healthcare” while others wail that “millions will die” or that “Republicans want the poor to die.” And of course the standard “this is a tax cut for the rich” argument. But none of those are true, as always. If I had a product that I required you to purchase, that would be wrong, which is what the ACA did. The government created “health care plans” that the government then sold, and required all American citizens to purchase, from them. Aside from the lies that I could keep my plan or Dr. if I liked them (I did, and I didn’t get to keep them,) or the fact that I personally know someone who was told they were not eligible for a waiver, and the only Dr. who would take them on an ACA plan was 100 MILES AWAY, the ACA was and always will be a horrible thing. Why else do you think we “had to pass it to find out what’s in it?” Well, the Republicans finally got together and passed the tax cut, and included a repeal of the ACA mandate. Note, they are NOT repealing the ACA, as much as many people want them to, they simply removed the mandate, meaning if you choose not to have health insurance, you are no longer fined (taxed.) I pointed this out in many social media threads only to be told I’m “ignorant of the facts.” Many of these threads I simply said “hey, you’re pro-choice, so you should be happy I get to choose,” only to be blocked or insulted, or in some cases, threatened. But one did seem intelligent, so I posted a screenshot of the actual verbiage, showing it’s only the mandate being repealed, and just like that, the intelligent argument died and I was a “horrible racist bigot who wants millions to die just to give the rich a tax cut.” And people wonder why I weep for the future.

Net “neutrality:” Just over two years ago, the FCC implemented a group of regulations to ensure “net neutrality,” and now that they are considering undoing that, the world is losing it’s collective mind of the “end of freedom.” I don’t even try to argue in those threads, as no one there will even tolerate my “ignorance” when I point out that there is no way for “all data to be equal” and that regulations increase costs, and thus, what we pay for a product. Simply put though, why should all data be equal? Not all sites are of equal importance, or take as much resources to display. Let’s take a few for example, Netflix/Hulu, e-mail, Twitter, and any software used by schools. Netflix/Hulu and other video streaming services take MUCH more bandwidth as they are transmitting much more data, while e-mail and Twitter require FAR LESS, so you don’t want those to be equal, as that means slowing down the bigger services, not speeding up the little ones. If you look at the last one, when compared to video streaming, e-mail, or social media, you can easily argue they are more important than entertainment. Why do you want what your child’s school (or yours if you are in college) to be equal to entertainment? I don’t, I want the options that require high bandwidth to get it, and those that don’t to get what they need.

Of course the argument always returns to “you just want to limit people,” which I don’t. We had health insurance before 2012, what happened was that many plans were deemed “bad” so they went away, and of course, costs went up. We heard screaming of “they want people to die” just as we always hear about “forcing women into back alley abortions” when any attempt is made to remove funding for planned parenthood. This is no different, we had internet before 2015, and honestly it was better than before net neutrality, as Netflix, YouTube, Hulu and so on could be prioritized, not forced to be equal to all other items. No ISP is going to decide they don’t like Netflix and block it, as they will lose customers right and left and go out of business. ISP’s will also not decide that you must pay $100 for a certain website, as the same will happen. Regulations, while not always bad, do cause costs to go up, so removing them isn’t always the death blow that is predicted.

Finally the “tax cut for the rich” argument, as it’s really it’s own thing. Sarah Sanders, who is either adored or despised, dropped the mic on the press corps when asked about this by talking about 10 reporters who always go out for drinks together, and pay based on their income, until the bartender gives them a cut in prices, based on what they pay. The top payers get the biggest cut, monetarily, and those who pay little or nothing, get less or nothing, because X% of a small number is a small number, and X% of nothing is nothing. So, tired of being vilified, those paying the most decide to drink at home, and suddenly, the remaining people can’t cover the bill at all. The tax cuts being passed (hopefully) will result in people like Bill Gates, who pay MASSIVE taxes, to see a larger savings when it comes to dollars and cents, because they pay more, as opposed to me, because I don’t pay what they do. The argument is flawed because other than socialism, there is not a way to pass tax cuts and exclude “the rich,” although ironically the Democrats harping on the “rich” getting more are themselves in the bracket to benefit most, although many also don’t pay their taxes. The last time this happened, I made one comment, and of course was castigated horribly for my ignorance, but I’ll say it again here. When you do your taxes the first time after the tax cuts are passed, if you don’t pay less, tell me, and I’ll happily change my mind and join you in demanding the cuts be reversed. You won’t see a single person who takes the challenge win, as they will see their taxes go down, unless of course they pay nothing, because of course 100% of zero is zero, but I tend to ignore them on any tax argument on principle.

So, to summarize, no millions upon millions will not die because I am no longer forced to pay for insurance I can’t even use. No, Verizon will not suddenly block all entertainment sites unless you pay $1000 more a month, and no, the tax cuts are not just for the rich. The Democrats depend on hyperbole and media frenzy, because simply put, their arguments are flawed and false, and they can’t stand people not obeying them.

All for me, none for you

I’ve written about this many times, and the arguments always devolve into the people demanding special treatment defending their “right” to it with arguments that would make a spider monkey tell them they’re idiots. The current thread is about the current case going before SCOTUS, regarding the baker who was sued into bankruptcy over refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay wedding. This baker did not say gays were not welcome in their business, only that they would not bake the wedding cake, which in their opinion, sanctioned the wedding, something their faith would not let them do. Naturally, the couple in question sued for having their “rights” violated, eventually causing the bakery to close and the family to lose their livelihood. Fast forward a bit, and we now have a gay coffee shop owner going on a profanity laced tirade, kicking Christians out of the shop. They were not asking the shop to cater or otherwise take part in anything other than the same business transactions everyone else was a part of, yet these legal experts that not that far in the past that screamed about rights, are now silent.

Well, I’m not a lawyer, I’m just a guy with a degree in history and a certification to teach secondary social studies, which includes U.S. Government, and there is no right to shop and buy from who you want. Business owners can legally deny anyone service, and only the free market can legally respond, by patrons deciding if they wish to continue shopping there. The First Amendment, simply, protects you from Congress passing a law restricting your speech or ability to exercise your faith (or lack thereof.)

While the current SCOTUS makeup is a pretty even split, I believe they will side with the baker, and hopefully force this couple to repay every dime their first suit stole from the business. If I had my way, when they rant about their rights, I would then simply say “So, you support bankrupting the gay coffee shop owner who kicked out Christians for being Christian, and not even for asking for a special service?” When they say that’s not the same thing, I’d agree, the Christians’ request was to purchase was was readily available in the shop, something the baker said they would not stop anyone from doing, it was not a request for a special service for a private event.

The long an short of this is very simple, you have a right to shop where you want, and the businesses have the right to say, “sorry, we don’t wish to provide that service.” But these lawsuits have never been about equal rights, it’s about forcing conservatives to accept as normal, that which we believe is not. Marriage is a social construct, and I personally believe the Government should have NO PART IN IT! You go to the religious leader of your choice and get married. Government can allow you to show someone who financially depends on you as a dependent, that’s it. If the wife makes the most, she is head of house, if it’s two women, the higher salary is head of house, there is no “spouse” just a “dependent.” But, sadly, this argument is also shouted down as “not allowing homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals,” when in fact it is, as it strips the “rights” one group wants from everyone, and is far more fair, but liberals aren’t about fairness, they are simply about forcing you to bend to their will, and they will soon find, the average American conservative is tired of bending, we now stand for what we believe. If SCOTUS rules for the lesbian couple, I will demand they rule against the coffee shop, you can’t have it both ways.