Society is at a tipping point, and I can’t say we’ll tip the right way

Just 40 years ago, regardless of your stance on politics, race, money, or religion, people were generally able to exist alongside anyone. There were arguments, just as there are today, but they didn’t end with divorce, or calls for arrest for some imagined crime, they just ended with an agreement to disagree, and not revisit the topic. Even 25 years ago, this was still the case, as I can remember my parents and I having that experience with friends. We may have been upset and avoided the other person all we could for a time, but we generally didn’t dispose of someone for a simple disagreement. During my high school years, when these conversations happened, they were either short lived or lasted months or years, as both parties would go back and research then come back and keep working to bring the other person to their point of view. Many of those I call friends vehemently disagree with me on many topics, from healthcare to immigration and more, and we still call the other a friend, unlike so many today.

During the election of 2016, many people became incensed at others for not agreeing with them on who to vote for, candidates had people insulting and demeaning others over the simple fact that you will never find one candidate that everyone will agree with. From George Washington to Donald Trump, every President has had people who wanted someone else for the office, yet they all were chosen to fill the job for their time. Sadly, today we see violence happening in the name of “resisting a fascist regime” from a group that is using Nazi logos and names, and tactics straight from Mussolini’s or Hitler’s playbook. The simple statement that “when your argument requires you to assault those who disagree, it has no value in any sense” perfectly sums up all of the groups who have rioted to stop what they don’t want. However, if you look at eras in the past, you will rarely find the “I don’t like that, so you can’t do it” attitude, you may see protests, signs outside a business or school, and chants being repeated to bring people to one side or the other, but rarely will you see violence erupt over a mere invitation of a speaker, or not wanting a statue removed from a city park.

This attitude, sadly, has been growing for the last 20 to 25 years, and seems to be all but unstoppable now. From the 1990’s and the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, to today’s demand that the military, and in fact, the federal government, “must” pay for all manner of things, society is at a tipping point. It is my hope that, over the course of this, I can highlight areas were simply walking away, or changing how a topic is approached, may help stop the flight toward anarchy or worse.

I have rights!
The go to argument today, it seems, is that everything is a right, or the denial of someone else’s rights, to stop an argument and “win” the day. Just pointing out that something is or isn’t included in the Bill of Rights is a trigger to call someone racist, sexist, bigot, or nazi, after which all bets are off and the person the group crying hates is instantly a demon from hell to be killed on the spot. Sadly, when the inverse of that argument happens, they defend the person “denying a right” as having the right to so, completely ignoring history and that they so recently argued completely against their new stance.

Just over two years ago (April 2015), a couple in Oregon sued a local baker for not making a cake for their wedding. The bakery in question is owned and run by a Christian couple who said that to do so would violate their faith. Rather than let the free market take over, and see who the public supports, the couple in question sued, eventually winning the day, and forcing the bakery to close. The argument that a business cannot deny service, else they are guilty of discrimination, is one that has been debated for decades, yet until 2015, people didn’t sue, they simply told their friends and family, and let the market decide if the business was guilty or not. If the community disagreed, the business would see sales decline until they either change their policy or close their doors for good. (1)

 That same year in Indiana, a pizza parlor was sued by a gay couple for not catering a wedding. Granted, this story produced a seemingly endless stream of humor over any couple wanting pizza for a wedding, but it shined a light on a new law in Indiana, which the restaurant owner said allowed a business to refuse service on religious grounds. In the Oregon case, the bakery was closed and a family’s ability to support themselves was stripped from them, over a simple matter of a cake, while in Indiana, the community rallied around the business and raised money for them to keep them open after being sued. (2)

On the opposite end of the spectrum from the examples above, just two years later (October 2017,) a coffee shop in Seattle, run by a gay man, saw a video go viral, as the owner went on a verbal tirade against Christians, as he kicked them out of his shop, and was very profane in doing so. Using the examples above, one might expect the damaged party (the customer) to sue and force the business owner to capitulate or close their doors, but this one saw nothing of the sort. The ACLU quickly got involved in the first two, proclaiming loudly in both cases that the First Amendment meant that a business could not say their religious freedom trumps anyone else’s, while in the case of this coffee shop, they were silent, and the community saw nothing more than customers treated as if they had urinated on the counter while their heads spun on their necks. (3)

The sad part of this is that a mere 20 years ago, many businesses had signs that they catered to a small group or didn’t serve others. Most were considered jokes, as they read “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, at any time, for any reason, with or without explanation.” This was often cause for laughter, or just a decision to not patronize a business, and again, the market decided which businesses succeeded or failed. Granted, this scenario is largely geographic as you will always find areas of any country that hold either very liberal or very conservative views, and the community rarely sees challenges to this, as those who disagree don’t stay long, if they visit at all. Taken as an example, Nashville and Los Angeles are almost on different planets, as in Nashville you find a generally conservative community, raised on Bar-B-Que and beer, and country music, while Los Angeles is so diverse in what you find it could almost be a country on it’s own. From international food, to different cultures, to different religions and lifestyles, when someone from either city visits the other, culture shock is almost too mild a term to use.

These example show two things very clearly, one segment of society demands that no one disagree with them, no one is allowed to run their lives according to anything but what they allow you do, while their polar opposite simply avoid a business that is not in line with their views. Chic-Fil-A has been the target of many tirades and more for their policy of closing on Sunday, despite the policy stating it is to allow employees to spend time as they see fit with their families. When the CEO, Dan Cathy, was interviewed and stated that his personal belief that marriage is a sacred union of a man and woman, the media proclaimed for the world to hear, that the business was homophobic, despite having the quote showing this was Mr. Cathy’s personal opinion. The Robertsons of Duck Dynasty fame faced the same, as the patriarch of the family, and the other members, said their personal belief is that marriage is for a man and woman, and saw the series almost cancelled, despite it always showing the family praying over their meal, and it being obvious that they are a deeply religious family.

All of examples of both sides of this argument point out a massive difference in how the two sides of this situation handle themselves when they are faced with those who disagree. There is a wonderful quote, although who said it first is something attributed to many, but there is a segment of society that says if something offends them, no one may do it, while their inverse simply says if something offends them, they will avoid it. This is perfectly shown in the fact that a baker and pizza parlor were sued, while a coffee shop was not, when they refused service to customers completely opposed to their views. There are very few examples of something so offensive it should not be in polite society, that being vulgar language, pornography, other nudity or graphic displays of affection, as very few people want to see any couple, gay or not, all but having sex in public, or someone dressed in so little a doctor could perform a full physical exam without needing them to disrobe. A prime example is something heard from both sides in the late 1990’s, and even parodied in South Park’s episode entitled Tolerance Camp.

I was sitting with friends just a short time after graduating high school, a few of them openly homosexual, when a story came on the TV about a Gay Pride parade that facing complaints and even threats of charges for public indecency. Knowing our friends, no one was shy about voicing their opinions, as the video showed men in lingerie few women would even want to try on outside of a closed room, and worse. Oddly enough, at least by current standards, the few gay people at the table were the most upset, as they said, it painted homosexuals as being perverse and horrible people, and I agreed with them completely. Those at my table were among the nicest and most amazing people I have known. I joke that, if you get a flat in Texas, don’t worry, in about ten minutes four guys in a truck with tools and beer will be by to help, and everyone at that table would agree we were “those guys” as we would all stop to help anyone who needed it. Aside from asking those few people for clothing advice when I didn’t want my mother or sister to know about a surprise party, they were people to me, just people with expertise in an area I didn’t have, as are the rest, we all find something interesting, and pursue it, and come to the others when needed. But, sadly, today, we’ve seen a movement from one extreme on the political scale to demonize all who don’t believe as they do, and those being demonized are so marginalized that any argument to defend themselves only adds fuel to the fire.

Academia is no longer about academics
Growing up for most Americans, those in their very late 30’s or older, a bad grade was a prompt for your parents to have a conversation about your studies. A note from the teacher about how you were “acting out” was reason for the parents to either ground, or spank, or otherwise punish you. If you were spanked at school, you were spanked again when you got home. My own grades began to slip in high school due to my unwillingness to study, and my parents sat me down and explained why I needed to study. Being who I am, I found a way to “study” so I’d pass, but didn’t truly apply myself, otherwise I would be in a far different place in life today.

Today, however, we have students so assured of their “rights” that they claim discrimination for a failing grade when they didn’t show up, or demand “safe spaces” where they can ignore the world. and their parents are defending them. A cartoon published years ago shows two situations, both where the student had failed a test, where in one the parents ask the child to explain, and in the other, they angrily shout at the teacher to explain. Having gone to college to teach, as I love studying history and teaching, I first found that as I don’t coach any sport, I’m not able to find a teaching position, but also having substituted for several years, this attitude is slowly encroaching on even the most conservative of states and cities. I am thankful I never had to sit in on a conference where parents were told their child was failing, but I did hear students in the halls telling their friends how their parents would “make the teacher change the grade or they’d have them fired.” The attitude of your academic success is someone else’s responsibility teaches only that you need to complain to get your way, and leads to so many other problems in life that no one entering the workforce is able to handle.

I also remember in one class, where I only had one day and it was test-prep, students claiming their teacher allowed the use of iPods and the like when absent, but the teacher didn’t leave me anything stating this, so I told them no. I was accused of being a Draconian Tyrant, and explained that in actuality I was a Jeffersonian, in that I followed the rules unless they were amended by someone with that authority. The students actually began to question me about their test prep, it being an AP Government class, and I ended up getting a long term position from that teacher as a result. In this situation, thankfully, the students wanted to learn, and seeing that they had someone in the classroom who could help, jumped at the chance.

When I returned for my two weeks in the classroom, I lectured, answered questions and generally had a wonderful experience, as the students were bright, engaged, and eager to learn. In the down time, some asked me about various colleges, and other paths in life. I didn’t hold back, telling those who wanted to open an auto garage they should first go to trade school, then learn from a master while getting their business degree slowly, so they’d have little debt and gain experience and real world knowledge, and they were shocked that a teacher didn’t just say “go to college.” Others wanted careers where college was a must, and I told them about loans and such, and advised against debt where it could be avoided. A few of the other teachers cautioned me in this, saying that I could anger parents who wanted their child to attend college, but I will not lie to students and tell them a path that isn’t right for them is. A few parents complained that I was “advising their child that college was wrong,” and I explained that I actually had advised college would help, but that there was a path that would avoid much, if not all, of the normal debt, and was told “you’re lying to cover yourself.”

This shows the attitude so prevalent in the world today, that being “I’m right, don’t you dare say you didn’t do what I said, you’re wrong and must now suffer!” After that experience, I was ready to tell that school district not to call me, but a move negated that need, as well as entering my Junior year, where I was either waiting tables, delivering pizza, in class or asleep, so the situation was resolved, but I was saddened still that parents are so hell bent on their child going to college, regardless of the child’s desires, that they will attack anyone actually listening to the child and being honest.

The rise of the social justice warrior
In each example used so far, you see an attitude of “I’m right, do as a say” which has given rise to the SJW, or Social Justice Warrior. This person cares little for anything but getting their way, as they will sue a bakery for disagreeing, support a coffee shop for kicking out a customer who wasn’t asking for special treatment or service, and silence all dissent. In April of 2016, Milo Yiannopoulos and Steven Crowder were invited to speak at U Mass, by the college Republicans, at an event now known as The Triggering (4 and 4.) This was, by design, meant to challenge students’ positions on various topics, to get them to debate and discuss, and learn from each other. Sadly, it went exactly opposite to the plans, with students cursing and shouting down the speakers. The students, in this case, in an attempt to avoid being offended, managed to offend many more to a higher degree.

The simple fact is, today we have people on all sides of every issue that firmly believe in their own infallibility and their right to not be challenged. When you suggest that the government should not force citizens to purchase a product provided by the government, you’re accused of wanting “millions to die.” When you point out that you simply want the mandate removed, not the products, you’re told you’re lying, that you want death and you will never change their mind. This is a large issue for sure, but this attitude goes much farther than just Health Care or other government programs. Stories have been told many times of a woman ranting at a man for holding the door as she “doesn’t need a man” to do that for her. Some have the man saying fine, then entering and not holding the door, only to then be berated for being rude. That event, ranting about holding the door and not holding the door, shows the attitude of “I’m always right, do as I say!” the clearest. How is anyone to know if someone wants a door held for them or not? A video online some ago shows a woman ranting at a couple as they simply share a chaste kiss for “having sex” in a restaurant. When the business refuses to kick them out, the woman then throws her food on the ground and demands a refund, after which it gets worse when she’s told no.

Opponents of unfettered immigration and open borders are accused of racism for wanting all immigration laws already on the books enforced. When those people ask what race an “illegal immigrant” is, they’re screamed at for “clouding the issue” and being racist. When illegal immigrants rape or kill an American, and are given little more than a slap on the wrist by a “sanctuary city” (5) opponents of illegal immigration use this to show why our laws must be enforced, while supporters of open borders say it’s a “random incident” and “shouldn’t be used to tar good people” but they can’t offer any statistics to show how it’s an isolated incident.

The cries of racism or sexism aren’t restricted to illegal immigration or opinionated people who believe they have a right to be right. Very few people today will argue in favor of Jim Crowe laws as we saw in the 1950’s and 1960’s, rather the opposite, as “separate but equal” never works. But, today, we have minority students demanding segregation, companies sued for not hiring a minority over a more qualified person, and even calls to change a character’s race or gender to be “inclusive.” One company, just over 15 years ago, had a policy that all applications were online and anyone including “anything that would give away the race or sex of the applicant” was disqualified. The first and second interviews were automated via phone, the third via phone with a live person, and the fourth was all but a job offer and the first time you were seen by anyone. This company was sued (although they won each time) for “policies that harmed minorities” and the argument was that minorities wouldn’t have access to the needed technology, despite public libraries not charging for internet time to apply for jobs, and phones being widely available and inexpensive.

The popular culture arguments are even more comical, as they are almost all made by those who would never watch the program they demand conform to their point of view. Two examples show how the policy works wonderfully, or could fail dramatically. The Flash, on the CW network, has the characters of Joe, Iris, and Wally West, played by African Americans, and being a long time fan of the comic myself, I noticed the change, but never cared, as these three are amazing in the role they play. This shows that if you hire for talent, it won’t matter who is playing the role, unless there is a reason to otherwise look for talent. Doctor Who, for years, has come under fire for not having a woman play The Doctor. Initially, the role of someone who fled their planet to avoid military conscription, and being the 1960’s, meant a man, but over time, we have seen women assume roles originally played by men, from Commanders on Gallifrey, to Missy taking over from The Master, and the new Doctor coming in late 2017 is a woman, but from all reports, will do amazingly, indicating that until now, the right woman for the role just wasn’t available. In a funny twist of fate, someone was outraged that Superman on the CW show Supergirl was to only be white, despite having a white man playing the role in the credits, while another was incensed that Rami Malek, a “white man,” was playing an Egyptian Pharaoh in the Night at the Museum movies, until Malek let them know he was born in Egypt, and thus, actually an Egyptian!

This argument also comes into play in many other situations, but it always comes down to the same basic tenet, hire based on race/sex to avoid being racist/sexist, and the irony of “you must be racist/sexist to not be racist/sexist” just brings about the response of “you’re too ignorant to understand.”

Agree with me or you’re a Nazi and to be killed

The secondary tactic today is to call everyone who doesn’t agree with and follow you without question a nazi. Being a student of history, and having already said this here, those using that accusation to silence dissent are actually using the nazi tactics and logic. After World War 1, Germany was demoralized and dejected, until a charismatic man named Adolf Hitler rose to power and gave the country a scapegoat and whipped them into a frenzy. This is a typical tactic, that being to paint your opponent as so evil that all around you will rally to your defense. Charlottesville, VA saw a violent clash between “nazis” and “antifa,” although many now claim to have seen these groups come in on the same busses, suggesting they are simply one group instigating violence to get their way.

My personal stance, and arguments, against this argument is simple, my Grandfather and Great Uncles fought in World War II against the actual Nazis, with one dying on D-Day and laying in Calais to this day. My Great Uncle Coleman, a tank commander on D-Day and in North Africa, rode into Paris when it was liberated, and told me about his time in the Army fighting a brutal regime that murdered millions for the “crimes” of being Jewish, or gay, or otherwise undesirable. Just under a century before that, my ancestors fought to free slaves in the south, but because I don’t support what these “enlightened” people do, I am now painted as nazi.

The clarion call, of course, is to disarm all who are legally armed after any event involving a firearm. A “white supremacist” killed African Americans after the election of President Trump and the call was for gun control, not killer control. Those crying for “common sense gun control” ignore the tool used when it’s a pressure cooker (Boston Marathon bomber,) a truck (NYC,) or a van full of fertilizer (OKC Federal building,) and look for how to fix mental health, but when someone uses a firearm, you’re a nazi for wanting to address the actual issue, not just ban a tool.

Looking at three specific events should show how making a tool illegal is going to do nothing, as Chicago and Detroit should prove on their own. Columbine High School saw a brutal massacre of students, by other students, using weapons stolen from their parents or others they knew. These were high school students, and thus, they should not have any legal way to purchase a firearm. The only exception is if they were already 18, they can legally buy a shotgun, but they used other weapons that they could not legally purchase, so if they acquired the weapons illegally, how would yet another law stop them. Sandy Hook Elementary was virtually identical, with the killer stealing the weapons to kill with them. Again, he acquired them illegally, but the call was to pass another law, not address how to stop the person. This one also showed media ignorance, as they showed a photo of an AR-15, when that was left in his car and not used. Finally, Sutherland Springs, TX, saw a Baptist Church targeted by an avowed atheist who hated Christians. While he did purchase his weapon, he should not have been allowed to, as had his Dishonorable Discharge and Domestic Violence charges been properly reported when they happened, the state of TX would have had him on record as a prohibited possessor, meaning legally, he shouldn’t have been allowed any weapons. But, in the aftermath, former Vice President Biden is on record saying the man who had his own AR-15, and stopped this murderer, should not have been allowed to have the weapon that stopped a killer and saved lives.

The simple fact is that if you argue against removing a statue, for a speaker to come to a private event, or for law abiding citizens to be armed as the law allows, you are labeled a “nazi” and will be attacked, in some cases, physically and to the point of death.

What do we take away from this?
What we take away from this is, simply, that it is still a long and hard fight to bring common sense back to society as a whole. Those accused of being nazis, or racists, or sexists, will be among the first to tell you that someone who has a history of violence should not be allowed to own a firearm, or a man deported five times who has felonies in addition to his illegal status should not be allowed in the country before he is even able to kill someone. But they also tell you that a private business can deny service, and the free market should then decide if that was a wise choice.

These are the people who stop in a driving rainstorm to change a stranger’s tire, who hear about a family in their community suffering a loss and rally to cook meals and help, and generally do all they can to help anyone in need. Those accusing them of all manner of horrible things are those who demand that you wait for the Police when a killer is standing over you. They scream that you want children dead for suggesting women arm themselves to prevent assault, while also screaming that we need to “teach men not to rape,” as if it’s a genetic thing, although they also tell you being a man isn’t genetic.

The arguments don’t make sense, as they tell you that rape culture is only fixable by “teaching men not to rape,” then tell you that you can’t assume someone’s gender. They ignore the actual culture of rape in Hollywood and the DNC, while harping on “locker room talk” from over a decade ago from a man who, until he ran for President, was never accused of racism or sexism. All of this, to me, proves that we don’t have a racism, sexism, or homophobia issue, we have an willful ignorance issue.

If someone broke into your home five times, each time doing damage to your property and family, would you welcome them back again, and then say they didn’t do anything wrong by their actions leading to the death of one of your family? No, you wouldn’t, although I also wouldn’t argue that a pistol round can ricochet and kill as was argued in this case, having read about it, but that is just what the jury in San Fransisco has said. If you were beaten to a pulp would you blame the bat, or the person swinging it? If you were fired for calling in sick when found to later be at a baseball game, would you blame racism for your being found out to be lying? This is the crux of the matter and what must change, as we have almost half of all Americans today blaming everyone but the person responsible. Zarate, after killing Kate Steinle, is acquitted despite multiple felony convictions and deportations, companies are accused of racism when a minority who is less qualified than a non-minority, doesn’t get the job they want, and men are accused of all manner of crimes for merely living their lives. The question here then becomes simple, when, if ever, will society finally stop this madness? If we don’t, we are headed for the end of the grand experiment that is the Shining City on the Hill that is the United States.

The Rules
Now, I’m sorry I have to put this here, but as I’m going to encourage my followers on Gab and Twitter to share this, so as to have as many as possible in the conversation, there are some rules I do not budge on when it comes to comments.

Remain civil and respectful of everyone’s right to their own opinion. You do have a right to think and believe as you do, but so do those you disagree with.

This is, by my design, an family friendly blog. Yes, I know that the topics I write about are not those children, or even teenagers, normally read about and discuss, but part of rule one, being civil, is not resorting to profanity.

If you resort to a base insult, you will immediately be ignored by me and all others who understand the rules of a debate. If I challenge your point and you call me racist, you are proven to be someone unworthy of my time and respect, and I will ignore you after that.

CITE! YOUR! SOURCES! I have cited my sources for the examples above, and if you have an example used where the source isn’t cited, you can assume it’s my own personal experience, but feel free to ask. If you are asked for source material, either admit you’re using something you can’t prove, or provide the source material.

Finally, and most importantly, I am never, by disagreeing with you, denying any right or insulting you, rather, I am embracing my own right to free speech, and questioning what I do not believe. If you are unable to convince me, that is not my “denying your right” to anything, it’s my refusal to embrace your point of view simply because you demand I do.

 

 

Addendum – I’ve fought the HTML and revised over ten times now and I cannot get a constant result of a SIMPLE CARRIAGE RETURN after the centered section headers.  I know it looks bad, but sadly WordPress is apparently in a mood to undo all changes when I save a draft.

An open letter to Congress and the Supreme Court

I will be mailing this letter, with only the salutation changed to personalize it, to all Reps and Senators from TX, on any relevant committee, and to all SCOTUS Justices.

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

We have seen tragedy in this country for decades, from Waco and Ruby Ridge, to Oklahoma City, to most recently, Las Vegas, and all of these tragedies share a few common threads. First, and almost instantly, there is a clarion call to “enact common sense gun control,” regardless of the fact that Waco with the Branch Davidians was the Government storming their compound, or OKC was a van filled with fertilizer, or the Boston Marathon bomb was a pressure cooker, it’s always “we need gun control.” What is ignored in all of these events, is that the weapons used were either perverted from their intended use (the van, fertilizer, pressure cooker) or illegally obtained, as those bent on committing murder will not let something like a law stop them.
Looking as the Sutherland Springs, TX shooting, the assailant was dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Air Force and had a domestic violence charge in his past that was not expunged or otherwise done away with, so he was a prohibited possessor in the State of Texas. The reason he was able to purchase his weapon was not due to the law being inadequate, but rather, the U.S. Air Force not filing the records properly and/or in good time. Had any background check in the State of Texas been run on his and shown his dishonorable discharge, the sale of any firearm would have been denied instantly, and this would not have stopped him finding a way to murder those he hated. Had it not been for a man with an AR style rifle and another with a weapon of his own, the TX shooter may not have stopped until all in that church were dead, yet we have a former Vice President, on record about that very shooting and the man’s actions to stop a murderer, saying the man should not have had that weapon that day, indicating he would prefer more people die waiting on police than a law abiding citizen step in to protect people.

Looking to Maryland now, however, we see far more than negligence in the mindset that banning weapons will keep them away from criminals, we see poorly thought out and poorly worded legislation, just as we saw in the wake of Las Vegas with attempts to regulate or ban bump stocks, using the verbiage “any device capable of increasing the standard rate of fire” of a semi-automatic weapon. The current rush to ban “military style” weapons, or “weapons of war” is as ill-advised and ill thought out as the rush to ban “devices that increase the standard rate of fire” of a semi-automatic weapon.

When looking at the first example, you need only speak to anyone who has used semi-automatic firearms for any significant length of time, and they will tell you that all humans are born with 10 such devices, they’re called fingers. For any weapon that does not automatically cycle and fire the next round (which are currently not available to civilians without extensive licensing and fees) there is no “standard rate of fire.” That term in and of itself refers only to automatic weapons, the term semi-automatic means that one round is fired every time the trigger is pulled, no more. The move after Las Vegas was to ban Bump Stocks, which rock the weapon and have a bit of plastic that prevents you from fully depressing the trigger, so the trigger is “pulled” very rapidly. This, however, is not the only way to do this, and two require nothing more than clothing and your body. You see, if the shooter does not properly seat the rifle against his or her shoulder, the weapon could rock in their arm, causing a bump fire situation until they react to remove their finger. Likewise, you can fire from the hip, with a finger or thumb through a belt loop and the trigger guard, also allowing the recoil to rock the weapon, firing very rapidly, so the above legislation would, in effect, ban fingers and belt loops in addition to bump stocks. Not to mention, it bans inexperienced shooters from ever learning lesson one on the range. Again, I am not averse to regulating bump stocks, and in fact fully support such regulations, but as a college educated American, who studied History and Political Science specifically, I see warnings of government overreach, due to poorly worded legislation, and I don’t like it.

Moving to the new situation in Maryland, where “military style” weapons are being banned, or others are saying the Second Amendment does not include “weapons of war,” I could not disagree more on both parts. First, if you visit any Military installation, the hip of every Military Police Officer will have something I own on it, a semi-automatic pistol, either in 9MM or .45ACP caliber. Simply by those men and women using them in their day to day duties, that is now a “military style” weapon, and a “weapon of war” as it’s also carried overseas by infantry, special forces, MP and other Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen both in and out of theaters of war. Aside from the make and barrel type, my 12GA shotgun is the same, as it’s the most common gauge shotgun on the planet, it’s just that the Military and Law Enforcement use Bull Barrels and I have a Bird Barrel currently. In point of fact, the only weapon I own that is not a “military style” weapon is my AR-15, it simply mimics the look of a Military weapon, that being the M-16, but that’s where it ends. Other than a few specific jobs in the military, the vast majority of rifles used as Select Fire, meaning you have 3 or 4 options, those being Safe (firing disabled,) single shot, 3 shot burst, full automatic. I know very few positions in the Military today where I would want a rifle that cannot fire at least a 3 shot burst, and every rifle I’ve owned does only that.

Moving on with respect to my AR-15, the only thing that is actually the same with regards to weapon function (this ignores the look or the rail system allowing additions to the weapon) is the caliber of ammunition, that being 223 Remington or 556, oddly enough, many widely available rifles today, which are not banned, are more powerful than either of those calibers. With no more than gravity and resistance by air, a 223 or 556 round will travel roughly 1650 feet, just about a third of a mile, before it hits the ground. Other rifles, such as the 308, 7 Mag, or 300 Winchester will travel further, and do more damage at further distances, as they were designed for hunting larger game, yet these are not banned as they aren’t “military style” or “weapons of war,” although again, as with my pistol and shotgun, many weapons designed for hunters are used by the Military today, as they are trained to find and use the best tool for their job.

Now, why have I chosen to reach out only now? I was only four when John Hinckley Jr attempted to assassinate President Reagan, but I have studied that event as it began the snowball of “common sense gun control” almost 40 years ago. From the Brady Bill and other waiting period laws, to the background checks of today, nothing has worked to curtail the violence in the hearts of evil men and women. One need only look to Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, or any other major city to find gang violence, and no weapon used by the thugs who seek to intimidate and control others is legally owned. Yet, in some of these places, citizens who just want to live their lives are disarmed, and even later told that unless the criminal is in the building with them, police will not respond until at the earliest, the next day. Worse still, some who defend themselves and either harm or kill their assailant are later charged with a crime, or the family of said attempted murderer are allowed to sue the person attacked for monetary damages.

As recently as 2012, George Zimmerman was attacked by a young man who may have been under the influence of narcotics, and defended himself, ultimately taking the life of his attacker, and was then charged with murder and civilly sued for defending his life. While yes, there are particulars of the case where I disagree with choices made, or need more information, the simple fact that Martin was attacking Zimmerman, and inaction would lead to Zimmerman’s death, have not changed.

Only two years later, Officer Wilson was forced to choose to shoot Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri, or he would have died. The mantra was quickly taken up by the media that Brown was running away, or had his hands up, or was kneeling, and all three have him shot in the back, while forensics show the rounds that struck him entered from the front, corroborating Wilson’s story that Brown was attacking him, yet a Police Officer who had responded to the scene of a crime, who was being either aggressively approached or attacked, lost his livelihood and had to move his family, because of a societal attitude that all boils down to “blame the tool, not the criminal.”

Sadly, this attitude is now so prevalent, that we see situations like Maryland, where legislation passes that is so poorly worded, anyone could point out what I have, and ban semi-automatic pistols, or shotguns, as if the Military uses them, they are now “weapons of war.” These same people often point out that “you don’t need an AR 15 to defend your home” or “the second amendment was about the military” and they are wrong on both counts. If someone enters my home illegally, and is carrying a weapon, seeing my pistol is likely to get me shot, while seeing me holding my AR 15 causes instant pause and often flight rather than fight. Were I restricted to my sidearm, I would most often be forced to use it to defend myself, but the mere sight of a rifle in my hands, the mere threat of force, often causes attackers to flee, allowing me to report the crime to the proper authorities and no one is harmed unless the criminals resist their later arrest.

The second argument, that the Second Amendment either only allows the use of weapons available at the time it was written, or that it applies only the Military, are both just as wrong as the assertion that “you don’t need (whatever weapon they hate at the time) to defend yourself” in that it seeks to impose rules where those rules have been specifically forbidden. The wording and timing of the Second Amendment are concrete facts, we know it was written just after a bloody war of independence from a government which sought to subjugate the colonies, and use them to make money, with no respect for the people who would be actually producing what the British would use or sell. That scenario showed our Founding Fathers that, if the government chooses tyranny over respect for the governed, the only viable option is for the people, the citizens and civilians, to stand up and say no more. Yes, our Military swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, but that does not prevent a tyrannical government from locking up all Military installations and only allowing those who will swear fealty and loyalty to the government out, thus ensuring they are well armed and the rest of us are left with what we personally own, the exact situation the colonists found themselves in just over 200 years ago. While this argument can be used to say that tanks, RPG’s, planes, and so on are legal for civilians to buy, there is valid reason to prevent a civilian from purchasing those as they have use only in a theater of war, and we all hope that the streets of small-town America never become such a theater. Saying, however, that a weapon that merely resembles another, and is the same caliber, but is actually less powerful and useful in battle, is a “weapon of war” or “military style” while other more useful and powerful weapons are allowed, shows an arrogance and ignorance that, in the halls of State of Federal government is very dangerous.

To show, using another Amendment, where this can go, we need only look at the potential ramifications of Net Neutrality being repealed. There are already allegations of Twitter and Facebook censoring certain viewpoints and not others, which from what I’ve seen amounts to stopping speech some find offensive and allowing calls for actual violence, based solely on political affiliation. Without Net Neutrality, all that needs be done is for Twitter, Facebook, or another to report to the ISP being used that someone is “engaging in hate speech or violent online behavior” and that person now either loses their internet connection, or must pay astronomical rates to keep it, all based only one a simple report. This, oddly enough, does exactly what I use as an example of how the Founding Fathers knew about and included advances in technology. The argument is often made that the Second Amendment only covers weapons that were available in the late 18th Century, but what is ignored is that the Puckle Gun was already available, was a rapid fire weapon, and was just too expensive for the Colonial Government to purchase. But, if your weapons can be taken because they aren’t covered by the Bill of Rights because they didn’t exist in the late 18th Century, so can your methods of speaking. Looking to the time of the Bill Of Rights, only the early printing press, quill and ink, and your voice were available. So, by the logic of “only the weapons available in colonial times” are covered, so too are methods of speech.

To close, and I do thank you for taking the time to read this letter, I will quote the Tenth Amendment.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.”

In short, anything the Constitution does not specifically mention as a power of the Federal Government, or specifically prohibit the Federal Government from doing, is something only The People, or the individual States can do. We all know that the Bill of Rights does not grant us the right to free speech, peaceable assembly, petition, to bear arms, or any other right. Rather, the Constitution and Bill Of Rights simply enumerate the rights all of us have, and state that the Federal or State government must protect them. As the Third Amendment prevents quartering of Soldiers in citizens’ homes, the Federal Government cannot do that, and also must prevent States from doing so either. As there is no mention in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, or Bill of Rights of the word Marriage, let alone what that is, that is not a power delegated to the Federal Government or prohibited to the States, so it is up to each state to decide for themselves.

We must reclaim common sense in all aspects of governance, as we are moving toward a time when the Federal Government may say that as someone is unpopular, they may be jailed so others are not forced to hear them, or as a certain religion is unpopular, you may not hold public office if you don’t renounce your faith. Oddly enough we have sitting Representatives and Senators already disparaging those nominated for federal office due to their faith, while private citizens scream that a teacher joining a student led prayer is a violation of the First Amendment. For too long we have allowed the perversion of our way of life, the perversion of our founding principles, and if we don’t act soon to reclaim what those actually are, and protect them for all Americans, we will lose our country as we did in 1861, and I fear not even a four year war could repair it this time.

Is this the beginning of the end?

Some time ago, I posted about Oregon Senate Bill 719 and it’s repercussions. You see, this bill allows for the confiscation of ALL FIREARMS from anyone deemed “a threat” to themselves and/or others. That, however, isn’t the issue. If someone is a known psychotic, or otherwise mentally unstable, not only do I not want them to be armed, I want them in a mental institution, as they do represent a danger to themselves and others. The issue here, however, is that anyone can lodge a complaint that someone is a “danger to themselves and others” and the court then must act. Today, there are many who have already tried to have people arrested or worse for simple comments about policy or politics in other ways. These, however, were not comments that threatened anyone at all, but simply disagreed with someone’s desire to oust this politician or that, or do away with some law, or the like. We have the masked cowards, or antifa, demanding that we bow to their will or they will attack, while those who support these masked cowards demand we not even speak about our right to defend ourselves from them, and therefore, you simply saying as there is a threat of violence from antifa due to you not agreeing with and bowing to them, you will exercise your Second Amendment rights, that person could then say you are a threat to others because you want to defend yourself.

This is where it comes to such an out of focus point that it’s silly, you see, there is no court hearing, no police showing up to let you know you’ve been charged/accused, they just let one person decide if you are a threat, then you have 24 hours to turn over ALL of your firearms, or you’re a criminal. Oh sure, you can appeal, and IF the complaint is found to be simply someone who hates guns and wanted you forced to give yours up, they’re punished, but that’s more subjective than their complaint. They just say they “honestly felt threatened” and there is no way to legally prove anything else. Yes, you are supposed to get your weapons back, but again, that person keeps filing that they “honestly feel threatened” and you are forcibly disarmed, for good.

Moving on from there, there are lawmakers in Oregon fighting to repeal this bill, for one of several possible reasons I’m sure. First, we have the Second Amendment, which of course liberals argue was written because we didn’t have an army, and now that we do, only the army should be armed. This could not be further from the truth, as the official government in control of the American Colonies did have an army, and that army was called on to disarm and take control of the colonies. The Second Amendment was put in place because the Founders know there could come a day when this new government they were forming would decide the people were little more than subjects to be controlled, and move to tyranny, so the right of The People to be armed and able to fight for their right to freedom is protected (not granted, but only protected) by the Constitution. Of course, this brings up the next argument that it only applies to muskets, but again, this is not true. Not only did the Founders use the word “arms,” they did it deliberately, as they knew that those fighting the new tyranny would need access to the same weapons being used against them, and look up the Puckle Gun if you don’t believe it, as muskets were far less advanced, and the Puckle Gun is far older than the Constitution.

My next move on this would be the Fourth Amendment, which without quoting it, protects all U.S. Citizens from Unreasonable Search and Seizure. This is a major point in this argument, as the only thing needed for police to bang on your door and demand all weapons, which we know will include a “we need to make sure, so we’re going to search your home” moment, is one person complaining that they “honestly feel you are a threat to yourself and others,” which is totally unreasonable as there is no burden of proof put on anyone but the person now forced to prove a negative, which is not possible. Under the Fourth Amendment, police must not only show a warrant or probable cause, they must show it to both the person being searched and the court. Yes, they can say they saw you threatening to shoot someone, so they burst in to stop that, then searched the area to ensure all was safe, etc, which is probable cause, but if my neighbor or a relative says they “feel” I’m a threat to myself or others, and they aren’t required to show concrete proof, the police then have no probable cause or other reason to search the home. And no, your refusal to allow a warrantless or baseless search of your home is not reason enough to them search the home. Technically as well, the Seventh Amendment comes in, as you have a right to a jury trial, as the value at stake (even one firearm) is over twenty dollars, but that’s an argument for another time.

The last Constitutional argument I can make against this law invokes the Sixth Amendment and the Tenth Amendment, as both are completely ignored by this law. The Sixth Amendment states that you have the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against you, and to be confronted with witnesses against you. You also have the right to obtain witnesses in your favor, and right to counsel. All of these are ignored, as you aren’t informed of the complaint or the hearing until after the fact, and then simply told you must surrender all weapons. Yes, you can appeal, but that will not be happening within 24 hours, so you are disarmed and then told you must prove you are not a threat. This, again, is forcing you to prove a negative, which is impossible. But, beyond that, it is never the defendant that must prove their innocence (although many do end up doing that) it’s the State that must prove guilt, “beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt.” This law flips the burden of proof, and does it after imposing the penalty. In a normal criminal complaint, the State must prove their assertions before sentence is carried out, but under SB 719, there is only one sentence, being totally disarmed, which is carried out before you have the chance to even face your accuser. To be Constitutional, the State must allow you to be notified of the complaint, to face your accuser, and then to counter their attempts to prove you are a danger, forcing the onus of proof onto the State, but they ignore all that in the name of “if one person feels unsafe, we must act” which tramples not only the Second, but also the Tenth Amendments. You see, the Tenth Amendment is the best in my opinion, as it specifically states that all powers not specifically delegated to The State (federal government) are reserved for The People (individual states,) and in this case, the Second Amendment specifically states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” No mention of what types of “arms,” or that one person not liking guns and thus “feeling unsafe” allows you to disarm me, just that as The People have a right to be free from tyranny, they shall always have the right to keep and bear Arms.

So, Oregon, in this move, has taken the first step toward tyranny, and it will be telling to see where they go from here. Will politicians “feel unsafe” that those who didn’t vote for them are possibly armed and demand their constituents be disarmed? Will the Governor decide that people not liking her new law “threatens her” and file complaints against all citizens of the state? This is the penultimate “slippery slope” as it allows for anyone to “feel threatened” and remove all responsibility for proof from the government and place it all on the citizen after sentence is carried out. As for myself, I’m glad to live in Texas, where our Governor wouldn’t support, let alone sign this, and would if over ruled, take it to the State Supreme Court to have it nullified, but I also call on all Oregonians to abandon ship now. Liberal run cities and states are raising minimum wage, which will mean higher taxes to pay it, they’re working to disarm you, I won’t be surprised if and when there is either a tax to move out of state, or a ban on all people moving out of state to “ensure the burden of tax income is met.”

We aren’t far from a state of governance where states will demand other states be taxed higher than them to offset their spending, California has already been shown to spend billions on illegal immigrants and they also disarm their citizens as much as they can (while exempting themselves from all of those laws,) so how long until they demand Texas “pay our fair share?” Or how long until they demand we obey their laws? We’ve already had states that “legalized” gay marriage demand all other states honor, but they refuse to honor laws from states that allow citizens to carry their weapons, or certain weapons. We are approaching the beginnings of what can cause civil war. California demands we honor their laws, that we pay for criminals to stay free, and Oregon demands that no one complain when disarmed on a complaint by someone you aren’t allowed to face, how long until someone sues CA or OR over these situations and those states decide they “have a right” to do as they please?

I know it’s not a pretty picture, but unless we demand logic and respect for all, as the laws on the books state must be done, we will see it get worse. From liberals rioting and destroying public universities over a speaker, then demanding they be allowed to riot over anything, to states demanding you disarm because someone “feels threatened” without telling you who or why, it’s only a matter of time before you even speaking out against un-Constitutional acts warrants life in prison. Remember, first they came for the Communists, and I said nothing. Next they came for the nationalists, and I did nothing. Then they came for me, and no one was left to do anything. We must stand together for the actual rights all of us enjoy, and quash the notions that this group or that has “rights” that only they enjoy, or this country will fall.

“Do as I order you to or I’ll say you’re an evil bigot who supports killing puppies!”

The violence in Charlottesville over this last weekend is just the latest example of a society populated by people who refuse to recognize that something happened they cannot control. It started in Ferguson during the riots after a Grand Jury ruled that the officer had acted in defense of his life, and that the thug Brown was not murdered by an evil racist. I’ve had several people tell me that I’m wrong in condemning everyone involved, just as they say the President is, because I won’t call out only the KKK and neo-nazis, ignoring and not naming antifa. When I point out that there were three groups involved, and calling out only two excuses the third, I get “but they’re nazis” as if that means I’m to excuse those who were just as fascistly violent. The antifa, or anti-fascists, for example have begun using a logo that is literally a 180 degree rotation and translation of an actual National Socialist logo from Nazi Germany. They violently suppress anything they don’t like, from speech to assembly, and they will all but kill to get their way. Those are the exact actions of the National Socialist party in the run up to WWII. Consolidate power, intimidate those against you into following you or at least being silent, suppress all dissent by any means necessary, and all of that leads to Buchenwald, Auschwitz, and murdering millions.

The next argument is that the neo-nazis and KKK were heavily armed when they showed up in Charlottesville to protest the removal of a statue, as if that’s to say they came ready to kill anyone who disagreed, but the only death was due to an idiot in a car. Another point of view would be that looking at antifa’s history, where a professor at a state college swung a bike lock at a student’s head, simply because the student wanted a speaker the professor doesn’t like, to come speak, I’d say they showed up ready to intimidate the other side, legally by the way as no weapons were taken, into staying non-violent. Scream and yell all you want, you throw a rock at me, swing a chain at me, and I’m ready to defend my life. The “but they’re nazis” as an excuse for violence is so far gone, I can’t even begin to understand how anyone can claim to be for tolerance, chant “Love trumps hate,” and then jump to violence over differing thought. I know they’re going to instantly say that Hitler would be shot on sight if he were here today, but that’s not the way our country works. You cannot use a WWII situation to justify violence in our streets over a disagreement. My Great Uncle drove a tank into France, starting at Normandy on D-Day, drove into Paris at the end to liberate an oppressed country, all after war had been declared, and it was military vs military. He would not only be the one standing against removal of a historical marker, but also stopping violence from either side, likely by giving that “I’m very disappointed in all of you” look he mastered early in life.

If it’s as simple as “they’re part of _____” why can’t I punch BLM supporters, since BLM has never officially and totally denounced those using the name BLM to call for murdering police? Why can’t I punch antifa on sight as they’ve said they want me beaten to a pulp for voting for Trump? The answer is very simple, you do not get to punch people simply because of what they say/believe/stand for, you only resort to violence to stop violence (PHYSICAL VIOLENCE) directed at you or someone else. My saying I believe Hillary should go to jail for life and be in the cell next to Obama is NOT VIOLENCE DIRECTED AT YOU, it’s a statement. We have heard for years that “hate speech” must be stopped, but that’s not something that can or should be done. The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no such thing as “hate speech,” which puts us back on the path of “you are free to speak your mind, but if you yell fire in a crowded room, and a panic/riot ensues, you’re responsible for the consequences of what you said.” My saying I believe antifa are a bunch of bigots, racists, sexists, and using tactics pioneered by the actual Nazi Party of Germany of the 30’s and 40’s, that is not “hate speech” that is my interpretation of their actions. If I invite Ann Coulter to campus having worked with a large group of fellow students to decide we want her to speak, and you then swing a bike lock at my head, that is assault with a deadly weapon. My speech is protected, your attempt to murder me is not.

People have asked me why I feel the need to be armed at all times, and it’s very simple. We now live in a world where my saying I’m a Christian sets of screams of rage that I would “dare” to believe in such hate, my stating that muslim terror groups have killed far more people than any other religious zealot group has sets of screams of islamaphobia, and my admitting I voted for Trump and would attend a speech by Milo or Coulter sets off, apparently, attempts to kill me to prevent me speaking my mind, while my attackers scream that they support free speech. I can guarantee that when they come to Texas and try this BS, and when a large number of my fellow Texans stop them, they will scream they were beaten bloody over protecting racist history. They will demand that everyone who stopped them destroying public property be arrested because they blocked them from breaking the law.

This is going to get worse, we will see people going to jail for things that the Obama administration ignored, and we will see the Trump administration accused of racism or sexism, for simply enforcing the law, and sadly, it’s what we need. 25-30 years ago, this wouldn’t have happened, as the Governor would’ve told the Mayor you have 1 hour, then I send in the National Guard, and it would have ended. Sadly, we now live in a world where people sue for everything, and we have “Judges” who will side against Police simply because they hate the current administration. I honestly wouldn’t have been surprised if the idiot who fired on the GOP softball practice had sued for discrimination and won from a liberal judge, simply because he would then claim that he was “forced into it because of how racist and sexist anyone with an R behind their name is.” At this point, I’m very thankful to live in TX and have lawyers ready to defend me, as I know it will come to a day where I’m threatened with death over simply believing as I do, and I will act to defend myself. If not that, we’ll have what’s happening in Europe happen, where “refugees” set up “muslim only” areas and attack those who dare try to actaully move about the country, and that won’t fly in the American south, and whoever is the first one told “you die for coming here,” who doesn’t accept it and acts to defend themselves will be accused of “going hunting” because the media and the American left are so bent on “we must be tolerant” they’ve now moved to “tolerant” meaning give in on everything, except when it comes to conservatives of course.

The long and short of this is very simple, and I’ve used this analogy before and it still fits. If I’m a teacher and I have three students fighting, two together against the third. I do not need to call out the team of two by their names, and ignore the lone student, that is excusing that third student. I do not need to name all three, as saying “all of you are in detention and I will be calling your parents” means just that ALL THREE ARE IN TROUBLE! For Trump to not specifically name only two of the three groups guilty of violence in Charlottesville is NOT siding with any group, and never will be. To call out only two of the three groups is to excuse the third, and the “but they’re all nazis or skinheads” is to say “I’m allowed to beat people up for believing different than me.” If you see a skinhead attacking someone, by all means, intervene and do all you must to protect that person, but YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ASSAULT SOMEONE BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE ALONE! Thought crime is Orwellian and a dangerous path. 1984 and Equilibrium are cautionary tales of allowing a government to have too much power, if we allow the “thought crimes” issue to become reality, how long before the government decides that suggesting that the First Amendment means you have free speech doesn’t mean that, and we see people killed over simple speech? How long before suggesting that wearing a shirt with a logo that “offends” someone is cause for death? How long before we’re drugged to remove all emotion and desire to resist control?

When they come for you, you will either go quietly, go screaming, or go down in a hail of bullets from government agents told to control you or kill you. Which will you choose, freedom, slavery or death? I know my choice, do you know yours, and will you stand up and refuse to give up your rights?

What happened in Charlottesville and what’s still happening?

We’ve heard the mantra from the left for years, that they want peace, love and tolerance. But, they are the most intolerant of all, as they will happily scream at you that you’re a hateful bigot for suggesting something isn’t right. From homosexuality, to politics, to immigration, they will make sure you’re told, repeatedly and at high volume, that you’re wrong, they’re right, and if you don’t agree, they will claim you just shot them.

Looking back at Charlottesville this last weekend, this is the same as we’ve seen in other places, just a different reason set things off. This time it was the left demanding all vestiges of the past, in this case Civil War memorials, that they don’t like be destroyed. To them, a state memorializing dead soldiers is the same as bringing back slavery. I’m very proud to be a Southerner, proud of my Texan roots, while also knowing Texas was a slave state. That does not mean I believe slavery was in any way not repugnant, it does not mean I want it back, it means I love my home, period. The monuments, however, are not there to glorify a horrible time in our history, they’re there to remind us of that time, so we never repeat it. Americans fought against, and killed, their fellow Americans, over something no sane person should ever defend, and all because of pride. We must remember that, we must teach our children that, so that when someone even considers suggesting a return to those ways, it’s shot down before it even leaves their lips.

But that’s the problem, the left doesn’t want to teach true history, just as they don’t want actual tolerance or diversity. You see, if they taught real history, they’d have to admit that the Democratic Party stood against abolition, that the NRA was instrumental in protecting the rights of the newly freed slaves to own firearms, that it was the Republican party that fought to give women and freed slaves the right to vote. True diversity would mean that they would have to allow those who disagree to speak and be heard. They wouldn’t be able to stop speech that offends them. They would have to stop insulting and accusing those who speak out against their pet projects of “crimes.” All of these things are what conservatives actually stand for, and what liberals stand against, because true tolerance and diversity means they can’t control the world around them, which is their true goal. As long as they control academia, they control the direction students go at graduation.

A mere 25 years ago this month, I was entering High School, and while there were bullies and cliques, it was a far cry from what we have today. Yes, I had bullies try to intimidate me, but they were all doing that because of their brutish size, not politics, and were easy to shut down. Even at 16, I was already very conservative, having grown up under Reagan’s administration, yet, when I met someone who was liberal, we didn’t hate each other. The most outwardly “flaming” homosexual I’ve ever met was only a year ahead of me and was one of the nicest and kindest people I’ve ever met. He knew my beliefs, and we still sat to lunch together, helped each other with assignments and so on. Every Thursday I was dressed either in Air Force blues or fatigues, and other than a few people sniggering at the “wannabe soldiers” all over campus, no one cared.

None of that would be possible today, because of the people who are responsible for what happened in Charlottesville. The very people screaming for tolerance demand you do as they do, and if you don’t, you’re attacked. Charlottesville’s Mayor and Virginia’s Governor are both Democrats, and one or both of them ordered the Police to stand down, just as Berkeley’s Mayor did when the riots over Milo being invited to speak happened. Regardless of who gave the order, the Mayor or Governor should have said NO to that, told the Police to stand their ground, then the Governor should have called in the National Guard to aid the Police. Who gave that order is only relevant as far as who is arrested for putting lives at risk.

Conservatives can joke that we love diversity, then say we have multiple weapons, or like different cuts of beef, but when it comes down to it, Conservatives are the only group actually working toward diversity, by fighting for everyone to actually be treated the same. So, the question is fairly simple, how much worse will it get before we finally act to stop the madness? Personally, I pray something happens very soon, as if it gets much worse, we’ll see martial law start happening, and no one wants that, no matter who’s in office.

On Bullies and Liberals, often the same thing

The last 8 months have been some of the most tense and violent that I’ve seen in a long time, likely ever. I remember 2000, when Gore ranted about the popular vote, dangling chads, and that the world would end because the country didn’t hand him the White House. 2001 when Bush began talking about responding to the attacks of 9/11, and so many other times, but it’s never been to the point of people destroying property on Inauguration Day, or college students and employees assaulting those who invite a speaker they don’t like to campus, and we’re there now. We’ve gone from the world of 2008 and 2012, where we were told “we won, you lost, get over it,” or “when they go low, we go high.” We’ve lived through hearing we could keep our plan, once the law passed so we can find out what’s in it, and now the country is tearing it’s self apart over an election, notably, the election of a Republican over a criminal, although the left will tell you, repeatedly at high volume, that Trump is the criminal, and Hillary is the reincarnation of the Virgin Mary, trust me there.

To understand the mindset, I actually need to go back over 20 years and show the earliest example of what I’m seeing now. I was in high school, and during my first month on campus, I had a bully lock in on me. As a sophomore (3 year High School,) I was 5 foot tall and a bit overweight. Before a month was out, as I was walking toward the door, this guy walks buy and punches me directly in the chest. He always had his gaggle of “friends” with him, so after a bit, I started to move around with my friends. He naturally didn’t like even odds, and called me out, and I got tired of it. In the cafeteria, I asked him how I was the coward when he only approached me when I was alone and he wasn’t, only when he could sucker punch me and walk away, and only when there wouldn’t be a staff witness. He tried to say it wasn’t true, so I simply said “If you’re not a coward, meet me, today, across the street, alone!” He never did, lied about it, and got madder and madder when no one believed him. A year after graduation (I’m now 6ft1 and 220+) he spotted me going to my car. I saw him coming up from behind me in the window reflection, so caught the punch, put him in a submission hold and called 911. He actually filed suit and complained the video of him trying to hit me from behind and my obvious defense was proof I attacked him.

This is the mindset today. Groups like “Moms Demand Action” tweet about how this group or that state are “making guns more accessible and putting women at risk” while ignoring the fact that domestic abusers, felons, etc., are barred from owning a firearm, period. When called out on this, they just block you, then tweet about you as if they’re the victim, and the media eats it up. Some of them, however, are powerful enough to do more than tweet. We’ve seen the multiple “mysterious” deaths of those investigating or otherwise in a position to oppose Hillary Clinton. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was in good health, not old, but still died “mysteriously,” and the Obama White House stepped in to ensure no autopsy. Seth Rich was shot in the back during a “robbery” where nothing was taken, survived and was in good condition at the hospital, according to doctors, until DCPD took custody of him.

Those who don’t have power just act as if they do. From blocking highways then suing anyone who actually manages to get past them, to swinging bike locks from behind a mask, the world is no longer a place where you can express your opinion without fear of someone being so “offended” they now feel they must attack you. When the uproar over Wonder Woman “fat shaming” women by being in great shape happened, I asked one person how else an Amazon Demi-Goddess should look, only to be told they were going to “find me and remove my ability to attack people.” I reported them to the social media site, and my local PD, and never heard more from them. But that’s the point, I presented a simple question, and rather than an answer, was told I should be killed! Another suggested that DC is racist because Wonder Woman looked too American. I pointed out that Gal Gadot is Israeli, Wonder Woman is from Themiscyra, which is normally in the Aegean Sea, meaning near Greece, so she’d be very tan and look pretty much like Gadot does all the time. The idiot told me I was just lying, so I sent him about 40 links to pictures from comic books and DC animated movies, after which I was blocked.

Finally, look at how they act when “offended,” it’s the simple bully mindset. If you look at any movie where a main character is in middle or high school, you’ll see it on screen. For this one, look at X-Men Apocalypse, where Cyclops is first feeling his powers come into being. He’s accused of winking at the bully’s girl, only for the bully to follow him to the bathroom, state he’s going to physically assault him, then beat on the door as if he has a right to go in and grab the other person. This is the same mindset of liberals today. They block or report anyone who disagrees with them, but if you tweet something they don’t like, they blow up the thread and then go nuclear when you don’t reply to every one of their comments, accuse you of “ignoring them to censor the issue,” and anything else they can use to make it look like you’re in the wrong and they’re in the right. Naturally, right now the Hillary issue or handgun questions are the hot button items. One tweeted a link out where they “make the case for Hillary to be President after Trump is removed, not Pence.” Many have commented about how every one of their 14 points are wrong, only to be told off, or ignored. Shannon Watts and Moms Demand will tweet out story after story showing how guns are the problem, not the criminals who already don’t follow laws, then either block or accuse those who point out the criminals don’t follow laws of sexism, racism, hating children, or some other BS, then block them.

The point here is a simple one, we’ve gone past the point of no return, but that’s not a hard point in space. The left is determined to no longer just make their point, but to silence by any means at their disposal, any who don’t follow them. I’m not saying we resort to their tactics, as I, unlike them, only use violence in self-defense or defense of others, but some of their rules need to be ours too. When they shout you down and won’t let you talk, hold up a sign “He/She is refusing to let me speak because he/she knows I have a point.” Make it clear you are being censored. When they make a grab for your sign, don’t let them have it, then when they try to grab you, defend yourself. As for the colleges and businesses who are trying to deny free speech to conservatives, don’t give them one red cent of your money. If you went to one of those schools, stop all donations, making it clear why you’re doing that. Boycott any business that panders to the left, and make it clear why you’re doing it. I told Denny’s over 3 years ago I was done when two on duty Police Officers were told to disarm or leave, I told Starbucks I was done when they came out in support of groups trying to end the nation of Israel, and I told Target I was done last year during the bathroom issue. I’ve stuck to these as well, and it’s not always easy, well in all but a single day, as I did buy my NES Classic at Target last year, but haven’t been back since, and won’t go back again. In the case of Denny’s, there are several items that are only available there that I love, Starbucks is great for studying, and Target has good quality items at good prices, but as long as they support groups adamantly against what I believe, I don’t spend a dime there. Until enough people do this (such as with Target and their needing to cancel expansion plans) it won’t be much good, but if enough people decide that disrespecting Police, or endangering children, or supporting terror, means a company doesn’t want our money, we will see change, either the company changes, or goes under, meaning that either they accept that customers are tired of being told we’re bigots while we spend our money there, or they’ll just be gone.

Along with this though, is the mental toughness to stick it out and stay standing for what you believe in. When you call out a bully, they will immediately start whining about you attacking them. Screenshot every tweet you use to call out bullies and throw their words back in their face. Senator Pelosi was recently on TV saying that everyone must read the GOP replacement for Obamacare, only for a lot of people to tweet or post on Facebook, with a link to her now famous “We have to pass it to find out what’s in it” line from years ago. When you make it known why you won’t patronize a business, people will call you bigoted for standing against their choice, so you make it clear you don’t deny them choice, but you can choose too. We must do both, stand against the tide of “do what I say, you’re still a bigot, but you must obey to survive” and make it clear why we’re not marching to our doom, lockstep with the safe space needing snowflakes. You will be attacked, you will be accused of everything under the sun, just keep standing. Don’t delete your posts and screenshot theirs, so you can show their words then ask them to do the same. Embrace the Covfefe line of thought, if you screw up a tweet, wear it like a crown to just cause them to wonder, if you are attacked, demand they explain themselves and cite sources. They’ll do the rest and prove themselves the bigots, meaning then you just need to wake up anyone around to the truth.

If you don’t like the evidence, ignore it and push forward

As many of us expected, Comey testified yesterday, confirming that not only did he tell President Trump he was not under investigation, that he was not ordered to drop the Flynn investigation, and that he leaked information to the press, he also confirmed that he purposely did not tell the public that the President was not under investigation. The media, of course, still has plenty of anonymously sourced information and will continue screaming about Russia, ignoring what they don’t like. Sadly, this is an extremely pervasive attitude and has been for a long time.

While Kathy Griffin screams and cries that she’s being bullied and it’s only because she’s a liberal, the media ignores that a man who wore an Obama mask at a state fair rodeo in Missouri in 2012 truly was bullied, as he lost his job, was banned for life from that state fair, and has been dragged in by the Secret Service for anything and everything, but that doesn’t fit the narrative that the GOP is the evil group, as it was a DNC President and far more innocent than Griffin’s “joke.” Before that, we had people screaming that vaccines cause autism, despite the only study that supports that being debunked and thousands of studies showing they don’t, and naturally, the screaming that the NRA wants to take us back to the wild west and the crocodile tears by paid shills at ever candlelight vigil after a shooting.

I’ve responded to several tweets lying about the NRA, as have many others, and the response is always the same. Accuse the person actually daring to defend the NRA of being a paid spokesperson, of lying, of being ignorant, lather, rinse, repeat. I got tired of that long ago, so I tried a new tactic, starting my replies to lies about the NRA, Trump, or anything really, with three simple words “CITE! YOUR! SOURCES!” – Naturally, none of the people lying about anything will, but it’s having an interesting effect. Several people have responded to me, asking if I can cite my sources, which I can. The NRA is not, for example, trying to remove all restrictions on firearm purchase, thus allowing felons and other violent offenders to once again legally purchase a weapon, in fact their stance against those who have proven to be the kind of person who would kill without hesitation is rather clear, they are a prohibited possessor. I have had someone ask, years ago, why the NRA says they want to enforce the Second Amendment, if they also support not allowing prohibited possessors to purchase weapons, and it’s pretty simple. The Second Amendment states “the right of The People,” notice the capitalization, meaning The People as in American Citizens, not an individual. Even before the Revolutionary War, there were criminals, and thus, people who had a right taken away as punishment. You steal, you lose your right to walk about freely for a time. You murder, you lose that right for a long time, along with others. That isn’t a violation of the Second Amendment, that is punishment for a crime, and not something the NRA wants. As with yesterday’s hearing, the facts of the case came out, and the media and the left went insane about everything. Comey admitted, under oath, that he was not investigating Trump, and told Trump that, but of course, that means he’s either lying, or lied to the President, or both. He said that the whole Russia situation was at least mostly false, but we still have the New York Times crying about it.

At this point, I doubt anything will convince anyone that Trump did not collude with Russia to win, that Hillary has committed many crimes, or even that Trump is actually human and just different from them. So, how do we proceed? It’s simple, don’t let up! Keep demanding proof, and picking anything provided apart, for all claims of racism, sexism, bigotry, crimes, and so on. If someone tweets about a racist incident where it seems fishy, pick the story apart! We’ve seen people forced to recant, and admit that no one so much as said boo to them, we’ve seen it proven that a black man painted a church with pro-Trump graffiti just to make the President look bad. This must continue! When you see a tweet about Russia, demand proof, and don’t accept any form of “It’s in the paper, just read it,” demand the actual source material, and ignore any “Sources Say” story. You’ll be attacked for “ignoring the evidence” and when you are, ask why they ignore that a massive number of hate crimes just after November were fake, why they ignore what Comey said, and watch their brain grind to a halt. We’ve had 8 years of “turn the other cheek” or “we need to be tolerant,” and it’s time to stop. Use their tactics against them, they scream that every form of proof that doesn’t vindicate them is a lie, do the same to these anonymous sources stories. When you get sent a source that is wrong, pick it apart and destroy it. When you get told to provide sources, provide only those that are true and honest, those are the only ones that count anyway, right?

Maybe, just maybe, four years of low taxes, low unemployment, increased security, and lies being shown in the light of day to be lies, well, I may be dreaming, but maybe all of those will help not only re-elect President Trump, but drive a nail into the heart of the “I’M SPECIAL, YOU HAVE TO LET ME HAVE MY WAY, GIVE ME FREE STUFF, GIVE ME MONEY, DON’T ARGUE OR YOU’RE RACIST” BS we’ve had crammed down our throats for too long.

An open letter to Kathy Griffin and Lisa Bloom

Ladies,

For a moment, think about the children in your lives, and how they would react to seeing a celebrity, staring into the camera with a serious expression, only to slowly raise, what appears to be, the severed head of their father, or mother, or aunt, or uncle. This, to the letter, is what Barron Trump saw when Ms. Griffin did exactly that earlier this week. Leaving aside that it’s a crime to threaten someone’s life, and in the case of a U.S. President, that crime is investigated by the Secret Service, you traumatized a child, and now you’re the victim? You didn’t mock or criticize the President, Kathy, you actively worked to depict a scene that no one should plan for anyone.

Five years ago, however, someone did poke a little fun at the President, and CNN was instrumental in not only that person losing his job, but far more. You see, the Missouri State Fair and Rodeo has a running gag they like to use, where one of their clowns wears a mask to look like a President, normally a former President, but the only mask they could find was an Obama mask. Naturally, someone was “sickened” by this, so they posted their outrage, and five years later, there is a man who McDonalds refused to hire because of the controversy. Ms. Bloom, will you be taking his case on? It would have to be Pro Bono of course, but he’s being bullied by an entire state, just for mocking the President. Will you demand CNN work to get him restored to his former life, and pay his salary until then? After all, he’s been bullied by one of the largest news organizations on the planet for mocking the President.

At this point, I’m sure there’s at least one person gearing up for a caps lock ridden tirade about how I just don’t understand comedy, and how the rodeo clown was so much worse than the mock beheading, well, educate me. Tell me how a rodeo clown wearing a mask and taunting a bull, and this is a highly skilled man at avoiding said animal, meaning all that happened was a man in an obvious mask running around for a while, is worse than someone staring coldly into a camera while slowing raising the apparent bloody and severed head of someone? I don’t remember anything about the Obama girls screaming when they saw the skit, although it’s doubtful two girls from Illinois, who live in DC at the time, would even know the MO state fair was happening, while Barrow Trump lives in either NY or DC, very news oriented towns, and this was on a major TV channel, viewed nationally!

Now, I will admit I hold little hope that a woman who feels mock decapitation is not only acceptable, but also a form of humor, or an attorney who takes that person as a client and then accuses the people who are having to comfort an eleven year old child who saw that of being bullies, but I can hope that at least some part of you will realize that you were completely in the wrong, Kathy, you need to apologize for real, not just to slow the Twitter storm aimed at you, and you Ms Bloom should be encouraging both of those actions. I guess time will tell as to how well the plan of defending someone who mocks the death of a parent, and that parent’s child sees it, and calling that family bullies goes, won’t we?

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

It seems that, as unlikely as I would have said it was, Trump Derangement Syndrome is so much worse than Bush Derangement Syndrome as to make 2001 to 2009 look like the left loved life and Bush was the second coming of any deity you can imagine. President Donald Trump has, in the last 4 months or so, fulfilled a good number of his promises, and has been insulted and accused of everything up to and including treason for it.

Looking at this administrations first days, there are three items that pop into my mind as to the height of TDS, the temporary halt on issuing Visas, the wall, and the latest accusation, that President Trump shared “highly classified” information with “the Russians.”

Starting with the immigration issue, this is not a “muslim ban,” or is it a “ban” of any kind, rather, it’s a temporary freeze on any immigration from a handful of countries where terrorist attacks are so high, that we cannot currently weed out anyone bent on hurting Americans should they pose as a refugee. We’ve heard, for years now, that the refugees are women and children, but if you look at France, the Netherlands, Germany and any other European country taking refugees as fast as they show up, you see a huge difference, the “refugees” are almost all men between 18 and 45, the perfect age to be used as troops. Where are the “women and children who just want to escape a horrible situation?” The answer is simple, they’re still there, left behind by those who already have them subjugated, and wouldn’t let them go no matter what. This leads to one end, the stories we see coming out of Europe daily, rape epidemics, attacks on people who aren’t muslim, entire swaths of European cities declared muslim only zones, and more. The latest news from France, the election of Macron as President, will only spell the end of our once greatest ally, France will fall.

Keeping with immigration as a topic, President Trump also promised to build a wall on the US/Mexican border, and was immediately attacked as being racist. For this to be true, though, it would have to mean that no other race has or will enter the U.S. illegally via the Mexican border and we already know that a great number of middle eastern men have done just that. Add to this the demands from Mexican citizens in the south of that country for a wall to block illegal immigration from Guatemala, and the question I’ve asked for years is only made more poignant, why is the U.S. the only country on the planet that is racist for wanting our immigration laws to be enforced? U.S. citizens going to Mexico on vacation (meaning to spend a good deal of money) are harassed and worse on a daily basis. One man was in the wrong lane and begged to be allowed to turn around as he tried to explain he could not legally cross the border into Mexico, but was made to do so and jailed immediately, while a woman was jailed over simple OTC medication, which she was offered back at her release. It’s abundantly clear that Mexico not only hates the U.S. for our prosperity, but also covets that very thing, and is doing all they can to send as many citizens north as possible, or they were until January when that number started to drop, simply due to the possibility of a wall. Cute commercials of a man getting building materials to make a door in the wall (destruction of federal property) or lying about the heritage of a man responsible for starting a major U.S. business (Anheiser Busch,) we need to stop the hype and screaming, and go back to where we were only 40 years ago, when our border laws were enforced and our people were so much safer.

Finally, the recent story about President Trump sharing “highly classified” information with “the Russians.” Just a few years ago, Barack Obama told Putin “I’ll have a lot more leeway after the election,” such an ambiguous statement that we never found out what leeway he gained, but when President Trump does what he is legally allowed to do, the world goes insane. The Washington Post has named only one source, and that person has called them liars for their story, but no one seems to care. WaPo runs with a story based on anonymous sources, the three men in the room all deny the story has any truth to it, but no one cares. President Trump has said on more than one occasion, that we need to work with Russia on many things, and stopping the spread of terror groups is something that everyone should agree on, but the left screams about “Russian collusion” and “hacking” as if that makes it true. A Lt. General who wrote the book on standing up to civilian leadership, who knows how to stand up for his own worth, has stated the WaPo story is false, and the media just twists his words to say “he’s saying this tiny bit is false, so he must mean the rest is true.” When someone says “it did not happen” that means “it” as in the whole thing!

The solution to this entire mess is both simple and so complex that I wonder if we’ll ever see it even attempted. The media needs to find the medium between 2009 to 2017, where they praised Obama as the world’s only hope, and now, where they vilify President Trump as someone Satan would run in fear from, and just report fairly and honestly. The left needs to grow up and do what they demanded the right do for 8 years, accept the loss from November. Conservatives have been targeted by the IRS under Obama, told to go to the “back of the bus” by his officials, and screamed at for being racist for everything said about wanting criminals to be punished for assaulting Police officers and the like. Much like 2009, the election from the previous year is over, Hillary is not President, and no amount of screaming will change that. For eight years, liberals have demanded “tolerance” from conservatives, so it’s time to practice what you preach. If a student group invites a speaker you don’t agree with to speak to them, you do not have any right to assault them or damage school property in response. More than one hundred people are learning that due to their actions on Inauguration Day, as they destroyed property and committed assault, and are now being charged with those crimes. Only when the people who resort to these methods are held accountable for their actions, and no screaming of “I have a right to protest” or “you’re censoring me” stops the arrest for the crime committed, will we even have a chance of moving in the right direction.

The world of today, where logic is deemed unacceptable

I will be the first to tell you I pray daily I never need to draw a weapon on another human being, but I will if I feel my life, or the lives of my friends and family are in danger. That is the nature of self defense, and unlike some of the snowflakes today, you don’t have time to think “is this person really a threat? Maybe they’re just confused, maybe they just need a hug.” Doing that is a quick way to get attacked or to be killed. This story shows a young man who realized he had no time, but even with that, he didn’t just open fire. The story states there was an “exchange of words,” which begs the question, why would 3 people, facing someone armed with a rifle, not turn and run? We won’t know that answer, but if three people, holding weapons and seeing I’m armed too, don’t run, they’re a threat to me. The story goes on to say the young man called 911, begged for medical attention, yet we still have this story bemoaning that it was “unfair” because he was armed with a rifle, as if to say he was supposed to put down the rifle and get a knife, so it would be “fair?” Sorry, you break into my home, you don’t get to then demand I ensure my weapon is what you have.


Sadly, this is just par for the course, as just having voted for someone that others don’t like is reason for violence. This is just another case of liberal activists deciding that they can do anything they want and get away with it. They bemoan police violence and scream that the Officer acted hastily, yet they open with violence at every opportunity. How long before one of them files assault charges against one of these people who stood up to a bully?


If you’re still wondering why so many act like this, look no further than a College Professor who feels nothing is wrong with tweeting about wanting “white genocide” (he’s white by the way) or how someone giving a Soldier their first class seat makes him “want to vomit.” The party of “if you don’t agree, fine, but don’t lash out at me” is apparently fine with lashing out, as long as it’s aimed at the GOP or Soldiers.


It’s not just higher education though, as a teenager on a field trip was implanted with a long term birth control device. Only 20 years ago, the school would have been shut down by the state and the organizers and the people who gave the implant arrested, but today, this teen’s mother is told she has no rights? And people wonder why school choice and home schooling is so popular a topic. Well, not everyone wonders, as some students defend MAKING DEMANDS of the administration is not only OK, but that their demands must not only be listened to, but obeyed.


Finally, two stories that show both the insanity and idiocy of the world. First, VP Pence has been misquoted and attacked for not being alone with another woman or attending events where alcohol is involved unless his wife is with him. Naturally, the party that defended Bill Clinton having an affair in the Oval Office is going nuts. Simply put, VP Pence knows that ANYTHING will be used to attack him and he’s acting in a way so he can avoid that, but sadly, even that’s used to attack him. But, why is this surprising when people go insane, some serious some not, over someone being fired and hearing only one side to the story. Cracker Barrel apparently fired a woman, so her husband goes online talking about how she worked there for 11 years, and how it happened on his birthday, and the internet goes nuts. Simply put, if she was actually fired, and we don’t hear about a wrongful termination suit from her or her husband, there was good reason. Second, NO COMPANY will answer this online, as doing so means they open themselves up to so much trouble, but then again, logic isn’t a common trait with people today, is it?

Once again the left shows their true colors

Last night, President Donald Trump addressed both houses of Congress, and as we had seen announced, the Democrats chose to act like children by inviting those they say he is targeting. Notice, however, that none were (likely) rapists, drug dealers, gang members, or likely even here illegally, who are those that the President has said need to be addressed. Also remember that President Clinton and President Obama both addressed the need for border security, although they did it only when it served their purpose, then changed as the political winds changed.

It’s a sad situation when the people in charge cannot, or worse, will not, acknowledge that the President is doing his job, and has the power to do just that, and that’s where we are today. President Obama blocked immigration from hot beds of terror more than a few times, yet no one said a word about it, nor did they say anything about his “I have a phone and a pen” style of working. Today, however, when President Trump enacted a temporary delay on immigration from seven countries identified by the Obama administration as hot beds of terror, a Circuit Court Judge decided he could step in and tell the President to stop. This has to stop, now!

For eight years we have been told by the Obama administration that we would need to tighten our belts, that we didn’t build that, or that things were now racist, and must stop. Yet, when a President takes office and states that he’s going to fix the broken immigration system (which the previous three Presidents all said they’d been elected to do) it’s “racist.” When he says he’s going to lower taxes, he’s “taking from the people who need,” and when he states he’s going to repeal and replaced a failed health care law, he’s “leaving people in the cold.”

No mention is made by the left of his words last night that pre-existing conditions would be covered, or that he’s going after those here illegally with more than that on their record. Just as it was twisted when President GW Bush said he was not expanding federal funding for Planned Parenthood (it was screamed he was making all abortion illegal, which was a lie,) President Trump’s words are being twisted and worse. Sadly, you could show video to these idiots and ask “where did he use the exact quote, using the the exact words you did, in that order, and without any others” and they’d point to a video of him saying something totally different.

We need to do more than fix the immigration system, we need to fix elementary, secondary, and higher education. We have a generation being taught that Christians are evil bigots who, by simply saying Merry Christmas, are “forcing conversion,” while Muslims attack and kill simply because their victim isn’t Muslim. We have teachers who gleefully tell their children that marriage or abortion is a “right,” while in the same breath say that only muskets are a right under the Constitution. Until we teach the younger generation properly, we will stay on track for a country that will tear it’s self apart, and it will be far more violent than anything seen thus far.

More from the “tolerant” left

For the last eight years there have been a few things we could count on the left to repeat, ad nauseum. First, Sascha and Malia were off limits and “attacking” Michelle for her looks or intelligence on a subject was “low.” Today, though, Barron is attacked left and right, Melania is attacked for not speaking perfect English, and if you bring up that Barron is a child or Melania is not the President, you’re then attacked for “defending them.” I have an acquaintance who blocked me when I pointed out they had, personally, told me that the Obama girls were off limits, after he went on a rant and attacked Barron. Well, today at least, the attacks aren’t aimed at a child or mother, but I don’t think that will last long.

Here we have a woman who has never served in the military, nor likely will, and I’d bet never worn a pair of military dress shoes or combat boots. Now, in the era when Trump would have been drafted (the mid 1960’s) the footwear was likely far less kind to someone with bone spurs, but as is the norm today, it doesn’t matter.

Speaking from experience, my Mother has bone spurs in both heels and has had surgeries to help, but still has them. She still played tennis after they were diagnosed, still walks fine, but with shoes meant to allow this. I know that the dress shoes in the military or combat boots would have her incapacitated in minutes, and I’m talking about the options today, not 50 years ago. But, once again, let’s ignore than a MEDICAL DOCTOR diagnosed the bone spurs, or that Clinton literally dodged the draft, rather than getting a deferrment, and Obama never served either. This only comes up when the DNC is either running a Veteran against a non-veteran, or they’ve lost. John Kerry was held up as a paragon of virtue in 2004 for serving in the U.S. Navy while George W Bush “only” served in the National Guard.

This is the blatant hypocrisy that must stop, or we’re doomed to watching our country burn. For eight years, Obama refused to properly (or at all) return salutes given as ordered, ordered Marines to hold an umbrella when they were not allowed to, and attacked our military right and left, either in quotes or by denying funds, yet it’s all about how wonderful the DNC was and how evil the GOP is today. President Trump is attacked as you see above for this story

I’ve read the article, and while I would have urged different phrasing, he is NOT attacking the troops or suggesting they are personally not fighting to win, but that 8 years of being hamstrung means WE aren’t winning wars today, and that needs to stop. If anything, this is a direct blow at the Obama legacy, yet rather than read it and understand it, we get more of the same, just attack the man because you didn’t vote for him.

Yet another attack, although on a different topic, came in the form of this image.

I would love to ask how they feel about a President who presided over the loss of a U.S. Embassy because his Secretary of State ordered troops to stop when they were headed to give aid. I wonder what he’d call a President who has crippled our military financially and logistically? Oh, wait, he voted for the man, so Benghazi was Hillary and Obama knew nothing, and of course, cutting spending was the right way to go, because he said so. I’m not sorry Hillary lost, and I called it when she “won” the DNC nomination. I’m not sorry the country once again had the electoral college do exactly what it was designed to do, that being keeping a handful of states from dragging the entire country into their choice. This is the system we have, and unless an amendment is passed, then ratified by enough states, it’s the system we’ll have for a long time. If you want to see the Democrats win again, start from within. You ran a candidate that has blatantly ignored her responsibility for the death of a U.S. Ambassador, who has told American parents that they’re not going to be the only ones raising their kids, and who said almost verbatim she would continue everything Obama started. She’s adamant that every citizen be disarmed, but will still have an army around her, and she’s just not able to accept that she lost. Start from within, learn and accept that the DNC is not the only party, nor will it ever be. Accept that just because someone doesn’t agree with you, they aren’t attacking you, or censoring you. Learn how to debate and disagree without attacking and belittling someone. Until this happens, until the left is once again a group of civil and logical adults, I see loss after loss after loss. Even more sad is the fact that Congress could be 100% GOP, the POTUS a Republican, and SCOTUS 100% conservative, leading to low taxes, a fully funded military and other departments, a balanced budget, and so many other wonderful things, and the left will still be screaming about something. It’s like the jokes have said, if Trump cures cancer he’ll be trying to put the grim reaper out of a job, and if he shat a gold brick, they’d complain it came from him.
As for those who sent these Tweets, I used screenshots as I don’t want to give them any hassle or unwanted traffic. I don’t retweet or reply to them because I don’t agree, and I also know I’d not get a debate, but hate in return. You? Well, you can make your own choice.

Society at the tipping point

Anyone who has worked in any form of retail or a service industry knows that you’re going to deal with the worst of people on an almost daily basis. From the people demanding you check the back even after you show them the “back” door is an exit, to people demanding to see the manager after an unreasonable request isn’t instantly granted, but there’s a common thread, selfishness. Growing up in the 1980’s, I don’t remember a single instance of someone screaming at a cashier over a wrong price, an expired coupon, or anything we’re seeing today, but now it’s almost so common place it’s expected. Granted, the image here is meant as a joke, as I really doubt a manager would fire a barista for not being able to put ice at the bottom of any liquid, but it’s not far off from some of the stories below it. The mindset of “instant payday” has become so pervasive though that companies are so scared of a lawsuit, they often jump to truly idiotic means to avoid it. The oddity about it though, is that it’s virtually all from one “side of the aisle,” in the “I’m going to sue” crowd. Recently, both Wendy’s and Whataburger in DFW, TX, have seen Police Officers refused service simply because they are Police Officers, and a Chili’s manager take a meal in a to go box from a man on Veteran’s day because he was told by another diner the man wasn’t a real veteran. In all cases, the company apologized (in the Chili’s case, the Pentagon called Chili’s to confirm the man’s status, yet the manager was just transferred,) but none of those three sued. Yes, social media lit up and all three companies had to move quickly to avoid a massive boycott, but that was it. Yet, when Under Armor not only refused to lash out at the new President’s administration, but was complimentary, those “on the left” acted as if he’d just killed their dog, and all but called for his execution. Ironically, when Nordstrom pulled all products in Ivanka Trump’s line, those very products because so popular they’re selling like made, and Nordstrom is seeing their sales go down, even if a small amount. Target is also seeing this, after they announced they would jump on the “use whichever restroom you want to” bandwagon, and now are cancelling expansion plans due to sales being down due to a boycott.

This is seen in other areas as well. Another social media meme about a lifeguard saving a toddler’s life, only for the Mother to berate the lifeguard and refuse to cooperate with the manager who, by law, has paperwork to fill out. Most of the comments state she knows she’d likely be reported to C.P.S. or otherwise proven to be at the very least, inattentive, and she doesn’t want that, but why berate the person who literally just saved your child’s life? The answer, again, is simply that people are so assured of their own superiority, that anything they don’t personally want done is obviously wrong and should be shunned. I can guarantee that had the child not been saved in time, not at all, or just come up crying, the lifeguard would be attacked for “not doing their job” or some such. We’re in a can’t win situation, and there’s very little chance of it changing any time soon.

A final example of this mindset is an MMA Fighter who was sued by a Ring Girl before the fight reported on, and can clearly be seen in the video almost running from the one in the ring this time. He is literally grabbed and pulled over, only to cross his hands and drop his head due to fear of any action he takes being seen as harassment of any kind. Yet, if he were to sue the organizers for mental trauma, or claim a disability, he’d be laughed at as “men cannot be victimized.” Sadly, it likely will take a lawsuit from a man like this fighter, claiming they are so afraid of being sued for simply making any physical contact with the ring girls that they cannot fight at all, and suing for the disability pay and so on, for the world to begin to realize that we’re now in a world where discrimination is a common issue, and done by those who scream that they’re discriminated against.



Moving forward, although still on this topic in a way, is the current topic screamed by “feminists” the world over, that being “rape culture.” We’ve seen women assert that a man “raped” them by looking at her, or in his mind, and try to sue, although so far, none of that has gone anywhere, but now we have the concept of reverse rape, that being when a woman wants to have sex with a man, but he says no. You didn’t misread that, it’s now apparently “rape” to refuse sex. This is the point where men are told to “shut up and do what we say to, and also, don’t complain when by doing what we tell you to, we later claim that you forced your way on us after we decide we didn’t really want what we said we wanted.” This will happen, as a woman will tell some man she’ll cry rape if he doesn’t sleep with her, then at a later point, she’ll still cry rape and ruin his life. Sadly, you could have video of her telling him “I’ll say you raped me” and some judge will rule you had no right to record her, and it will still be game over for the guy who was hamstrung from the off.


This is the point where we either slam on the brakes and demand logic and adult behavior be the norm again, not only from society, but from those in power. We must tell the judges we don’t want them doing whatever they want and changing laws here and there when they feel they should, we just want them to rule based on the law of the land as it’s written. We need to tell Congress we don’t want to be lectured about how racist or sexist we are because we oppose a bill we haven’t been allowed to read, or that we must allow a bill to be passed before we can read it. And finally, we must tell the President that we want someone who will work for Americans’ interests, not any other country. Yes, we have allies and we must stand beside them, but that never requires that the US economy be sacrificed, or American jobs be sent over seas just to prop up a foreign country. We are the only country today being ordered around by the U.N. while they happily take our money, mostly because the other member states fall in line, or are exempted from what they demand the U.S. do. It’s time to tell the U.N. we will not go along any more, and we will also not pay or house them. Once the world sees we’re embracing their philosophy of take care of home first, maybe, just maybe, they’ll wake up. The same may happen when “feminists” realize that calling every little thing that slightly irks them rape is going to land them in hot water, or threatening to sue no longer gets you free crap, maybe we’ll see people starting to act like adults again, but I’m not holding my breath.

HuffPo supports harassment based on politics, not a surprise

I shouldn’t be surprised, but it seems the left just can’t go any lower at times, then they prove they can at least try. Most recently, the Huffington Post, a well known liberal publication, said that Tom Brady isn’t getting enough blowback for supporting Donald Trump in the election last year. We’ve seen this for the last 8 years mostly, although it was always there to a point, and the digital age just made it worse. In 08 and 12, anyone who said anything other than praise for Barack Obama was instantly the most racist person on the planet and looking to bring back the days when slaves were lynched everywhere. Last year anyone who didn’t support Hillary was a sexist looking to put women back in the kitchen and send the country 100+ years back in time.

I would LOVE to get an honest answer out of one of these idiots, asking why they defended people being silenced when it was Obama running then in office, or when it was Hillary running, but now defend harassment based on a personal choice. But, it’s the same as if you ask why someone supported Obama blocking immigration, or bombing countries, but they don’t support Trump just doing the same. I could hold up a list of actions that Obama took that Trump is taking, say “Trump is doing exactly what Obama did for 8 years” and I would be told I’m wrong, Obama bred unicorns that shat gold, and Trump is literally the love child of Hitler and Satan. Trump could hand these idiots $1000 each and they’d take it, then call him evil for not giving them more.

So, the question isn’t why any more, as that won’t ever be answered, or already has and is simply that the left is a hypocritical and selfish group, rather, the question is how can we wake up a generation that firmly believes their candidate not winning is the end of the world, or that words are so horrible that they have the right to forcibly silence others? The answer, well, it’s not easy, and will be dirty. We must not allow them to silence us, we must not allow them to control the narrative, and we must continue to fight the hypocrisy and stay true to our beliefs. HuffPo is advocating the harassment of someone simply because he supported our new President, but will defend Madonna’s right to free speech after she made a threat against the White House. You can’t reason with them, but we can fight them with their own tactics. When a celebrity goes off the deep end for something like Madonna or Ashley Judd did during their March, we need to stop buying anything that they profit from. Huffpo and their ilk will scream that the poor stars are being “attack for speaking their minds” or that they’re losing money because of evil conservatives, but they’d do that if Madonna saw someone a block away helping a Trump supporter up after that supporter was attacked.

Personally, I plan to do this, and it may get down to me listening to CD’s, reading books and only eating what I can get at my local grocery store, but I won’t patronize those who demean me any more. As for when they complain, I plan to simply reply with evidence that they’ve done or advocated what I am now doing, just aimed at a conservative, and it was acceptable, then I may record their mental implosion when faced with a “you did it, so I decided it was a fair tactic” argument.

The real question though, is are we too late to make a difference?

More hypocrisy and such to start your week

Imgur Link

So, I got sent this today, and as I expected before I even opened it, I knew the comments would be nothing but attacks and arguments. Well, I wasn’t disappointed, as naturally, there were the “Those who thought Obama was muslim think Trump is Christian” comments, there were comments about how since “Jesus was from the middle east, he’s not allowed in” and more. One person did bring up that Christ was born in Israel, which is not on the list of countries listed in the Executive Order which was signed regarding visas and refugees. Outside of the idiots screaming that this is a “ban on muslims” while it’s not, when did we get to this point? When did the world officially accept that it’s completely OK to denigrate only one group, while forcing everyone to tell that very group they aren’t allowed to say anything deemed offensive? I’ve been told I’m racist, a bigot, a sexist, and so much more simply for disagreeing with someone over the last eight years, only to watch as those same people are losing their minds that Trump not only won in November, that the screaming about the Electoral College didn’t work, the recounts didn’t work, the moves in the House to block the confirmation didn’t work, and that he was finally inaugurated on the 20th of January. For eight years anyone who questioned Obama’s citizenship was berated, anyone who suggested the man was not a Christian was shouted down, and anyone who dared suggest that Obamacare wasn’t going to work other than to take money from people wanted to see the poor kicked into the streets so they die slowly for the GOP’s entertainment. Now, those people who demanded not only silence, but praise for their “tolerance” and “forward thinking” for eight years, have completely reversed course, and demand that we not speak out in support of a President we voted for, that we not speak for any policy, and of course, still demanding praise for their “tolerance of such hateful bigots” as they haven’t killed anyone yet.

Think back, if anyone who voted for McCain or Romney had blocked a highway after they lost, how long would it have been before either they were arrested or worse, were dead from a liberal running them over? Today, though, police actually said that protesters at some airports could block the roads for 15 of every 30 minutes. Yes, they were ALLOWED to BLOCK ALL TRAFFIC, which is completely ILLEGAL because they didn’t get their way, yet even if an Ambulance was screaming THIS MAN WILL DIE IF YOU DON’T MOVE, they’d stand their and “embrace their right to protest” until arrested for causing the man’s death, and then scream and whine in court that they have a “right” to protest.

So now my customary statement on how we got here, and simply put it’s due to an entire generation being told they get a trophy for showing up, they make the team because they want to, never having been told no, never having been told something is wrong, and now a generation of young adults believes it’s “wrong” to not hand them money because they want it, or to not give them any salary they demand, or to do everything they want. Thankfully the vast majority of them will not run for office, so while the House and Senate will have a very few of them, I hope for a day when it’s mostly people just there to do the job. When one runs for President, the meltdown when a major party won’t nominate them will be glorious, and the nuclear explosion when they aren’t elected will put the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to shame.

Sadly, Thanks to eight years of Bill, only an eight year break and much of that with a DNC Congress, then eight years of Obama and his “I have a pen and a phone” mentality when Congress didn’t bow and do everything he demanded, we’re many years from even being close to raising children who will learn math, science, english, history and so on, but not that Christians are bad, Muslims are just misunderstood, and the government is God and should be obeyed without question. I just hope we survive to see that day.