Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liberals. Show all posts
2016-10-09
Faux Outrage From Left Concerning Trump
2016-09-10
I Watched The Ann Coulter [Rob Lowe] Roast
I was a tad anxious and even apprehensive about watching Ann Coulter perform at this Roast of Rob Lowe. I wanted to watch the moment I discovered she would be on the panel of roasters because I was curious what she would say but, I was scared about what the others were going to say. I adore Ann but let's face it, she's not everyone's cup of tea; she certainly is not appreciated by the elites of Hollywood. Still, there was a glimmer of hope that her invite might also be a sign that perhaps some in Hollywood are at least willing to kid around with a conservative - a huge step in the right direction for them, and not just any conservative - this is Ann Coulter we are talking about.
2016-05-26
What is Happening on America's College Campuses?
Milo Yiannopoulos recently went to DePaul University to give one of his famous speeches from The Dangerous Faggot Tour and was met with hostile students that literally stopped his show.
So far, during his tour, Milo has been confronted with many far left wing students who have protested and disrupted his shows but, this is the first time he has had to shut down completely.
One of the protesters identified as being from Black Lives Matter literally went up on stage, grabbed a microphone, and proceeded to strike Milo in the face. Milo sat stoic, obviously hoping for the young woman to calm down or have security remove her. His own security did nothing.
In the following clip you can see one of the male protesters just pace back and forth on the stage, refusing to leave. He actually turns toward Milo at one point (near the end), and threatens him (though we cannot hear the threat, it's clear he said something).
As you can see the security staff did nothing. They did not stop these protesters from disturbing the event. How can any campus justify this? For all the talk liberals make of safe spaces, why on earth would they not allow for conservatives to have the same benefit? You can bet this would never happen during an event where a progressive liberal would take center stage.
American college campuses should exemplify free speech and challenge thoughts and ideas. The fact that Milo's show was shut down should give all of us a wake-up call as to the state of free speech in this country. We have failed at explaining why this freedom is so important and paramount to our republic.
So far, during his tour, Milo has been confronted with many far left wing students who have protested and disrupted his shows but, this is the first time he has had to shut down completely.
One of the protesters identified as being from Black Lives Matter literally went up on stage, grabbed a microphone, and proceeded to strike Milo in the face. Milo sat stoic, obviously hoping for the young woman to calm down or have security remove her. His own security did nothing.
In the following clip you can see one of the male protesters just pace back and forth on the stage, refusing to leave. He actually turns toward Milo at one point (near the end), and threatens him (though we cannot hear the threat, it's clear he said something).
As you can see the security staff did nothing. They did not stop these protesters from disturbing the event. How can any campus justify this? For all the talk liberals make of safe spaces, why on earth would they not allow for conservatives to have the same benefit? You can bet this would never happen during an event where a progressive liberal would take center stage.
American college campuses should exemplify free speech and challenge thoughts and ideas. The fact that Milo's show was shut down should give all of us a wake-up call as to the state of free speech in this country. We have failed at explaining why this freedom is so important and paramount to our republic.
2015-12-07
Lefty Progressives Making Things Simple - Guns, Terrorists, and Victims
The recent tragic terror attack in San Bernardino has sparked intense conversation on the internet. Leave it to our lefty, progressive pals to lecture us on the dangers of "assault weapons" (it's rather agonizing they still don't realize ALL guns are assault weapons), and how if only we could make more laws, shootings would no longer occur. They seem to base this belief on magic.
Take this recent exchange on Facebook, where one man informs us of such an easy, simple way to stop all gun violence:
Perhaps it's their insecurity in the world that makes these sort of people lash out at things like facts and reason.
In a horrific example of journalism, Linda Stasi for the New York Daily News decided to give the terrorists a pass on killing one of their victims, Nicholas Thalasinos, whom she describes as an equal bigot deserving his death. She makes this point very clear when she states at the beginning of the article there were "13 innocent victims," as opposed to the actual number of 14.
She compares the men, leaving the reader to believe there is almost no difference between them, except for the fact that one is dead due to the other's actions.
Yes, apparently Stasi views bigotry as being equivalent to that of being a terrorist. Still, she only makes this conclusion based on some posts this man made on Facebook. Even worse, she doesn't provide any screencaps showing these supposed rants filled with bigotry so, I guess we are just supposed to take her word for it. She continues:
So dedicated to ad hominem attacks, Stasi actually worded this in such a way that would lead the reader to believe it was Thalasinos who called Ann Coulter "hateful." Exactly who is this Stasi to determine who is hateful and who is not? Did she join some moral-brigade I am unaware of? How exactly does claiming Coulter to be hateful not make her a bigot? Last I checked, being a bigot simply means being intolerant of another person's views.
The entire article is merely just a confirmation that in the minds of extreme lefties, some people are more equal than others. If you chose to kill someone, just make sure it's one of those right-wingers because they sort of deserve it, right? Don't blame the radical and his fanatical religion that drives him to commit a terrorist act, just blame the victim.
The simplistic and irrational thinking is never in short supply on the far-left.
Though California has strict gun-laws, this terrorist attack still managed to occur. Even IF one of the victims was indeed a bigot, he most certainly was not the one who carried out this murderous deed, and there is no comparing a rant on Facebook with the work of a murdering terrorist. Thalasinos was an innocent victim who did not commit any crime, despite what Stasi would like to believe. Having a different opinion that isn't "politically correct" is not reflective of someone worthy of death. Perhaps Stasi should worry about her own bigotry, or at least have a better command of the English language.
The truth is in the US, there is no clear pattern of gun laws automatically leading to less gun crimes. This also means that less gun laws do not mean more or even less crime either. The numbers can actually be skewed in such a way that either side can make arguments depending on where they fall on the ideological spectrum. Many of these statistics involve suicide, which is technically a crime but only the person pulling the trigger is the victim.
I wish I could tell you it's more clear-cut but, our country is quite unique since we cover not only a large amount of land but as you travel across this country you will find many different types of mindsets. A small town in the South will be vastly different from a major metropolitan city in the North. There are many anomalies that both sides will hold up as an example. For example, DC has many strong gun control laws, yet it also has one of the highest markings for gun violence. On the other hand, places like NY and NJ also have many gun laws and their gun crime rates have indeed fallen. Yet, no one can claim that gun laws actually equal lower crime rates.
I say it's immoral to tell a citizen they are not allowed to protect themselves. As uncomfortable as it may be, the police are not magicians who float through the air or pop into existence the way Endora did on an episode of Bewitched. Calling the police takes time and waiting for them takes even more time and sometimes those precious minutes are not enough. A person must have the ability to protect themselves in these horrifying experiences. What is needed is education about firearms - how they work, how to use them, and when not to use them. Fear is always combated through knowledge.
Switzerland is a country where gun ownership is high and shootings are quite low. The reason is due to their education. They demand that citizens are educated in how to handle a gun.
Training should be mandatory. Our government will never realistically succeed in taking away guns from our citizens but it can succeed in implementing courses that keep our citizens aware of firearms and how to accurately use them. Rather than stirring the pot by talking about the evils of guns and blaming the victims, we need to get behind more rational ideas that can ultimately unite people on both sides of the aisle.
Take this recent exchange on Facebook, where one man informs us of such an easy, simple way to stop all gun violence:
Perhaps it's their insecurity in the world that makes these sort of people lash out at things like facts and reason.
In a horrific example of journalism, Linda Stasi for the New York Daily News decided to give the terrorists a pass on killing one of their victims, Nicholas Thalasinos, whom she describes as an equal bigot deserving his death. She makes this point very clear when she states at the beginning of the article there were "13 innocent victims," as opposed to the actual number of 14.
She compares the men, leaving the reader to believe there is almost no difference between them, except for the fact that one is dead due to the other's actions.
What they didn’t realize is that except for their different religions they were in many ways similar men who even had the same job.
Yes, apparently Stasi views bigotry as being equivalent to that of being a terrorist. Still, she only makes this conclusion based on some posts this man made on Facebook. Even worse, she doesn't provide any screencaps showing these supposed rants filled with bigotry so, I guess we are just supposed to take her word for it. She continues:
Thalasinos was an anti-government, anti-Islam, pro-NRA, rabidly anti-Planned Parenthood kinda guy, who posted that it would be “Freaking Awesome” if hateful Ann Coulter was named head of Homeland Security. He asked, “IS 1. EVERY POLITICIAN IS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR? 2. EVERY POLITICIAN IS A MORON? 3. EVERY POLITICIAN IS RACIST AGAINST JEWS?” He also posted screeds like, “You can stick your Muslim Million Man march up your asses,” and how “Hashem” should blow up Iran.
So dedicated to ad hominem attacks, Stasi actually worded this in such a way that would lead the reader to believe it was Thalasinos who called Ann Coulter "hateful." Exactly who is this Stasi to determine who is hateful and who is not? Did she join some moral-brigade I am unaware of? How exactly does claiming Coulter to be hateful not make her a bigot? Last I checked, being a bigot simply means being intolerant of another person's views.
big·otˈbiɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.
The entire article is merely just a confirmation that in the minds of extreme lefties, some people are more equal than others. If you chose to kill someone, just make sure it's one of those right-wingers because they sort of deserve it, right? Don't blame the radical and his fanatical religion that drives him to commit a terrorist act, just blame the victim.
The simplistic and irrational thinking is never in short supply on the far-left.
Though California has strict gun-laws, this terrorist attack still managed to occur. Even IF one of the victims was indeed a bigot, he most certainly was not the one who carried out this murderous deed, and there is no comparing a rant on Facebook with the work of a murdering terrorist. Thalasinos was an innocent victim who did not commit any crime, despite what Stasi would like to believe. Having a different opinion that isn't "politically correct" is not reflective of someone worthy of death. Perhaps Stasi should worry about her own bigotry, or at least have a better command of the English language.
The truth is in the US, there is no clear pattern of gun laws automatically leading to less gun crimes. This also means that less gun laws do not mean more or even less crime either. The numbers can actually be skewed in such a way that either side can make arguments depending on where they fall on the ideological spectrum. Many of these statistics involve suicide, which is technically a crime but only the person pulling the trigger is the victim.
I wish I could tell you it's more clear-cut but, our country is quite unique since we cover not only a large amount of land but as you travel across this country you will find many different types of mindsets. A small town in the South will be vastly different from a major metropolitan city in the North. There are many anomalies that both sides will hold up as an example. For example, DC has many strong gun control laws, yet it also has one of the highest markings for gun violence. On the other hand, places like NY and NJ also have many gun laws and their gun crime rates have indeed fallen. Yet, no one can claim that gun laws actually equal lower crime rates.
I say it's immoral to tell a citizen they are not allowed to protect themselves. As uncomfortable as it may be, the police are not magicians who float through the air or pop into existence the way Endora did on an episode of Bewitched. Calling the police takes time and waiting for them takes even more time and sometimes those precious minutes are not enough. A person must have the ability to protect themselves in these horrifying experiences. What is needed is education about firearms - how they work, how to use them, and when not to use them. Fear is always combated through knowledge.
Switzerland is a country where gun ownership is high and shootings are quite low. The reason is due to their education. They demand that citizens are educated in how to handle a gun.
Training should be mandatory. Our government will never realistically succeed in taking away guns from our citizens but it can succeed in implementing courses that keep our citizens aware of firearms and how to accurately use them. Rather than stirring the pot by talking about the evils of guns and blaming the victims, we need to get behind more rational ideas that can ultimately unite people on both sides of the aisle.
2013-10-03
Psychological Projection
Just a random thought...
To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil. — Charles Krauthammer
In psychology, the term projection is used to describe a person's thoughts and behavior as being a reflection of their true self. People who make accusations towards others are really only revealing who they truly are on the inside.
I've always agreed with the quote above from Krauthammer. I have heard those sentiments exactly from liberals about conservatives and vice versa. Could it be that both sides are projecting themselves with these descriptions?
Well, I don't know about you but I would rather be stupid than evil.
I've always agreed with the quote above from Krauthammer. I have heard those sentiments exactly from liberals about conservatives and vice versa. Could it be that both sides are projecting themselves with these descriptions?
Well, I don't know about you but I would rather be stupid than evil.
2013-09-16
Liberals Lack Understanding of Conservatives
While surfing the internet, I often run into articles written by people on the left who really do seem to lack understanding of conservatives and conservative ideology. In fact, many times I will see outrageous claims that have nothing to do with core conservative principles.
2013-01-12
Facebook Trolls
A few months back I ran into some interesting characters trolls on Facebook. I was visiting a page that was set up for an event that happened to have a conservative bent to it. While commenting and meeting new friends, we were somewhat "attacked" by a group of trolls who were determined to shut us up. They were relentless in their cause of pushing forth propaganda and insulting people who supported the page. I was rather confused because you would think that if there is an event you don't support, a normal person would probably just ignore the page altogether or maybe make a nasty comment and leave.
Once I started clicking on these troll-files, I discovered that most of them had either just been created, indicating that they were open for the purposes of insulting behind a fake account, while others were actually pages that were formed for the purposes of trolling on Facebook. Some of these pages were completely devoted to taking screen caps of various posts that included pictures or statuses that they didn't like and then immediately followed by their own comments that contained vile words, anger, insults, and sophomoric attempts at comedy. All of them were obsessed with a new word they created, "teabilly" and it appears as though their main course of action during their troll-posts was to use the word "teabilly" as many times as possible. Another noteworthy characteristic concerning these screen-caps that were posted on their pages where other "friends" could laugh, like, and pat them on the back, was that any responses to their posts were conveniently omitted. Their insecurity shows through like a bright bleach-spot on a pair of new, black pants.
Some of them even went so far as to seek out my name and find by blog page that I have listed on Facebook. After they commented on one of my posts, they immediately screen-capped the information, ran back to their page, posted, and waited for their sycophants to congratulate them on their amazing ignorance. What they did not post was my response and honestly, I can understand why. Obviously they were embarrassed of someone being able to point out their absurd conclusions. Also when I checked the other conversations they screencapped and posted, I found that absolutely none of them included the responses.
I cannot help but pity these people. Apparently they are so confident in their beliefs that they have to hide behind fake accounts, fake names, and resort to silly insults in order to feel good about themselves and their spiritually arrested state of development pertaining to their philosophy. Their pages are filled with displaying their own hatred yet, they project this on to anyone who disagrees with them. You would think they would notice the irony themselves but, no such luck.
Here is a typical conversation among them and notice how they admit to being trolls, as if it were a proud label to wear:
I would never suggest that there are not conservative trolls, however I do not see them making pages where they need to show off their so-called talent for insults and hatred. Mostly they just stick with posting on other pages without needing congratulations from others constantly. I do some know some conservatives who have had to open additional accounts for fear their real accounts would be banned but these were people who were on conservative pages. They were taking precautions due to the troll activity. Trolls actually report people they offend. The liberal troll is not interested in any type of debate; they stick with insults and spewing hate. If you look at the pages they have created, they do not welcome anyone that disagrees with them however, they are quick to point out the intolerance of others if they themselves are banned for trolling.
What struck me as being most disturbing is the fact that these pages are updated daily and constantly. I'm not sure any of these people have jobs. I myself have made screencaps and posted things similar but, I have never found myself doing this day after day and actively seeking out people to insult and berate. The internet is filled with political forums where people engage in hyperbole and political discussions. The people who visit them are aware they will be challenged and insulted from time to time but, when you are just going around to pages on Facebook where you know you disagree with them and have no intention of asking questions or engaging in debate, where your only purpose is to insult a group of people and act like a bully, sceencap, then post to your page in order to feel better about your life, well...I find that to be truly sad.
Unfortunately, with these people there is no reasoning with them. They are most likely unemployed, miserable, insecure, and like causing disruption because that's probably all they have ever known in their personal lives. It's hard to ignore them sometimes because nobody wants to look or feel like a push-over but, for me, if I want that type of flame throwing I just make my way over to a few political forums that I am registered at.
Lesson -- Debating is great. Disagreeing is fine. Spewing hate, vile, and taunting while hiding behind a fake persona is just plain sad.
Once I started clicking on these troll-files, I discovered that most of them had either just been created, indicating that they were open for the purposes of insulting behind a fake account, while others were actually pages that were formed for the purposes of trolling on Facebook. Some of these pages were completely devoted to taking screen caps of various posts that included pictures or statuses that they didn't like and then immediately followed by their own comments that contained vile words, anger, insults, and sophomoric attempts at comedy. All of them were obsessed with a new word they created, "teabilly" and it appears as though their main course of action during their troll-posts was to use the word "teabilly" as many times as possible. Another noteworthy characteristic concerning these screen-caps that were posted on their pages where other "friends" could laugh, like, and pat them on the back, was that any responses to their posts were conveniently omitted. Their insecurity shows through like a bright bleach-spot on a pair of new, black pants.
Some of them even went so far as to seek out my name and find by blog page that I have listed on Facebook. After they commented on one of my posts, they immediately screen-capped the information, ran back to their page, posted, and waited for their sycophants to congratulate them on their amazing ignorance. What they did not post was my response and honestly, I can understand why. Obviously they were embarrassed of someone being able to point out their absurd conclusions. Also when I checked the other conversations they screencapped and posted, I found that absolutely none of them included the responses.
I cannot help but pity these people. Apparently they are so confident in their beliefs that they have to hide behind fake accounts, fake names, and resort to silly insults in order to feel good about themselves and their spiritually arrested state of development pertaining to their philosophy. Their pages are filled with displaying their own hatred yet, they project this on to anyone who disagrees with them. You would think they would notice the irony themselves but, no such luck.
Here is a typical conversation among them and notice how they admit to being trolls, as if it were a proud label to wear:
(King Troll)--(Name of troll) was taken from us. but you can't keep a good patriot down. Journey over and say "welcome back."
(Facebook page of said troll)
This is a site for laughter and mockery of Teabaggers. This is not a debate forum. Douchebags will be banned. Have a nice day! LOL! 1Like · · Share ***** and 13 others like this.
(Another troll name)-- Praise be to the (Troll name)
7 hours ago · Like · 5
(Name of troll)-- Thank you (King Troll)! We have fought the good fight together from the very beginning!
6 hours ago · Like · 1
(King Troll) -- Would appear the carnage continues. I backed everything up last night in anticipation.
6 hours ago · Like · 1
(Yet another troll) --These religious freaks haven't a clue, what kind of shit storm they are making, do they?
6 hours ago via mobile · Like · 1
(Another troll) --So why is this happening suddenly to so many of us trolls?5 hours ago · Like · 1
(King Troll) --The teabillies occasionally gang up and mass-report to try to drive someone out. They took a shot at me a couple of days ago. I don't know why I'm still here.Of course I did not mention any of their names because this would just give them the idea that they are credible in some way; they're not. I'm merely making a point about the type of typical mentality that I witness among the far-left who post on Facebook.
I would never suggest that there are not conservative trolls, however I do not see them making pages where they need to show off their so-called talent for insults and hatred. Mostly they just stick with posting on other pages without needing congratulations from others constantly. I do some know some conservatives who have had to open additional accounts for fear their real accounts would be banned but these were people who were on conservative pages. They were taking precautions due to the troll activity. Trolls actually report people they offend. The liberal troll is not interested in any type of debate; they stick with insults and spewing hate. If you look at the pages they have created, they do not welcome anyone that disagrees with them however, they are quick to point out the intolerance of others if they themselves are banned for trolling.
What struck me as being most disturbing is the fact that these pages are updated daily and constantly. I'm not sure any of these people have jobs. I myself have made screencaps and posted things similar but, I have never found myself doing this day after day and actively seeking out people to insult and berate. The internet is filled with political forums where people engage in hyperbole and political discussions. The people who visit them are aware they will be challenged and insulted from time to time but, when you are just going around to pages on Facebook where you know you disagree with them and have no intention of asking questions or engaging in debate, where your only purpose is to insult a group of people and act like a bully, sceencap, then post to your page in order to feel better about your life, well...I find that to be truly sad.
Unfortunately, with these people there is no reasoning with them. They are most likely unemployed, miserable, insecure, and like causing disruption because that's probably all they have ever known in their personal lives. It's hard to ignore them sometimes because nobody wants to look or feel like a push-over but, for me, if I want that type of flame throwing I just make my way over to a few political forums that I am registered at.
Lesson -- Debating is great. Disagreeing is fine. Spewing hate, vile, and taunting while hiding behind a fake persona is just plain sad.
2012-12-19
Guns -- When the Left Attacks
Whenever I see a tragedy unfold that belongs under the title of "gun violence," I know that the next topic that left wingers will bring up is the famous "gun control" argument they are obsessed with. Their arguments are similar and filled with displaced emotion. To wit:
2012-11-26
The American Left -- Analyzing Tolerance
The American left has been very active over the past 20 years (at least in my lifetime of following politics), in demonstrating their beliefs of tolerance and forgiveness. It is without question that liberals are extremely forgiving people, especially toward those who consider themselves democrats and liberals.
Reading and watching the news has allowed me to make some general observations of the left and their rules for tolerance. In order to make sense of the liberal mindset, it's important to read the words they chose to convey their beliefs.
Some examples I have found repeatedly over the internet include:
"You don't support gay marriage because you're a homophobe! You obviously just hate gays."
"You judge people so you are no Christian."
"You don't want more taxes because you hate the poor and you're greedy."
"If you don't support abortion, you are simply showing everyone that you hate women."
"If you weren't evil, you'd be liberal."
Of course, most of you know that this is a very small sampling of statements that are commonly uttered on liberal blogs and social networking sites. In some cases the statements are much worse but I will assume that those are made by people representing more of a fringe rather than the norm. Now, let's ask ourselves, what is the first thing we see when we look at these types of statements?
1) False dichotomies. A false dichotomy is described as a statement that is meant to lead a person into believing there are only two options of choice and reasoning. Let's use the first example, "You don't support gay marriage because you're a homophobe! You obviously just hate gays." If you don't support A, you are B. In their minds, it is simply not possible for someone to be C, D, E, etc., because they are telling us they simply haven't thought passed the one conclusion.
2) No sense of reasoning. Since they have not allowed themselves to be exposed to other explanations in a positive way, they simply cannot make sense when someone makes an attempt to define another reason for their beliefs. To many it is unacceptable to say that you believe homosexuality to be immoral or that you object to the government supporting a lifestyle that is destructive on both a physical and spiritual level. In fact, any other reason that you try to present to them is dismissed because they now view you as a bigot. They are unable to find reasoning in your views because they lack the curiosity to engage in understanding.
3) Judging is reserved for the left. "You judge people so you are no Christian." Now of course the obvious problem with this statement is that anyone who has read the Bible knows full well that we are called on to judge behavior as being moral or immoral. Furthermore when a person refuses to gain insight into positive and negative judgments they are subject to continue making poor judgments that can hurt themselves and others around them. While condemning people for judging, they then turn around and make a judgement concerning a person's relationship with their G-d in the very same statement. So the issue here is not judging because the modern left has no problem doing this; it is merely that they have a disdain for conservatives who make judgments.
4) Irrational and ignorant of cause and correlation. "If you don't support abortion, you are simply showing everyone that you hate women." The very sentiment is irrational and not supported by any logic but it also tells us that those on the left have difficulty in understanding the cause and correlation. They are suggesting that there is a direct link to hating women and being against abortion. This is not fact based and one could easily say the exact opposite -- people who care about women are against abortion.
5) Consistently inconsistent. "If you weren't evil, you'd be liberal." Here we can see that many on the left not only disagree with conservatives but that they actually believe that our views are founded by evil people. Interestingly the left has repeatedly engaged in slandering people on the right while encouraging and enabling the same behavior, if not worse, demonstrated from their own leaders.
6) Huge egos. The modern left is a collective ego that is fueled with the many individual egos that make up the whole. We know this to be true because of the inconsistency issue I listed above. When a person is conflicted in such a way that they are unable to ascertain their selective outrage. Ultimately it is their egos that stand in the way of allowing themselves to be confronted and questioned. It's much easier for someone with a false ego to dismiss information by calling names, attacking sources, appealing to authority, and acting superior.
After all, they still decided to elect a former klan wizard into the Senate for years; they still supported Ted Kennedy who allowed a woman to drown and made active attempts at covering up the accident; they didn't blink an eye when their party tore a black man apart for being nominated to the Supreme Court; they still believe that Clinton did nothing wrong and was only impeached over a sex act; they don't even bat an eye when their former president Carter makes hateful statements about Israel, and I will discuss more later on but, the point is simple - they do not have any problems with immoral behavior; they just have problems with any behavior demonstrated from the right.
Understanding these observations might be insightful but is there a way we can use this information to better communicate with people on the left? Is there a way to get passed the childish statements and offer them a new or different perspective?
Sometimes I look at those on the left and I get frustrated that they still don't "get it." What more information do they need in order to help them understand the dangers in their beliefs? We have years of history to help us understand that when a government becomes too cozy offering its citizens cradle-to-the-grave "protection" they become corrupted and ultimately end up slaughtering millions of people. For whatever reason these facts do not deter people on the left because they have convinced themselves that "true socialism" never existed and we just "haven't done it right" before.
For a sample demonstration of how liberals try to rationalize information, click here. The article is clearly conveying how the current administration has been able to rely on the media to either suppress information or distort it in someway that protected the administration from being rightly scrutinized. If we go down to the comment section however, we can see a poster going by the name of "jharp" who actually suggests that Clinton was impeached over a sex act. Of course we can see other posters trying to explain that the Clinton scandal had nothing to do with that but rather lying under oath. He also tampered with witnesses and attempted to hide physical evidence. The liberal poster, "jharp" immediately rejects the information and moves on to suggest that Benghazi was not a cover-up, that the Obama administration had nothing to lie about, and the administration did not lie about it. If we continue reading we see people trying to explain what went wrong with Benghazi, giving facts and information about the event but, alas they are met with the same hateful rhetoric and a person determined to ignore anything that doesn't support his beliefs. Did this guy even bother to watch the hearings where testimony proves the consulate had repeatedly asked for more security weeks before the attack? Does it occur to him that 9/11 is also the anniversary of one of the most horrific days in America, yet Obama claimed to be unaware of potential problems? It couldn't be more obvious that Obama lied but, this is ignored completely.
Communicating to people who have such little understanding and depth of issues is reminiscent of trying to explain a calculus problem to someone who has never taken algebra, geometry, or trigonometry (all of which are needed). It is up to us to simplify our positions in order to ignite curiosity. This in turn may provide us the opportunity we need to further explain our position on issues without being met with the initial unwarranted hostility.
We must remember that we are not speaking with these people directly but rather trying to converse with an ego that is unreasonable. The ego is a manifestation of information absorbed by the person during the course of their lives. Ultimately the far left and others who are radical in their beliefs have consumed a great amount of negative feedback in their lives. This feedback has turned many of them into very bitter and angry people who separate themselves from others simply by feeling a certain way and those feelings turn into thoughts that are harmful to themselves as well as others.
It is possible that many liberals have found anecdotal evidence to support their ideology, such as a rich CEO acting abusively towards those he has employed. This in turn pushes them to believe that all CEO's or people who are engaged in business on an executive level are evil or harmful people. This thought alone gives them the idea that they should support the "little guy" only but, they fail to see that the CEO and the "little guy" are part of the same whole. They might see an injustice brought about through racism so they pledge support for the minority and ignore the fact that the minority is a part of the whole and not separate from the majority. This is the genesis of us/them, either/or rhetoric. It comes from a divided mind that lacks clarity in understanding how the world is connected. They seem to think that actions occur in a vacuum, that changing or fixing up one area will not harm or change other areas or policies. For instance they might support special rights for minorities but lack the ability to understand that those special privileges can and have worked against the very people they were initially trying to help.
Egos are a part of everyone's life but if we ever expect to grow and learn, we must first recognize their damage and only then can we begin to start making connections between both the individual and systems that the individual is a part of.
If we truly expect to help the "little guy" we must first recognize that the "big guys" are the ones that have the power to help the "little guy." We must understand that the success of an individual is a success for all of us. This is why it is so important for government and the private sector to have balanced approaches in our problem solving decisions.
When someone believes things like, "the rich need to pay their fair share," and, "there's no reason for this person to make so much money" they are telling us that they see the rich as people who are separate from them and not a part of them. The fallacy in this thinking should be obvious but, for those on the left it's as if they never had time to think about the absurdity of their claim. Without encouraging success from all people, we limit ourselves as well as others. In countries where "fairness" policies have been implemented we can clearly see that there always remained a wealthy class but much fewer in number. This in turn meant that less people are able to invest in businesses, ultimately a smaller number of people determining which services and products that can be purchased. Since there are less services and products to chose from, prices can continue to rise, less money is placed into the hands of individuals creating greater strain on those who are on the bottom, which will in turn call for more government money and help from politicians, greater restrictions are placed upon businesses making it almost impossible to hire or fire people, which drives down the quantity and quality of production. Greater resentment is created between the now two classes (uber-rich and extremely poor), that are created through this philosophy.
It is no wonder that the ego creates a wall between a person's true self and the reality they have chosen to live in -- a prison inside their mind. Masters and victims are what they chose to focus on so creating more victims only further helps to fuel this destructive mentality.
All of this leads us back to finding a better way to communicate with people who are in arrested states of development, both mentally and spiritually. It is not only important for us to analyze the left and their so-called tolerance, we must help them analyze their own tolerance. If we can try to break through the ego and get them to question themselves, it might prove to be successful. One thing we must accept is that our words and reasoning will almost never make any instant changes. The reality is the process of understanding truth must come from within and that change could take years and years to occur so, the best we can hope for is planting some seeds where we can.
I believe we must focus on the root of why conservatives believe what we believe and that is love. Love is the force that drives us because it is love that helps us recognize the importance of the individual and supporting a moral culture. Love is what allows us to understand truth and drives us to understand that not all tolerance is love. Some tolerance is actually harmful and we know this as fact. This is why we need not worry about defending anything. The truth can, will, and must stand on its own. If we can approach our conversations with love in our hearts, we can see through the ego, ignore the insults, and stay firm while remaining honest.
I've given up trying to beat a dead horse with someone since it is just a fact that my words will take a long time to penetrate through the inflated and false egos but, maybe somewhere down the line, maybe by some miracle my words will be remembered for a later time in life.
How about you? Have you had any success breaking through with someone? What did you do or not do that was different from before? How do you see the left's selective tolerance? Tell me your stories; I'd love to hear from you.
Reading and watching the news has allowed me to make some general observations of the left and their rules for tolerance. In order to make sense of the liberal mindset, it's important to read the words they chose to convey their beliefs.
Some examples I have found repeatedly over the internet include:
"You don't support gay marriage because you're a homophobe! You obviously just hate gays."
"You judge people so you are no Christian."
"You don't want more taxes because you hate the poor and you're greedy."
"If you don't support abortion, you are simply showing everyone that you hate women."
"If you weren't evil, you'd be liberal."
Of course, most of you know that this is a very small sampling of statements that are commonly uttered on liberal blogs and social networking sites. In some cases the statements are much worse but I will assume that those are made by people representing more of a fringe rather than the norm. Now, let's ask ourselves, what is the first thing we see when we look at these types of statements?
1) False dichotomies. A false dichotomy is described as a statement that is meant to lead a person into believing there are only two options of choice and reasoning. Let's use the first example, "You don't support gay marriage because you're a homophobe! You obviously just hate gays." If you don't support A, you are B. In their minds, it is simply not possible for someone to be C, D, E, etc., because they are telling us they simply haven't thought passed the one conclusion.
2) No sense of reasoning. Since they have not allowed themselves to be exposed to other explanations in a positive way, they simply cannot make sense when someone makes an attempt to define another reason for their beliefs. To many it is unacceptable to say that you believe homosexuality to be immoral or that you object to the government supporting a lifestyle that is destructive on both a physical and spiritual level. In fact, any other reason that you try to present to them is dismissed because they now view you as a bigot. They are unable to find reasoning in your views because they lack the curiosity to engage in understanding.
3) Judging is reserved for the left. "You judge people so you are no Christian." Now of course the obvious problem with this statement is that anyone who has read the Bible knows full well that we are called on to judge behavior as being moral or immoral. Furthermore when a person refuses to gain insight into positive and negative judgments they are subject to continue making poor judgments that can hurt themselves and others around them. While condemning people for judging, they then turn around and make a judgement concerning a person's relationship with their G-d in the very same statement. So the issue here is not judging because the modern left has no problem doing this; it is merely that they have a disdain for conservatives who make judgments.
4) Irrational and ignorant of cause and correlation. "If you don't support abortion, you are simply showing everyone that you hate women." The very sentiment is irrational and not supported by any logic but it also tells us that those on the left have difficulty in understanding the cause and correlation. They are suggesting that there is a direct link to hating women and being against abortion. This is not fact based and one could easily say the exact opposite -- people who care about women are against abortion.
5) Consistently inconsistent. "If you weren't evil, you'd be liberal." Here we can see that many on the left not only disagree with conservatives but that they actually believe that our views are founded by evil people. Interestingly the left has repeatedly engaged in slandering people on the right while encouraging and enabling the same behavior, if not worse, demonstrated from their own leaders.
6) Huge egos. The modern left is a collective ego that is fueled with the many individual egos that make up the whole. We know this to be true because of the inconsistency issue I listed above. When a person is conflicted in such a way that they are unable to ascertain their selective outrage. Ultimately it is their egos that stand in the way of allowing themselves to be confronted and questioned. It's much easier for someone with a false ego to dismiss information by calling names, attacking sources, appealing to authority, and acting superior.
After all, they still decided to elect a former klan wizard into the Senate for years; they still supported Ted Kennedy who allowed a woman to drown and made active attempts at covering up the accident; they didn't blink an eye when their party tore a black man apart for being nominated to the Supreme Court; they still believe that Clinton did nothing wrong and was only impeached over a sex act; they don't even bat an eye when their former president Carter makes hateful statements about Israel, and I will discuss more later on but, the point is simple - they do not have any problems with immoral behavior; they just have problems with any behavior demonstrated from the right.
Understanding these observations might be insightful but is there a way we can use this information to better communicate with people on the left? Is there a way to get passed the childish statements and offer them a new or different perspective?
Sometimes I look at those on the left and I get frustrated that they still don't "get it." What more information do they need in order to help them understand the dangers in their beliefs? We have years of history to help us understand that when a government becomes too cozy offering its citizens cradle-to-the-grave "protection" they become corrupted and ultimately end up slaughtering millions of people. For whatever reason these facts do not deter people on the left because they have convinced themselves that "true socialism" never existed and we just "haven't done it right" before.
For a sample demonstration of how liberals try to rationalize information, click here. The article is clearly conveying how the current administration has been able to rely on the media to either suppress information or distort it in someway that protected the administration from being rightly scrutinized. If we go down to the comment section however, we can see a poster going by the name of "jharp" who actually suggests that Clinton was impeached over a sex act. Of course we can see other posters trying to explain that the Clinton scandal had nothing to do with that but rather lying under oath. He also tampered with witnesses and attempted to hide physical evidence. The liberal poster, "jharp" immediately rejects the information and moves on to suggest that Benghazi was not a cover-up, that the Obama administration had nothing to lie about, and the administration did not lie about it. If we continue reading we see people trying to explain what went wrong with Benghazi, giving facts and information about the event but, alas they are met with the same hateful rhetoric and a person determined to ignore anything that doesn't support his beliefs. Did this guy even bother to watch the hearings where testimony proves the consulate had repeatedly asked for more security weeks before the attack? Does it occur to him that 9/11 is also the anniversary of one of the most horrific days in America, yet Obama claimed to be unaware of potential problems? It couldn't be more obvious that Obama lied but, this is ignored completely.
Communicating to people who have such little understanding and depth of issues is reminiscent of trying to explain a calculus problem to someone who has never taken algebra, geometry, or trigonometry (all of which are needed). It is up to us to simplify our positions in order to ignite curiosity. This in turn may provide us the opportunity we need to further explain our position on issues without being met with the initial unwarranted hostility.
We must remember that we are not speaking with these people directly but rather trying to converse with an ego that is unreasonable. The ego is a manifestation of information absorbed by the person during the course of their lives. Ultimately the far left and others who are radical in their beliefs have consumed a great amount of negative feedback in their lives. This feedback has turned many of them into very bitter and angry people who separate themselves from others simply by feeling a certain way and those feelings turn into thoughts that are harmful to themselves as well as others.
It is possible that many liberals have found anecdotal evidence to support their ideology, such as a rich CEO acting abusively towards those he has employed. This in turn pushes them to believe that all CEO's or people who are engaged in business on an executive level are evil or harmful people. This thought alone gives them the idea that they should support the "little guy" only but, they fail to see that the CEO and the "little guy" are part of the same whole. They might see an injustice brought about through racism so they pledge support for the minority and ignore the fact that the minority is a part of the whole and not separate from the majority. This is the genesis of us/them, either/or rhetoric. It comes from a divided mind that lacks clarity in understanding how the world is connected. They seem to think that actions occur in a vacuum, that changing or fixing up one area will not harm or change other areas or policies. For instance they might support special rights for minorities but lack the ability to understand that those special privileges can and have worked against the very people they were initially trying to help.
Egos are a part of everyone's life but if we ever expect to grow and learn, we must first recognize their damage and only then can we begin to start making connections between both the individual and systems that the individual is a part of.
If we truly expect to help the "little guy" we must first recognize that the "big guys" are the ones that have the power to help the "little guy." We must understand that the success of an individual is a success for all of us. This is why it is so important for government and the private sector to have balanced approaches in our problem solving decisions.
When someone believes things like, "the rich need to pay their fair share," and, "there's no reason for this person to make so much money" they are telling us that they see the rich as people who are separate from them and not a part of them. The fallacy in this thinking should be obvious but, for those on the left it's as if they never had time to think about the absurdity of their claim. Without encouraging success from all people, we limit ourselves as well as others. In countries where "fairness" policies have been implemented we can clearly see that there always remained a wealthy class but much fewer in number. This in turn meant that less people are able to invest in businesses, ultimately a smaller number of people determining which services and products that can be purchased. Since there are less services and products to chose from, prices can continue to rise, less money is placed into the hands of individuals creating greater strain on those who are on the bottom, which will in turn call for more government money and help from politicians, greater restrictions are placed upon businesses making it almost impossible to hire or fire people, which drives down the quantity and quality of production. Greater resentment is created between the now two classes (uber-rich and extremely poor), that are created through this philosophy.
It is no wonder that the ego creates a wall between a person's true self and the reality they have chosen to live in -- a prison inside their mind. Masters and victims are what they chose to focus on so creating more victims only further helps to fuel this destructive mentality.
All of this leads us back to finding a better way to communicate with people who are in arrested states of development, both mentally and spiritually. It is not only important for us to analyze the left and their so-called tolerance, we must help them analyze their own tolerance. If we can try to break through the ego and get them to question themselves, it might prove to be successful. One thing we must accept is that our words and reasoning will almost never make any instant changes. The reality is the process of understanding truth must come from within and that change could take years and years to occur so, the best we can hope for is planting some seeds where we can.
I believe we must focus on the root of why conservatives believe what we believe and that is love. Love is the force that drives us because it is love that helps us recognize the importance of the individual and supporting a moral culture. Love is what allows us to understand truth and drives us to understand that not all tolerance is love. Some tolerance is actually harmful and we know this as fact. This is why we need not worry about defending anything. The truth can, will, and must stand on its own. If we can approach our conversations with love in our hearts, we can see through the ego, ignore the insults, and stay firm while remaining honest.
I've given up trying to beat a dead horse with someone since it is just a fact that my words will take a long time to penetrate through the inflated and false egos but, maybe somewhere down the line, maybe by some miracle my words will be remembered for a later time in life.
How about you? Have you had any success breaking through with someone? What did you do or not do that was different from before? How do you see the left's selective tolerance? Tell me your stories; I'd love to hear from you.
2012-10-29
Libertarianism - The Cancer That is Eating the American Right
I have been inspired to write this article because it has gradually become very difficult for me to sit back and not say anything concerning my direct observations of the ideology that is currently described as American libertarainism. At first the idea of being libertarian was considered novel and somewhat of a safe place, considering the climate of modern day American politics. No matter who we are, the idea of having to argue all the time with people repeatedly can take a toll on anyone. It is no wonder that many of the conservative friends I once had have seemingly given up on certain ideas in order to "get along" with more people and this objective seems to fit nicely with someone claiming to be libertarian.
2012-10-23
Final Debate
Tonight was the final debate and it was all about foreign policy. From Obama we learned that we no longer have to worry about Russia and he has established stability throughout the word. Amazing. So I guess we are back to ignoring Libya and Egypt again?
Is this guy serious? I'm not sure how one can honestly follow what has been going on the past four years and not realize what a liar this man is.
As usual, Obama could not control himself. He was dismissive, condescending, and rude. The man cannot control his behavior for 90 minutes. Again, those of us that have watched him deal with the press know full well what an angry man he is but, hopefully it is more apparent to those that have done nothing but praise him for basically doing nothing the last four years.
He still has no plan and as far as balancing a budget. How does he plan on doing this, with another executive order? He hasn't been able to pass a budget the past three years. What makes him think this will change over the next four years? Even if he needs the majority of 60 votes to enact the budget, it still doesn't change the fact that none of the democrats will vote for his budget. Unlike Romney, he has not been willing to work with others. Just like his demeanor reveals, he is a child in an adult body playing president. I'm surprised he didn't just throw himself on the floor and begin to scream, while banging his feet and fists on the ground.
(The video will not allow me to embed it here, even though it does offer a code). You will have to click here to see the video for yourself.
After the debate, libs were all over the "Bayonette" comment as if it were some kind of amazing observation but it looks like the pie is on their faces now! Shhh...don't tell a liberal they are wrong, you'll be instantly called a racist.
Obama also insists that he never went on an "apology tour" as Romney pointed out. He went so far as to suggest that all those "fact check" sites confirm this for him. It's nice to know that Obama has to double check with websites devoted to his re-election in order to confirm what he did or didn't do. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees. For example:
The liberals actually think Americans are stupid and yes, some of us are, we call them lefty-liberals but, the rest of us that have a brain do not need to hear an exact phrase in order to understand the meaning of a statement. It is just like when Obama made his closing statement. He said that when he came into office...this and this was all wrong...etc. No, he didn't use the words, "It's all Bush's fault," but dear heavens we KNOW what he was implying and he does nothing but repeat this same idea in a different fashion, each and every time he has an audience.
I guess we're also supposed to forget the recent apology made by the administration to Pakistan as well?
First the man declares this was a protest about some obscure film. Then we discover The White House was warned before the attack occurred. There was a deliberate attempt by the administration to cover this fact up because they made heavy attempts to saturate the media with this idea of a short film being the catalyst of this attack.
Then we find that Obama and his minions begin to back off of the story blaming this film. During the VP debate we learned through the laughing-fool Biden that the administration simply did not know until later on that it was a terrorist attack. Finally, the second debate with Romney, Obama claims he always called the attack one of terror. Even if we give benefit of the doubt to Obama and allow him to get away with making that claim, it doesn't explain away why he and others kept up the narrative of placing blame on the film for two weeks after the attack. It also makes Biden look foolish and clueless, considering he claims no one knew it was a terrorist attack initially.
Not only was there so much confusion going on, after the oversight hearing, we learned that the Embassy was asking for additional security because they knew they were not being properly protected. Oh, and let's not forget that this occurred on 9/11! Only a complete fool would ignore requests for additional security around the date of 9/11. With all of this information, what the hell happened?
Clinton decided to fall on her sword and take full responsibility and Obama did the same later on during the second debate. The whole situation reeks of problems. Obama has failed on all points because his administration is obviously incompetent. If all this initial diversion was centered on covering up the fact that this was a terrorist attack, then they are naive to think they could actually try to do such a thing. If they really didn't know, then they really should have just been honest in saying they didn't know and explained that they wanted to take prudent course of action. If they did know it was a terrorist attack, then why the hell didn't they call it that in the first place? No matter what, this was not handled appropriately and all evidence seems to point to the possibility they tried to do what Clinton did for 8 years -- ignore it. This was a political move, putting Obama's re-election above the interest of the country's, as well as the four men that were killed. Those four men were servants to this country and they were left to fend for themselves against hostile terrorists, an attack that most likely could have been avoided. I think we have a name for putting one's own interest above their country's. It's called TREASON and it's punishment is death.
Either way you slice it, Obama doesn't look good and it showed during the debates. Had he spent more of his time actually doing his job and not traveling, spending time on the golf course, or bowing down to world leaders, and hanging out with those cool, Hollywood celebrities, maybe he would have been more aware of what the hell was going on.
Romney won on substance and lost on having an inflated ego. Mr. Obama wins the ego award hands down.
Is this guy serious? I'm not sure how one can honestly follow what has been going on the past four years and not realize what a liar this man is.
As usual, Obama could not control himself. He was dismissive, condescending, and rude. The man cannot control his behavior for 90 minutes. Again, those of us that have watched him deal with the press know full well what an angry man he is but, hopefully it is more apparent to those that have done nothing but praise him for basically doing nothing the last four years.
He still has no plan and as far as balancing a budget. How does he plan on doing this, with another executive order? He hasn't been able to pass a budget the past three years. What makes him think this will change over the next four years? Even if he needs the majority of 60 votes to enact the budget, it still doesn't change the fact that none of the democrats will vote for his budget. Unlike Romney, he has not been willing to work with others. Just like his demeanor reveals, he is a child in an adult body playing president. I'm surprised he didn't just throw himself on the floor and begin to scream, while banging his feet and fists on the ground.
In early 2011, Barack Obama received a report from the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission he himself launched that outlined a series of significant cuts and new taxes that would have at least lowered the rate at which the country added to its debt. Obama ignored the report completely and instead proposed a budget with nearly $1.5 trillion in deficit spending, with no serious attempts to cut spending. It was so embarrassing that Republicans had to force the Democrat-controlled Senate in May 2011 to bring it up for a vote, where it failed unanimously, 0-97.Let's take a look at other fibs that came from Obama:
(The video will not allow me to embed it here, even though it does offer a code). You will have to click here to see the video for yourself.
After the debate, libs were all over the "Bayonette" comment as if it were some kind of amazing observation but it looks like the pie is on their faces now! Shhh...don't tell a liberal they are wrong, you'll be instantly called a racist.
Obama also insists that he never went on an "apology tour" as Romney pointed out. He went so far as to suggest that all those "fact check" sites confirm this for him. It's nice to know that Obama has to double check with websites devoted to his re-election in order to confirm what he did or didn't do. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees. For example:
Obama to France and Europe: “Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”Let's face it folks, he didn't use the words, "I apologize." Will "Blame America" tour suffice, Mr. Obama?
The liberals actually think Americans are stupid and yes, some of us are, we call them lefty-liberals but, the rest of us that have a brain do not need to hear an exact phrase in order to understand the meaning of a statement. It is just like when Obama made his closing statement. He said that when he came into office...this and this was all wrong...etc. No, he didn't use the words, "It's all Bush's fault," but dear heavens we KNOW what he was implying and he does nothing but repeat this same idea in a different fashion, each and every time he has an audience.
I guess we're also supposed to forget the recent apology made by the administration to Pakistan as well?
In a commercial containing clips from their Washington press conferences, subtitled in Urdu, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton said “sorry” to the mad hordes attacking the American embassy in the Pakistani capital of Islamabad and deplored the infamous anti-Muslim14-minute YouTube video.Of course, this brings us to the most recent topic that involves the revelation that the attack had nothing to do with a YouTube video. Interesting how no one has bothered to mention that the film maker, Mark Basseley Youssef (a k a Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is still in jail!!! Obama should lose any and all credibility for how this entire situation has played out.
First the man declares this was a protest about some obscure film. Then we discover The White House was warned before the attack occurred. There was a deliberate attempt by the administration to cover this fact up because they made heavy attempts to saturate the media with this idea of a short film being the catalyst of this attack.
Then we find that Obama and his minions begin to back off of the story blaming this film. During the VP debate we learned through the laughing-fool Biden that the administration simply did not know until later on that it was a terrorist attack. Finally, the second debate with Romney, Obama claims he always called the attack one of terror. Even if we give benefit of the doubt to Obama and allow him to get away with making that claim, it doesn't explain away why he and others kept up the narrative of placing blame on the film for two weeks after the attack. It also makes Biden look foolish and clueless, considering he claims no one knew it was a terrorist attack initially.
Not only was there so much confusion going on, after the oversight hearing, we learned that the Embassy was asking for additional security because they knew they were not being properly protected. Oh, and let's not forget that this occurred on 9/11! Only a complete fool would ignore requests for additional security around the date of 9/11. With all of this information, what the hell happened?
Clinton decided to fall on her sword and take full responsibility and Obama did the same later on during the second debate. The whole situation reeks of problems. Obama has failed on all points because his administration is obviously incompetent. If all this initial diversion was centered on covering up the fact that this was a terrorist attack, then they are naive to think they could actually try to do such a thing. If they really didn't know, then they really should have just been honest in saying they didn't know and explained that they wanted to take prudent course of action. If they did know it was a terrorist attack, then why the hell didn't they call it that in the first place? No matter what, this was not handled appropriately and all evidence seems to point to the possibility they tried to do what Clinton did for 8 years -- ignore it. This was a political move, putting Obama's re-election above the interest of the country's, as well as the four men that were killed. Those four men were servants to this country and they were left to fend for themselves against hostile terrorists, an attack that most likely could have been avoided. I think we have a name for putting one's own interest above their country's. It's called TREASON and it's punishment is death.
Either way you slice it, Obama doesn't look good and it showed during the debates. Had he spent more of his time actually doing his job and not traveling, spending time on the golf course, or bowing down to world leaders, and hanging out with those cool, Hollywood celebrities, maybe he would have been more aware of what the hell was going on.
Romney won on substance and lost on having an inflated ego. Mr. Obama wins the ego award hands down.
2012-10-18
My Rant
Obama says he wants us to have higher paying jobs with higher skill but, how the hell is that going to happen when the likes of Hollywood has shaped the minds of so many young people to only focus on having sex with a variety of people, using drugs, promoting self-mutilation, and praising immoral behavior? These things have nothing to do with encouraging people to gain higher skills or think on a higher level. They have everything to do with keeping the public ignorant and lowering the standards for everyone. They actually advocate victimization for the American people. How anyone is still struggling to see this is really beyond my personal comprehension.
The dems are the party that support the corruption of Hollywood. Go after the catholic church for their pedophilia! I'm all for it...but, nary a word from these so-called child protectors when it comes to Hollywood molesting children, putting them on a casting couch, and then putting them in roles where they are depicted in a violent rape scene.
The dems have done nothing but stand behind corrupt unions that have destroyed business in this country. Many union officials are the most evil-type of people I have ever run across. They use their union members as pawns; they skim off of the union dues to pay themselves while the members are forced to go along with strikes that many do not even want to bother with, because they need to take care of their families. Most final negotiations gain very little making the protests worth nothing.
Dems actually tell people that there is no voter fraud and when it does occur, it's so small that only a few people engage in this behavior. This is a patent lie and we know that the dems routinely have dead people and criminals vote in elections. If the amount of people committing voter fraud is so small, why are they fighting so hard to protect it?
The same demoncraps are the same people who like to stand behind children rather than in front of them, protecting them. They send THEIR kids to private schools because they KNOW public schools are a massive failure purely designed to brainwash your child into a life of servitude. Even though many solutions have been placed on the table to help poor people/minorities get their children into private schools, the dems refuse to negotiate and the Republicans are shunned and ridiculed. Not to mention that teachers who are utter morons are NEVER fired because, once again, UNIONS that protect these do-nothing teachers and even insist that more money and benefits be handed out to them.
When a Republican is exposed for fraud or other illegal activity, including immorality, our party is active in asking them to resign or be fired. Not dems, they dig their heels in and actually stand behind their corrupt politicians. Somehow they feel if they point to other corruption in the other party, that makes their argument stronger.
They hate war. They will protest constantly and call people war mongers and state that the United States in an evil nation trying to take over the world, even though we have mostly, only gone into areas where we were originally invited to go. Yet, when their "D" president increases a war or proclaims war, not a word about the evils of war. All of a sudden, war is good. Somehow attacking Iraq was bad, even though Saddam was killing his own, linked to terrorists, actively calling for suicide bombers to attack Israel, and other intelligence agencies confirming his immediate threat. Yet, under the guise of a dem like Clinton, attacking Serbia (a long time ally of the US), for fighting the very people who hate us is completely ignored, much like any other terrorist attack that occurs on the watches of our demoncrap leaders.
I am flat out sick of this party and unbelievably astounded by the ignorance that comes from the left. Now they are actually trying to take credit for stopping the war in Iraq when that was already on the Bush timeline, and to top it off they are suggesting that when someone brings up Libya it is some sort of political ploy. To which I say -- No, asshats it's called an incompetent administration that didn't know what was going on, an administration putting their political ambitions above America, or an administration that was trying to negotiate with terrorists....take your pick!
Tell ya what... If you still don't understand that this is the party of corruption, racism, war mongering, immorality, division -- desperate to keep you stupid, dependent, powerless, angry, and a victim, if you still can't see the lies and the half truths the media has been feeding you, do us all a favor and don't vote! This country simply doesn't need idiots voting. You're the death of us all, not just yourself! Stop being selfish and stop voting.
2012-10-10
Half Truths - Global Warming/Climate Change/Different Weather/Increasing or Decreasing Temperature
Or...whatever you want to call it. See, the difference between a conservative and a liberal is simple. Conservatives follow a story forever and follow up on it: Liberals take the "facts" they like, stick with them, never follow up, never question themselves or their sources, and when challenged insist everyone else is stupid. In the case of global warming, it's called a "consensus" and if you are not a part of that supposed "large" crowd, you are obviously a denier!
2012-10-08
Advocate For Children In Hollywood -- Paul Peterson
When I was young, I was fortunate to grow up with Nick at Nite and watch all the classics from the 50's and early 60's. One of those shows included, "The Donna Reed Show" and as any girl would, I fell in love with Paul Peterson who played Donna's son, Jeff Stone.
2012-04-11
My Message For Liberals Today
I wanted to save this...sometimes I write things I actually like.
______________________________________________________
You're all a bunch of sheep. You think these people [democrats] care about this country, the poor, the minorities, the environment, (fill in stupid fake cause here), etc. No wonder you are out of your fricken minds. You can't even see reality and you can't understand why people mock you and think you're stupid? These people care about ONE thing -- POWER and they use you, lie to you, treat you like idiots, all so they can promise you more goodies that they will NEVER deliver to you, and they know it.
______________________________________________________
You're all a bunch of sheep. You think these people [democrats] care about this country, the poor, the minorities, the environment, (fill in stupid fake cause here), etc. No wonder you are out of your fricken minds. You can't even see reality and you can't understand why people mock you and think you're stupid? These people care about ONE thing -- POWER and they use you, lie to you, treat you like idiots, all so they can promise you more goodies that they will NEVER deliver to you, and they know it.
2012-03-07
What I Learned Today ...
Each day, I really do try to learn something new. I either read something or engage in conversation with someone but, it is always my intention to find something that I can learn. Hopefully it will be something that is positive and something that is considered useful. Then there are somethings I have to re-learn because I just forget or I do not want to remember. I guess you could say today is one of those days.
While the country is in dire need of fixing, our men and woman are at war, our economy is collapsing, gasoline prices are skyrocketing, our debt is growing larger, unemployment is increasing, our attention has been forced onto Sandra Fluke, anobody 3rd year law student at Georgetown University who is advocating for the government to force her catholic school to cover contraception for women.
While the country is in dire need of fixing, our men and woman are at war, our economy is collapsing, gasoline prices are skyrocketing, our debt is growing larger, unemployment is increasing, our attention has been forced onto Sandra Fluke, a
2012-03-06
So Let Me Get This Straight...
This is a guest post by my friend Sidney Salgado. I read this and immediately felt the need to pass this along. Sidney is always topping himself with one great post after another. He is a huge inspiration to me and I hope that I too will find a strong voice in my writing the way Sidney has. Please read, enjoy, and pass along if you like.
Thank you, Sidney for all you do!
------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight:
✔ Movies and video games highlighting the assassination of George W. Bush are acceptable...CHECK!
✔ It's okay for a lowlife cretin like Jay-Z to dehumanize women with his lyrics...CHECK!
✔ Rapper Chris Brown can pummel the shit out of his girlfriend within inches of her life, yet receives a Grammy...CHECK!
✔ Ted Kennedy KILLED a woman and continued to serve in office for another 40 years...CHECK!
✔ On Jimmy Fallon's "Late Night" show (which nobody watches), the band introduces Michele Bachmann with the song, "Lyin' Ass Bitch", yet nary a word was said...CHECK!
✔ HBO's Bill Maher has repeatedly called Sarah Palin a "cunt," yet the State-controlled Ministry of Propaganda that is the limp-wristed liberal lamestream media (including Fox News) doesn't have a problem...CHECK!
✔ MSNBC's Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut," yet ya didn't see advertisers pulling out en masse in protest...CHECK!
✔ The rapist Bill Clinton sexually assaulted more than a dozen women o'er three decades, but nobody's talking...CHECK!
✔ I see that David Letterman is still on the air despite saying, "There was an awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game. During the 7th inning, her daughter (who was 12 at the time) was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."...CHECK!
✔ Al Gore sexually assaulted a female masseuse, but the story was buried...CHECK!
✔ Jesse Jackson called Barack Hussein Obama a "nigger" during a break from an interview and once dubbed New York City as "Hymietown," yet HIS apologies were good enough...CHECK!
✔ Barney Frank ran an illegal gay whorehouse on his property whilst serving the people of Massachusetts in Congress, but it's all water under the bridge now...CHECK!
Meanwhile...
• Obama is selling the country to the Russians, Chinese, and Arabs in piecemeal,
• our God-given rights (protected by the Constitution) are being stripped away on every front,
• the national debt is fast-approaching $16,000,000,000,000,
• the U.S. dollar is on the verge of hyperinflation,
• the American economy has been reduced from its AAA rating and is on the verge of bankruptcy (primarily due to Marxist welfare entitlement programs),
• the Muslim Brotherhood is on the rise in the Middle East,
• dangerous anti-American communist radicals are protesting in the streets of Anytown, USA,
• the overall cost of living is skyrocketing,
• the REAL unemployment rate is close to 18%,
• gas prices are starting to hit $5 per gallon (and will be $6 by the 4th of July),
• the country has been divided along racial, gender, class, religious, and lifestyle lines,
• U.S. military troops are STILL getting killed in the Middle East,
• hatred is abounding, while Christians and Jews are being attacked on all sides,
...yet the ONLY headline worth mentioning in the media is Rush Limbaugh apologizing to a woman (seeking her fifteen minutes) for calling her a "slut," despite the fact that she's openly admitted that she wants to get compensated by insurance companies (funded by YOU) so she can: 1) have the right to spread her legs, 2) engage in sex, and 3) kill her baby (if need be) on the friendly campus confines of a Catholic university for which she already pays $50,000+ per semester as a third-year law student.
WORKS FOR ME!
Thank you, Sidney for all you do!
------------------------------------------------------------------
So let me get this straight:
✔ Movies and video games highlighting the assassination of George W. Bush are acceptable...CHECK!
✔ It's okay for a lowlife cretin like Jay-Z to dehumanize women with his lyrics...CHECK!
✔ Rapper Chris Brown can pummel the shit out of his girlfriend within inches of her life, yet receives a Grammy...CHECK!
✔ Ted Kennedy KILLED a woman and continued to serve in office for another 40 years...CHECK!
✔ On Jimmy Fallon's "Late Night" show (which nobody watches), the band introduces Michele Bachmann with the song, "Lyin' Ass Bitch", yet nary a word was said...CHECK!
✔ HBO's Bill Maher has repeatedly called Sarah Palin a "cunt," yet the State-controlled Ministry of Propaganda that is the limp-wristed liberal lamestream media (including Fox News) doesn't have a problem...CHECK!
✔ MSNBC's Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "right-wing slut," yet ya didn't see advertisers pulling out en masse in protest...CHECK!
✔ The rapist Bill Clinton sexually assaulted more than a dozen women o'er three decades, but nobody's talking...CHECK!
✔ I see that David Letterman is still on the air despite saying, "There was an awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game. During the 7th inning, her daughter (who was 12 at the time) was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."...CHECK!
✔ Al Gore sexually assaulted a female masseuse, but the story was buried...CHECK!
✔ Jesse Jackson called Barack Hussein Obama a "nigger" during a break from an interview and once dubbed New York City as "Hymietown," yet HIS apologies were good enough...CHECK!
✔ Barney Frank ran an illegal gay whorehouse on his property whilst serving the people of Massachusetts in Congress, but it's all water under the bridge now...CHECK!
Meanwhile...
• Obama is selling the country to the Russians, Chinese, and Arabs in piecemeal,
• our God-given rights (protected by the Constitution) are being stripped away on every front,
• the national debt is fast-approaching $16,000,000,000,000,
• the U.S. dollar is on the verge of hyperinflation,
• the American economy has been reduced from its AAA rating and is on the verge of bankruptcy (primarily due to Marxist welfare entitlement programs),
• the Muslim Brotherhood is on the rise in the Middle East,
• dangerous anti-American communist radicals are protesting in the streets of Anytown, USA,
• the overall cost of living is skyrocketing,
• the REAL unemployment rate is close to 18%,
• gas prices are starting to hit $5 per gallon (and will be $6 by the 4th of July),
• the country has been divided along racial, gender, class, religious, and lifestyle lines,
• U.S. military troops are STILL getting killed in the Middle East,
• hatred is abounding, while Christians and Jews are being attacked on all sides,
...yet the ONLY headline worth mentioning in the media is Rush Limbaugh apologizing to a woman (seeking her fifteen minutes) for calling her a "slut," despite the fact that she's openly admitted that she wants to get compensated by insurance companies (funded by YOU) so she can: 1) have the right to spread her legs, 2) engage in sex, and 3) kill her baby (if need be) on the friendly campus confines of a Catholic university for which she already pays $50,000+ per semester as a third-year law student.
WORKS FOR ME!
2012-01-19
Sh*t Liberals Say
Here is a funny video someone posted on Facebook earlier today. It offers a perfect depiction of the most nonsensical things liberals seem to believe.
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
2011-12-08
Ann Coulter is Right Again
Wow! I just love Ann and I have to say, I agree with her on a lot of things. This is one I especially agree with.
Click title for story.
2011-11-23
Megyn Kelly Creates Thunderstorm Amongst Liberals
Admittedly, the title of my post is somewhat generalized. I should say Ms. Kelly has certainly stirred up some controversy amongst those that are siding with the Occupy Wallstreet movement.
Can someone please tell me what she said that was incorrect?
I wouldn't say I'm an expert but, I certainly studied chemistry. Capsaicin is the ingredient found in peppers that make them "hot." Pepper spray is a concentration of capsainoids.
Yes, it does appear that this is diluted because no one would just sit there and allow themselves to be sprayed like that if it weren't.
I have never been sprayed personally but, I was at a bar years ago where someone sprayed pepper spray in the men's restroom/washroom. The bar cleared out quickly and most of us were no where near the restroom.
In the video you can clearly see they are just sitting there doing nothing. Why are they not moving to avoid the spray?
Click title of post for article.
Can someone please tell me what she said that was incorrect?
"First of all, pepper spray — that just burns your eyes, right?" O'Reilly asks Kelly, the legal (and apparently chemical) expert. "It's like a derivative of actual pepper," she responds. "It's a food product, essentially."
I wouldn't say I'm an expert but, I certainly studied chemistry. Capsaicin is the ingredient found in peppers that make them "hot." Pepper spray is a concentration of capsainoids.
Yes, it does appear that this is diluted because no one would just sit there and allow themselves to be sprayed like that if it weren't.
I have never been sprayed personally but, I was at a bar years ago where someone sprayed pepper spray in the men's restroom/washroom. The bar cleared out quickly and most of us were no where near the restroom.
In the video you can clearly see they are just sitting there doing nothing. Why are they not moving to avoid the spray?
Click title of post for article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)