The Weekend After

It didn’t take long for the POS WAH! Party to start in on blaming the Republicans, the NRA, Conservatives, and any one they could possibly think of for their sycophant to start shooting the Republicans on a baseball field.  I’m so livid at the lack of any decency, I can barely have a conversation with my wife concerning the politics of the day.  And of course, the libtards are out in full force trying to use this incident to push gun control.  So before I write anything too incendiary, let’s finish the post with a few chosen pictures:

Image may contain: text

Image may contain: one or more people, people standing, text and outdoor

Image may contain: one or more people, meme, ocean and text

Image may contain: 15 people, people smiling, meme and text

Image may contain: text

Image may contain: 1 person, standing and text

Image may contain: 1 person, text

Image may contain: 1 person, text

And finally, the best liberal brain-fart from an anti-gun wacko…

Image result for McAuliffe 93 million

Seems that the United States will be depopulated in less than a week…

Be well, fellow Conservatives.

Posted in Gun Rights, Opinion, Politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

At What Cost for Liberalism?

In response to yesterday’s shooting at a Republican baseball practice –

“How many innocent people have to die before we realize that words do matter? Crazy people act on the crazy things they hear from politicians and celebrities. Think before you utter those blind, hateful words next time, liberals. Because there are crazy people out there taking your metaphors literally.” – Eric Bolling

And this –

“DEMOCRATS:

“You have normalized violence against us for the last two years. You have set buildings on fire to prevent us from speaking. You have called for our deaths, you have called it “a masterpiece” when our president is killed at Shakespeare in the Park, you laughed at his severed head in effigy as supposed comedy, and you have spoken quite freely about blowing up the Whitehouse.  You have called honorable men like Jeff Sessions.”Russian operatives”, you have been complicit in correcting the record of phony narratives in the press. You have shamelessly wished death to the unborn grandson of our President. And NOW? You have sent hearts full of rage, rhetoric, and hate into the streets TO KILL our representatives.

“This is not some random tragedy without a clear motive. This is not some senseless act of violence to be fixed by stricter gun laws. Criminals don’t obey laws. No, the gun is not to blame for the shooting of “Republicans” and dozens of violent attacks against us, you are! The blood is on YOUR hands!” – Unknown

It used to be that political discourse and debates were as civilized as they were passionate.  No more…

I seem to remember when politics changed as being when George Bush (43) was President, and people began hanging effigies and calling for his death or removal.  Things really stepped up when Obummer was running for office with personal attacks and unfounded accusations of racism, corruption, and any other “ism” leveled upon the opposition. 

Then there was the creation of radical, violent groups such as Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, and all the other mobs that created mayhem, destruction, and even death because of some event (usually someone being killed in some criminal act).  With the media portraying such acts as “civil disobedience” and “protests against a corrupt establishment”, the participants generally were not prosecuted, but hailed as heroes in the cause of social justice. 

But I have to ask – Why must property of others (usually having nothing to do with the issue at hand) be damaged, livelihoods ruined, and people hurt to prove a point?  What happened to civil discourse?

The last election was one of the nastiest that I have ever seen – and both sides participated in the offal-slinging.  But it has continued past the election, instigated primarily by the sore loser WAH! Party (formerly known as the Democratic Party).  And now this latest incident of not character assassination, but attempted assignation of members of the winning party.

And said members of the WAH! Party now stand before the media and their fellow representatives, wring their hands, and cry “this isn’t what we meant to do!”  You damned hypocrites!!  Look back at your calls of resistance at any cost, your supporters depiction of bloody attacks without condemnation, and what exactly did you fricken expect would happen?

Image may contain: text

To the members of the WAH! Party – be on notice that I will oppose your Liberal ideology (or idiotology) with every legal means at my disposal.  I will oppose you at the ballot box, in posts, in letters & appearances to my representative, and donations to organizations that oppose your anti-Constitutional & destructive policies.  You have been warned.

Posted in Opinion, Politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Will Someone Turn Off the Broken Record?

I know that I haven’t posted for a while.  Besides life and work going on at the usual frantic pace, there really isn’t much new to post about.  Sure, there are developments on the current stories and topics, but essentially there really isn’t much new under the sun.  The following, however, did catch my attention during the ad hoc sabbatical:

The investigation into the Russian hacking/interfering of the US elections is turning out to be a three ring circus with the WAH! Party* playing the part of the clowns.  While there has been a revelation that Russia did attempt to access voter records, it was unsuccessful.  While the WAH! Party* and their sycophants in the Media point to this as being “evidence” that there was collusion between the Russians and the Trump Campaign, no hard evidence has been presented to show that this is the case.

But the question begs to be asked – If there was collusion, why would the Russians throw their resources behind the Republicans and not the WAH! Party*?  Other than the generic “business dealings” explanation, nothing else sticks.  Indeed, if there were charges of collusion, it should be against the WAH! Party*, and here’s a couple of reasons why:

  • During the 2012 campaign, then President Obummer was caught on an open microphone talking to the Russian President and stated ““This is my last election … After my election I have more flexibility.”  This was in reference to the US-led missile defense of Europe through NATO.  Almost sounds like the President was willing to throw our allies under the bus in favor of the Russian Bear…
  • It is well known that while Felonia von Pantsuit was the the Secretary of State, she negotiated a contract with Russia for access to uranium mines and material located in the US, possibly in return for “contributions” to her personal slush-fund known as the Clinton Foundation.  Sounds very favorable to the Russians and potentially damaging to the WAH! Party* candidate (subject to blackmail or at least conflict of interest charges).

Currently, there is a witch-hunt going on that will supposedly “find” evidence of collusion between the Trump Campaign and the Russians.  Personally, I believe that the WAH! Party* made this up to explain why their candidate lost to a non-political candidate.

Last, considering that then President Obummer sent US taxpayer dollars to influence Israel’s election is absolutely hypocritical.

Moving on…

The disaster known as ObamaCare is failing in more states as insurance companies pull out of more exchanges, leaving some people without insurance options.  Obamacare was designed to fail, and the WAH! Party* was playing the long game, fully expecting the voters to continue electing their candidates in order to pass single-payer government funded health insurance legislation to “save” the people.  This POS legislation needs to be repealed, not replaced, by the Republicans.

Next…

Terrorist attacks continue in Europe with the incompetent Progressive politicians stating that terrorism is now a way of life, and wants the population at large to be disarmed so that the government can protect them better with unarmed police.  Doesn’t work in France or England as the terrorists still find a way to find arms, make bombs, and run over people with vehicles in a largely gun-free zone/country.

Twits….

Another anniversary of D-Day has passed.  A lot has changed from the character of the young men who rushed into danger and death.  Now the young people rush from bad words, hate speech, and hurtful ideas to safe zones with puppies and play dough because they need protection from all things that create micro-aggressions in some of the most expensive colleges that are educating tomorrow’s leaders.

Pathetic and sad, and doesn’t bode well for the future of the country…

Climate Warming/Cooling/Change is being revealed as being more scam than science.  If it was really true, then the computer models would all agree without having to fudge or cherry-pick the data, and would also explain why the Earth has warmed and cooled in the past without man’s interference.  All one has to do is follow the money between the proponents of Climate Warming/Cooling/Change and the politicians & scientists that derive power & funding to know that their isn’t a bit of reality to any of it.  I applaud President Trump calling out these hypocrites, withdrawing from the non-binding Paris Accord that penalizes the US & almost no one else, and allowing the eco-wienies to collectively throw hissy-fits.

Yes, I will admit to a bit of schadenfreude watching them…

While there is more that can be commented on, this is what is at the top of my list at the moment.  Until next time.


* The WAH! Party stands for Whiners And Hypocrites, of which the Democratic Party has become.

Posted in Education, Global Warming, Government, Gun Rights, Health Care, Musings, Opinion, Politics, Terrorism, The Media | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Memorial Day 2017

unnamed

“Our debt to the heroic men and valiant women in the service of our country can never be repaid.  The have earned our undying gratitude.  America will never forget their sacrifices.” – President Harry Truman

Posted in Holiday, Our Soldiers | Tagged | Leave a comment

The Death of Free Speech

Let’s first consider the First Amendment of the Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Let us further consider a quote from the noted French philosopher François-Marie Arouet (also known as Voltaire):

“I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Over the past few months, we have witnessed the greatest opposition to the freedom of Americans to speak their minds that I can remember.  Vocal and violent protests to conservative speakers on college campuses only demonstrates the fear that the Progressive Left has for the rational and confrontational opposition to their point of view.

The fact that college and university campuses have “safe spaces” for their sensitive snowflake social justice warriors is a far cry from the purpose of higher level education to turn out well rounded, well-educated graduates.  Indeed, they are turning out mental and emotional cripples incapable of listening to and evaluating different points of view.  This trend of graduating emotionally mental midgets can be blamed directly upon the staff and administration of these colleges and universities, and indirectly, are violating the First Amendment of the Constitution.

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech” applies to any college or university accepting Federal funding.  As Congress approves funding for education (including colleges and universities) and cannot by law restrict speech, colleges and universities, by extension, cannot oppose the expression of ideas that may not be inline with their staff or administration viewpoints.  Accepting funding from a government source implies that that entity is now an agent of the government, and must accept the same responsibilities and restrictions that the government has.  (I know that businesses that accept government contracts/funding must conform to governmental regulations, and I see no reason for colleges and universities to be treated any differently.  My Google-fu is weak today, but I am aware of cases that were successful in proving that if government funding is present, then that person or entity receiving the funds could be considered acting on the behalf of the government, i.e., as an agent of the government.)

The Progressive Left has encouraged protests against hate speech, racist speech, anti-Islamic speech, anti-LGBT speech, anti-XYZ speech, etc.  Almost any speech is anti-something and must be protested against (although I have yet to see any of these same groups protest against speech that defames the Christian belief).  And yet, who determines what is offensive?  Therein lies the slippery slope that we, as a society and country, have been sliding headlong into – the political correctness trap.  From a 2013 post:

Here’s the problem with political correctness – the standard of what is politically correct is subject to what someone finds objectionable to their race, religion, and/or belief system. In other words, there are no absolute standards or limits to what these people would find objectionable.  Where this could eventually lead is a suppression of our ability to voice our opinions for fear of being publically attacked, and potentially charged with a hate crime.  Freedom of speech now becomes a casualty of “political correctness” and “hate crime” laws.

Dr. Ben Carson stated it best in his now famous speech at the National Prayer Breakfast:

“And one last thing about political correctness, which I think is a horrible thing, by the way. I’m very, very come — compassionate, and I’m not never out to offend anyone. But PC is dangerous. Because, you see, this country one of the founding principles was freedom of thought and freedom of expression. and it muffles people. It puts a muzzle on them. And at the same time, keeps people from discussing important issues while the fabric of this society is being changed. And we cannot fall for that trick. And what we need to do is start talking about things, talking about things that are important.”

The First Amendment does not define what is or is not hate speech, nor should Congress define it as well with the laws it passes.  However, Congress has passed laws defining certain crimes singled out as being “hate crimes” when in fact all crime is hateful against society – the circumstances behind that crime may be heinous, but should be dealt with within the criminal code without regard to whether the victim or criminal is black, white, straight, gay, etc.  That by itself is discriminatory.

However, if one were to listen to former Democratic Chairman and Presidential Candidate Howard Dean –

“Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.” – Tweet from Howard Dean

– It becomes clear that certain people do not understand the Constitution and the principles that this country was founded upon.  For instance, if all hate speech (and by extension, hateful thoughts) were banned, think about the following groups and activities that would be outlawed and banned because someone, somewhere would be offended by their opinions and activities:

  • The KKK
  • Black Lives Matter
  • Blue Lives Matter
  • All Lives Matter
  • NAACP
  • All Christian Churches and denominations
  • All Muslim mosques and denominations
  • All other religions and denominations
  • Everyone with skin color (or lack thereof)
  • Everyone that is of Asian, African, European, etc. descent.
  • Everyone who is a different sexual orientation than themselves
  • Everyone who hates (or likes) cats
  • Everyone who likes (or hates) dogs
  • Everyone who hates (or likes) animals
  • Everyone who hates eating liver, asparagus, cauliflower, etc.
  • Everyone who likes bacon
  • Whoever doesn’t believe (or does) believe that Global Warming/Cooling/Climate Change is real and settled science
  • Put your favorite hate group / thought here…

A bit ridiculous, right?  And that is exactly the point!!

Limiting the ideas and opinions that people can express demeans us all, and limits our individual ability to grow as a person.  Yes, we do reserve the right to agree or disagree with the opinions expressed (and even to walk out & not listen to the speaker), but we do not have the right to prevent them from speaking or assault the person for expressing themselves.  Yet, this is exactly what happened to conservative speakers that were engaged to speak at college campuses in California.

The excuses given have been that the speakers “trigger” violent activities, promotes hate speech, is a racist, and a host of other charges.  But when it really gets down to it, it is not the speakers that are the problem, but the protestors.  By inhibiting the free speech that the protestors supposedly support, the protestors have revealed themselves not only as being hypocrites, but as being more intolerant than they have accused the speakers to be.

More is the pity…

Professor Glenn Reynolds had this in an opinion piece in USA Today:

In First Amendment law, the term “hate speech” is meaningless. All speech is equally protected whether it’s hateful or cheerful. It doesn’t matter if it’s racist, sexist or in poor taste, unless speech falls into a few very narrow categories — like “true threats,” which have to address a specific individual, or “incitement,” which must constitute an immediate and intentional encouragement to imminent lawless action — it’s protected.

The term “hate speech” was invented by people who don’t like that freedom, and who want to give the — completely false — impression that there’s a kind of speech that the First Amendment doesn’t protect because it’s hateful. What they mean by “hateful,” it seems, is really just that it’s speech they don’t agree with. Some even try to argue that since hearing disagreeable ideas is unpleasant, expressing those ideas is somehow an act of “violence.”

There are two problems with that argument. The first is that it’s idiotic: That’s never been the law, nor could it be if we give any value to free expression, because there’s no idea that somebody doesn’t disagree with. The second is that the argument is usually made by people who spend a lot of time expressing disagreeable ideas themselves, without, apparently, the least thought that if their own rules about disagreeable speech held sway, they’d probably be locked up first. (As Twitter wag IowaHawk has offered: “I’ll let you ban hate speech when you let me define it. Deal?”)

We have the First Amendment for a reason – for the freedom of expression, whether by our acts of Faith or speech, to disseminate those thoughts by talk or print, and to openly assemble to give a speech to voice those opinions, whether they are critical of the government or not.  For thugs to protest this right of others to speak while keeping it only for themselves shows that they, not the speakers, are the real Fascists.

PicturePicture

Posted in Free Speech, Opinion | Tagged ,