Political Correctness Claims First Lives

A few years ago, when there was all of the talk about illegal aliens coming across the border in Arizona, the law enforcement officers were accused of profiling. Hispanics that were driving were selected to be pulled over because of their nationality and not just due to any traffic violations, as it was reported. Officers were told that they could not ask or check to see if those people were in this country legally. A law was even passed on this issue and Governor Jan Brewer vetoed it, possibly because the National Football League threatened to move the Super Bowl out of Arizona.

                                            

The Obama administration even got into the state issue and a battle between the federal government and the State of Arizona ensued. The talk then was how wrong it was to profile people based on their nationality.

During the investigation of the attack in San Bernardino, California where 14 people were killed and another 21 wounded, it was discovered that a neighbor of the shooters noticed unusual activity at their house. She didn’t report it because she was afraid of being accused of profiling.

Imagine how that woman must feel now following this latest shooting, which at this point appears to be a terrorist attack by ISIS on our own soil. She didn’t report because she didn’t want to be accused of profiling or being racist. She knew something was wrong but because the liberals put labels on people for putting labels on people (do you see the double standard there?) this neighbor was afraid to report something that she had the good sense to know wasn’t quite right and could be dangerous. Political correctness has now cost lives.

Had the liberals not made it an albatross to say something about some suspicious activity because of the race or appearance of the ones acting oddly, this woman would normally have reported it and possibly saved 14 lives, 21 woundings, and the fear people went through that day during their office Christmas Party. Now, she could very well be blaming herself for the deaths of those victims. All because of political correctness.

Along those same lines, the liberals have been railing on gun control for fifty years. ‘Why do you need those weapons? This isn’t the wild west anymore.’ Well, let’s take a look specifically at that statement about it not being the wild west anymore. Think of your westerns that you watched as a kid. Bonanza took place in Nevada. The Big Valley in Stockton, California. John Wayne movies were anywhere from Texas to Montana to California. Buffalo Bill died in Deadwood, South Dakota. Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday from Kansas, to Arizona. Shootouts in the street were extremely rare. So these liberals are using fiction or something that rarely happened, that they saw on television and movies and creating a scenario that didn’t exist.

Either that or they just believe that if everyone is unarmed that criminals will take that into account and out of the goodness of their hearts not commit their crime against someone unarmed.

Lastly, President Obama opens his mouth and something happens. He calls ISIS a JV team. Then they march across Iraq taking city after city. Cutting off heads, burning people alive in cages. They are killing Americans, Israeli’s and other Muslims. They don’t care. They are killing anyone and everyone that they run across.

Obama said that ISIS was contained, and that very day, terrorists attack Paris. Obama said that we are safe, and then these shooters go into a Christmas party in San Bernardino and kill 14 people. Before they even know whether it’s a terrorist attack or not, Obama and Hillary Clinton start talking about legislating tougher gun control laws and blaming Republicans for it not being done. Still, at this writing, Obama has not come out and said it was a terrorist attack.

We cannot be politically correct. We must stand up and say when we see something that doesn’t look normal. If we’re wrong, nobody died. But if we’re right and we don’t say something people could die needlessly.

A County Executive in Rockland County California is calling for citizens to be armed. Sheriff Joe Arpaio is doing the same, as is Sheriff David Clark from Wisconsin. The liberals saying that this isn’t the old west, have created a situation where we could very well be looking like the old west. The problem is that the old west never existed as they say it, but now it just might.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Terrorism? Obama Calls for Gun Control

Todays headline reads, 14 dead and 17 wounded in San Bernardino, California.

As expected, President Obama and the liberals are already using this incident to call for more gun control and of course, blaming Republicans. California already has one of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. We still don’t know if this is a terrorist attack or workplace shooting, or something else. Everything is political anymore.

To use the death and wounding of Americans as a political football is reprehensible. To call for gun control is silly at best. It’s the same old argument. If we ban guns, only the evil will have guns. Criminals do not care about the laws. If they did, they wouldn’t be criminals.

Its confusing how two people can enter a building dressed in commando garb, go to the second floor, enter a conference room and begin shooting and nobody from the front door to the second floor noticed how they were dressed? Did they change their clothes in the second floor restroom? Did they change their clothes outside the door? Not likely.

We have seen children killed in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. They were in a gun free zone. Nobody armed except for the shooter. The kids were huddled in a closet. All they had to be was found and then slaughtered. No protection.

We have seen others shot in Oregon again in a gun free zone. The only one armed was the shooter. We’ve seen others shot in Colorado just in the past couple of days. Again, the only one armed was the murderer. We’ve seen in Chattanooga, Tennessee at a recruiting office for the military and a military facility a few miles away where even the military personnel was not armed and five dead. But the terrorist was armed. Unarmed military!

They put Drug Free Zone signs up at schools across the nation, but drugs are still there. We’ve seen gun free zones, but still there are guns used. If Obama thinks he can prevent terrorism by holding a sign up at the border saying Terrorist Free Zone and not check on those crossing the border, it won’t work.

I don’t want to see the headline saying 14 dead, 17 wounded again, but we will. I’d rather see a headline that says, “Terrorist Greeted at Party by 31 Armed Citizens”.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Spoiled College Brats vs Terrorism

The students at Missouri University are upset. They are complaining that the terrorists attacks in Paris, France have taken the focus off of them.

These kids at the college and other colleges that these protests are spreading to are complaining about the freedom of speech. In one video, a young girl was talking to an administrator about the protest and wanted to be heard and was heard. However, when the administrator then began to answer her, she shouted him down and said her feelings were hurt because he wasn’t in agreement with her. Freedom of speech applies to everyone. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree with you. Only that you have the right to speak as does the other person. When one is not permitted to speak, their freedom of speech is taken away. The college students don’t see it that way. They want to dictate but not have a conversation. In other words, they are saying “it’s my way or the highway and to heck with what your free speech rights.”

The students are not letting the press in to report on what’s happening on campus. So why are they protesting? Isn’t a protest supposed to get attention to your grievances so that everyone knows of them? It’s akin to advertising. If you want to make change, you have to get the word out so that others can see your position and form an opinion. But when you block out those that would get the word out, the only thing you are doing is gathering in a group and skipping class. That’s all anyone can see.

So just in that, they are hindering others free speech and they are hindering the freedom of the press (also a part of the first amendment).

Not only do they want free education, but they want their expenses paid from previous years of schooling as well.

These are college students!! One of those college students complaining about having to pay for college and wanting someone else to pay is the son of a railroad executive who has an income of $8.5 million per year!!

These kids have shown the failure of the public education system. That they don’t know anything about the first amendment to the United States Constitution only shows that they weren’t taught civics in civics classes in high school. They also show their ignorance when they claim that they want free college education. Nothing is free. If no money is paid for their education, where does the money come from for their lights? To pay their professors? Will they show up for class dragging their own desk and chairs into the room? Actually, will there be a room since it’s not paid for? Do they really think that the rooms, buildings, electricity, all just grow on the grounds simply for their education needs? Why do they even need college? It’s obvious that they aren’t even learning the basics, let alone the fine points of civics, math, or even common sense!

On Friday, terrorists launched six attacks in Paris, France. These terrorists blew themselves up. They attacked at a stadium with a soccer match going on. They did a driveby shooting at a popular and crowded restaurant. They took control of a concert and then stood in the balcony shooting down on the concert goers. Shooting fish in a barrel couldn’t be easier. There were 129 dead from these attacks. DEAD!! They will never hear another note of music. They will never go on another date. They will never have a chance to marry the guy or girl they went to the concert with. They’ll never have children. They are dead at the hands of fanatics whose only goal in life is to kill anyone from the western world.

Today, the college students are complaining that the terrorist attack in France is taking the spotlight off of their protest!

Well here’s a newsflash for you snot nosed little brats. Terrorists attacking people and killing people are a little more important than your feelings being hurt. Perhaps you ought to pay attention to something other than your own spoiled little lives and try to learn something because that attack could very well be you in a very short time. It was for one college student from California. A 23 year old student who was part of a student exchange program died in that attack.

At least one of the terrorists came to France as a refugee from war torn areas of the middle east. President Obama wants to bring 65,000  of those refugees here knowing that we have no way of knowing if terrorists have infiltrated the refugees as they promised to do. We have no way of knowing if they are terrorists or not. So if you think your feelings are hurt now, wait until you’re gathered in a group holding up your signs complaining that some guy at a bar, off campus, has hurled a racial slur within earshot of you, and all of a sudden one of those terrorists decides you’re part of a nice crowd that he could shoot into and just keep shooting until someone comes to shoot him. Then he can push the button on his bomb that he has strapped to his waist and blow not only himself up, but anyone within fifty feet of him as he runs into the crowd before pushing the button.

Think your feelings are hurt now? Wait until you discover you didn’t die in that attack but you were unfortunate enough to have a leg blown off or an arm blown off.

129 people are dead in France with more likely to die from their injuries and you’re upset that the news isn’t paying as much attention to you now? Why would you care? You were chasing the press away. Now that they have something more important to cover, you’re upset that they aren’t paying attention to you?

Get over yourselves. Stop whining about black and white. Stop crying that someone actually pays for your college. It’s probably your parents paying anyway. We are all Americans and one of our own was murdered by a terrorist! Those terrorists are coming here and they want to kill us just because we’re Americans. Do you really think they are going to stop to see if you’re black, white, hispanic? They don’t care. They only want a huge body count to draw attention to themselves. They don’t care about your little worries about your feelings.

If you spoiled little children really want something to whine about, complain to the schools that you’re being cheated on your education because you don’t even know what the freedom of speech means! You should have learned that in high school.

We’re on the brink of World War III! Your complaints are petty and insignificant. American lives matter and right now, American lives are at risk. Need proof? Look at Fort Hood, Texas. Look at Chattanooga, Tennessee. Look at New York City. Look at the Pentagon. If you really want to see what really matters, stop off in Pennsylvania and see where Americans that were not soldiers, that were citizens, sacrificed their lives to save either the White House or the U. S. Capitol. Those were people that were heroes. They knew they were going to die and they died saving others lives. Maybe even yours.

So wipe your nose, change your diaper and show up for class and demand that your teachers teach you about the Constitution. Then go to a math class and demand to find out why education is not free. And maybe, on your way to your class you might want to stop and say a prayer for those that lost their lives and/or loved ones in Paris and pray that we can stop it from ever happening again anywhere, but most certainly from happening on our own shores!

Someone ought to lecture your parents for not turning you over their knee when you were a kid and maybe you wouldn’t have to be told that a human life is more precious than your feelings being hurt!

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

GOP in Circular Firing Squad

The GOP has lost sight of their opponent. Or perhaps they never had a vision of their opponent. From the moment that Donald Trump entered the race, the other candidates have spent more time dealing with Trump than they have with the good of the country.

When Trump entered the race, he started off by talking about how illegal aliens were coming here and the worst were being sent by Mexico. Did we all forget the trains from the summer of 2014 when people were riding atop the trains from South America, through Mexico into the United States? Women and children were being raped and murdered on their way to our country. Drug cartels were smuggling people across the border for their own purposes. President Obama was encouraging people to come here and not enforcing our border laws.

What did Trump say? He said that murderers and rapists were coming here and some were good people, he assumed. From that moment on the Democrats and media have said that Trump was bashing immigrants. They didn’t say he was bashing illegal immigrants. They said he was bashing all immigrants.

Did the other GOP candidates stand up for what Trump said? No. They all paid it lip service until he came on the scene with his comments, but once he said it, the other candidates sounded like Democrats complaining about the way Trump said something.

Dr. Ben Carson has been moving up in the polls and in one he is actually ahead of Trump. At first, Carson was a great surgeon. Now that he’s moving up, they are finding some disgruntled patients from his past. Six of them out of thousands he’s treated. Now they are talking about his book tour and whether he’s violating campaign finance law.

Carly Fiorina has been in two debates. The first, she was at the so-called kiddie table. That was the early debate for the lowest polling candidates. By all accounts, she not only won that debate, but she was more talked about than the evening debate with the top ten in the polls.

In the second debate, it was widely considered that she was the winner of that debate where she was in the top ten or at the so-called adult table. She shot up in the polls to number two and then three. The top three candidates were all outsiders and between the three of them they had over 50% of the votes in the polls.

Rand Paul went after Trump and he fell to the bottom of the heap. Rick Perry went after Trump and dropped out of the race. Scott Walker, who many considered the top of the list, fell after going after Trump and he’s now out of the race. Bobby Jindahl went after Trump and while he’s still in the race, he has no numbers. Jeb Bush, who was the front runner until Trump got in has lately been goaded into defending his brother, President Bush, which is something he wanted to stay away from.

Many of these candidates have said that Trump doesn’t qualify to be President. Yet, Trump, Carson and Fiorina all have led the race. The candidates are spending their time and money fighting Trump and they keep falling. Maybe they should start looking at something that is becoming almost a theme. They are all professional politicians. Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Lindsay Graham, all Senators, all down in the polls. Two of them in their first term. Bush, Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, George Pataki, Jim Gilmore, all former or sitting governors, all down in the polls. The leaders are the non politicians. It’s very clear that the people have had it with politicians are looking at our government as being a citizen government. The supposed “experts” are not trusted. Eric Cantor was one of the first signs of this when he was defeated last year in the primary in Virginia. He’s now out and his Primary opponent is the new sitting Representative.

The opponent is Hillary Clinton and the Democrats. They ought to be focusing on her and the Democrats. She has scandals running throughout her history and even currently with the Benghazi and E-mail problem. If they were all hammering at her, the mainstream press would not be able to ignore them. As it is, CNN, the liberal bastion for the media, puts on a debate and tries to instigate arguments between the Republican candidates rather than dealing with real issues. While the CNN debate for Democrats was a love fest between them and the them was Hillary Clinton and the self described socialist, Bernie Sanders. The other three were virtually ignored during that debate.

People will vote for something. They will vote for a candidate. They don’t vote against things. The constant chasing every nuance of Trump has the GOP shooting at themselves while Hillary and possibly Biden are playing nice with each other making the press report how much in disarray the Republicans are. This is a serious mistake on the part of the GOP. When the Democrats best hope is Hillary, who is possibly looking at being indicted, and they are hoping that Joe Biden jumps in the race to give them someone, it’s the Democrats that are in disarray. Doesn’t anyone remember Biden’s previous runs for President? He’s a walking disaster.

Now we’ve got the House Republicans jumping in criticizing the Benghazi committee and the games being played for the speakership of the House.

The GOP had better get away from the circular firing squad and start remembering Reagans eleventh commandment (Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.), or the only ones left standing are the two worst possibilities for President. Hillary and/or Biden. Oh, and it might be a good idea for these GOP candidates to put their egos on hold and try to understand that the people that vote are tired of professional politicians. Either find a way to do as the people want, or get out of the race.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Gun Control. Again and again and again...

President Obama said that he wanted to politicize the shootings following the shooting in Oregon last week. He stopped off there to speak to the victims that were willing to see him before moving on to a fundraiser for Senator Patty Murray.

He has claimed that Congress needs to address gun control following several of the more recent shootings. Now he’s talking about using executive orders to get what he wants regardless of what the American citizens want. Yet none of his proposals would have prevented even one of these shootings.

So let’s take a look at the shootings and some of the similarities in each of them.

Chattanooga, Tennessee:

One shooter, first fired 30 rounds into a recruiting center, then went to the Naval Reserve and shot more.

Five dead, one wounded. The shooter was the only one with a gun.

Charleston, South Carolina:

One shooter. 9 dead. The shooter was the only one with a gun.

Sandy Hook, Newtown, Connecticut

One shooter. 27 dead 1 injured. The shooter was the only one with a gun.

Aurora, Colorado

One shooter. 12 dead. 70 wounded. The shooter was the only one with a gun.

Tucson, Arizona Supermarket

One shooter. 6 dead 12 wounded. Two people had a gun. The shooter had a gun, but he had finished with the shooting when the second person with a gun showed up to help subdue the shooter. So he never drew his weapon.

Umpqua Community College, Roseburg, Oregon

One shooter. 9 dead, 9 wounded.

Above are six shootings. There were six shooters and seven that had a weapon. The results of those six shootings are 59 dead. 93 wounded.

In each of the shootings, the motive was not about robbery. They weren’t robbing any stores, places of business or even individuals of their cash on hand. In fact, in one case, the Aurora Colorado shooting, the gunman had to pay five or six dollars for a ticket to the movie theater. In each of these shootings, it appears as though the sole purpose was to kill many people. Where is the best place to accomplish your purpose? Where there are people and where they are unlikely to have armed confrontation as they begin their shootings. Notice they aren’t choosing police stations or even gun shows.

Shooters go after the vulnerable. Who is more vulnerable than children? What gets the most attention if you’re intending to harm a large group of people? Children.

Obama’s answer seems to be to stop people from having guns and creating gun free zones where you aren’t allowed to have guns. However, Umqua Community College was a gun free zone. Even their security guard didn’t carry a weapon. Apparently, the president doesn’t realize that labeling an area a gun free zone doesn’t stop people that want to inflict the most harm on people from going to those places that are gun free zones.

At Sandy Hook school, the shooter found the children and a teacher huddled in a class room and just began shooting them. They had no weapons to shoot back with and there was nobody around that carried a gun that could stop him from killing all of those kids. At Umqua, nobody was armed. Gun free zone! So the shooter walked into a class room, told individuals to stand up one by one and asked if they were Christian. If they said yes, he shot them in the head.

There is one place that gun control actually worked, but I doubt that the president will even consider that one as reasonable. In Tucson, where Representative Gabby Giffords was shot, the shooter killed 6 and wounded 12. When he dropped his clip as he was reloading some quick thinking citizens jumped him. One person that helped subdue him actually showed up as the shooter was being subdued. Joseph Zumudio had a gun on him but he exerted gun control by not drawing his weapon when the shooter was actually losing his battle at getting free to do more shooting, and instead Zumudio  helped subdue him rather than just pulling his gun and shooting the shooter. That was the only form of gun control that worked!

You are not going to stop shootings by banning guns. Not by law and not by policy. Trying to appeal to their sense of right and wrong or even to appeal to their consideration of children or respect for human life is not going to work. They are selfish most of the time, and are only looking to make a name for themselves or only thinking of lashing out and hurting someone or a large group because they are upset about something in their own lives, and they have no respect for others or their lives.

They don’t care that they are about to shoot children. They only care that they have the power because they know that the children will not shoot back. They choose a school that is designated a gun free zone because they know that they will be the only one with a gun until the police show up and they intend to die anyway.

During the 1990’s anytime the liberals wanted to get some law passed they claimed it was the right thing to do “for the children”. Or just do it “for the children”.  Even out in California they are forcing parents to get vaccinations for their kids and there will be no more tolerance for those with religious or personal convictions about immunizations. So why can’t these schools protect the children from those that would do them harm? They could easily protect them by allowing their security staff to be armed. Or having weapons on hand for self defense for the adults in the school such as teachers or administrative staff to use to protect the children.

Perhaps if a shooter shows up at a school where there are arms for protection, some will die, but less would die if the people that work and attend the school at least have something to defend themselves. Perhaps a classroom full of first graders wouldn’t be massacred if someone was able to shoot back at someone that came in shooting.

Even when I was in school back in the 60’s, we had preparations for a nuclear bomb (although hiding under the desks wasn’t going to give much protection), but we also had fire drills, and tornado drills. Even in office buildings, there are signs showing you the exits in case of a fire and a sign at the elevator telling you not to use the elevator in case of a fire.

What do we do for children in a school in case of a shooting? In Sandy Hook, they hid in a closet where they were all bunched together making them easy targets for a shooter.

Dr. Ben Carson has been raked over the coals by the press lately because he suggested that if a shooter came in where he was with a group, he thought he and others would just rush the shooter. One or two may get shot, but not the entire room. That at least is a plan of action in case something happens. Lives may be lost, but more would be saved.

But the president and the rest of the liberals jump up before the bodies have even been moved and before the wounded even get to the hospital and says we need gun safety laws, which is nothing more than code words for gun control.

It only makes sense, I guess , that the president would think that gun control would work. After all, he apparently believes that the Iranians will keep their word.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Mr. President: Please Sit and Be Quiet

Today, there was another mass shooting. This time in Oregon at a community college. Very little is publicly known yet. There was a shooter who is now dead, and many dead at the hand of the shooter as well as many wounded. That is just about the extent of our knowledge at this time.

Within four hours of the shooting President Obama held a press conference scolding Congress for not passing a gun “safety” law. I put the “safety” part in quotes because it seems that this is the new name for gun control.

Global warming is now “climate change”. Teachers are now “educators”. Gun control is now “gun safety”.

Mr. President, please sit down and stop talking. Just go sit in the corner for the next 15 months and play tetris on your Obama phone. We’re sick of your incompetence and your games.

You have blamed the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan on President Bush.  You and your minions always go to the line “we never should have been in Iraq to begin with” as though that’s some sort of an answer to the mess you’ve made in the middle east. Let’s try some truth for a change.

When George Bush took over the Presidency in January 2001, it was widely known and reported that the United States Intelligence had been starkly diminished during the eight years of the Clintons. Seven months into Bush’s presidency, this nation was attacked. Nearly 3,000 dead from four planes. Two into the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon, and one that crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. That one didn’t harm anyone in Washington DC because the American citizens on that plane saved the lives of either Congress or the lives of those at the White House by trying to take the plane back. They weren’t “ordinary” Americans, they were heroes! 

That attack took place on September 11, 2001. 7 months into his presidency, and remember, his presidency started off slow because the election was contested for over 35 days and then delayed a bit by the childishness of the Democrats leaving the White House taking the W’s off of the computer keyboards as they left. But those petty occurances didn’t deter Bush. He began bombing in Afghanistan on October 7. Less than 30 days after the attack! That sir, is Presidential. Acting with decisiveness and not making excuses. Having a clear plan and strategy and not running away and hiding from the problem. 

If you’d like to claim that the entry into Iraq was wrong, have at it. But with the intelligence we had at the time, Bush was right to go to Iraq. Perhaps you don’t remember that a substantial majority (including Senator Hillary Clinton) voted in agreement for that war.

If there was a problem with Iraq when you took over, that’s fine. But blaming it on President Bush is asinine. It’s now been 6+ years and you’re still complaining that we shouldn’t have been there? Had you been presidential, you’d have stopped your whining about how we got there, and blaming President Bush, and if you felt it was wrong, you’d have found a way to solve it and get out of that war without creating all of the problems we have now. Keeping the American spirit and preserving American dignity. 

You drew a red line in Syria, but you didn’t hold to your words. Your Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton brought out some cheesy button and called it a reset button for the Russians to push. Your concern was to get a deal with Iran. You got your deal, but America got screwed with more screwing to come. Just those three things, let’s look at what the results are. The Russians have now moved into Syria ostensibly to fight ISIS, but they are attacking the rebels (that we back) instead. Today, the Iranians moved into Syria for the ground war to clean up any surviving members of the rebels. The rebels are not ISIS. They want Assad out and are trying to do something about it. We want Assad out but all that's provided from this administration is hot air. 

Apparently, the red line you drew was in our friends blood. The reset button Hillary pushed with the Russians set in motion a new day where the Russians no longer care what the U. S. says because the President of the United States hasn’t the wherewithal to follow through on his own words. In other words Mr. President, the world says you’re weak!

Now you want to bring in refugees from Syria. Please tell us how long before we find out how many terrorists snuck in with those refugees.

You have opened the borders and by-passed Congress on the southern border of this country. We now have illegal aliens here that are unsavory at best. Murderers and rapists at worst. How many terrorists have slipped by into this country from the south since you stopped enforcing our laws on entry into this country?

Now you want gun control again because of another shooting on your watch? Well, I refuse to give up my guns. This country is not safe any longer because of your failures as President of this country. How do I defend my family, friends, neighbors and myself when one of the terrorists decides that they want to attack an area that I happen to be in on any particular day? We certainly can’t talk terrorists out of what they want to do. Need proof? Look at Iran. All of your talking got a deal…for the Iranians. Nothing for the United States of America! Even while negotiating, they were saying "death to America". 

It’s time that another approach was taken to these shootings. Perhaps arming  the potential victims instead. When we can shoot back, most of those that want to shoot up a school or movie theater, will think twice before trying. Please don’t suggest that this is ridiculous. I’ll just remind you again that it was American citizens on a hijacked plane that probably saved many Congressman and women from certain death by fighting back and taking the plane.

Taking our guns away will only embolden our enemies. I think you’ve spent nearly 7 years doing that and it’s made us the laughing stock of the world and put American lives in danger at home.

While I’m in a disgusted mood, I’ll add one more thing. You traded five terrorists for one of our soldiers that apparently deserted to join the other side. Yes, I’m talking about Bergdahl. You left four American hostages in Iran and didn’t even try to get them as part of this all important (to you) deal with Iran. Now, there is an outrageous event taking place. Sgt. Charles Martland, a Green Beret is being kicked out of the army for going after an Afghan police commander who had raped a 12 year old boy and beat his mother and did this on an American base. In addition to that, this police commander was trained by the US military and that training paid for by our tax dollars!

I suppose it makes sense that you’d want to disarm Americans and not allow us to protect ourselves from those that would do us harm domestically and abroad. In my opinion, that Green Beret is too good to be commanded by such an incompetent commander in chief.

You did as was predicted and cut and ran from Iraq and about to from Afghanistan. You’ve negotiated with terrorists (Iran) and gotten the deal you wanted despite 70% of the country not liking the deal. You wanted it to be your legacy along with Obama care. Obamacare failed and  your deal with Iran failed to obtain anything for our country.  So I beg you to just go sit in the corner and play whatever games are on your Obama phone. We American citizens will do better for ourselves without your interference.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

CNN: Debate or bashfest

How many times have you heard someone say, “I went to the fights last night and a hockey game broke out.” Or at a football game where the officials are the story and the players aren’t really allowed to play.

After the first debate, I said that I thought that Fox News put on a professional debate and they were the clear winner. Last nights debate was an embarrassment for CNN. You’d be hard pressed to find a sound byte of one of the candidates where you don’t hear Jake Tapper saying “Thank you Governor”, or “Thank you Senator” to stop; them from talking. Where were Dana Bash and Hugh Hewitt?

With eleven candidates on stage and only three hours for the debate for those eleven, it’s understandable that their time would have to be limited on each question, but some sort of a warning that they were going over would be appropriate. Talking over them and the last sentence or two that they are trying to say is annoying at best. Using a light as a warning their time was running out would have been good. A short bell when their time expired would be good, but to interrupt them where you couldn’t understand what was being said was not very professional.

CNN created their own problems with this debate. First, the qualifications for the candidates to earn their spot on the stage was flawed. Originally, CNN said they would use the average of the polls dating back to July. This meant that a candidate from the bottom performers would have a harder time moving up and it appeared it would work out unfairly for Carly Fiorina. She clearly impressed everyone in the early Fox debate which was sometimes called the kids table. Her numbers were moving up, but what was dragging her down were the polls prior to the debate.

CNN went politically correct after the criticism started coming up. They were leaving out a woman because her early polls when she wasn’t very well known were holding her back. So CNN knuckled under and created a change in the rules so that she could qualify. But they apparently thought they would be unfair if they had to remove someone else with this new “special exemption” for Fiorina. So they added her rather than eliminating the lowest candidate with their new criteria.

Had they left it alone, Fiorina actually did qualify even under their first set of guidelines. Had they left it alone, Fiorina would have bumped out either Chris Christie or Rand Paul. But by creating the exemption, worried about the feelings of whoever would be knocked off the big stage. So either Rand Paul or Chris Christie were onstage when they shouldn’t have. CNN’s political correctness helped a white man. That’s not likely ever their intention.

CNN created another problem. Their stated intention was to get the candidates to do battle against each other. They wanted the knock down drag out fight between the candidates. Perhaps they thought it would help the Democrats, or help their ratings, or create news for their Sunday program and all of their political programs leading up to Sundays talk show. However, with all of that time spent trying to get the candidates into a fistfight on stage, we didn’t hear about the economy, the $18 trillion debt, social security failing, and veterans dying while waiting for the doctors to see them.  Compare this to how Fox handled  their questions.

During the Fox debate, the moderators asked questions of the candidates about their own words that they seem to have changed over time. For instance, someone was asked about their abortion views and how they are different from what they used to be. However, CNN decided they were going to ask a candidate about what another candidate said about them and then said “how do you want to respond to them about what they said”. CNN was trying to create news rather than reporting news that came from the debate without prodding.

To the candidates credit, for the most part, they didn’t take the bait. The perfect example was Carly Fiorina. She was asked about Donald Trumps comment about her face and being President. She made the comment that Trump had heard Jeb Bush on another topic, and that the women of this country had heard what Trump said. She didn’t talk about his hair, or his lack of humility.

On the other hand, right out of the gate, Rand Paul and Donald Trump had a brief face spitting contest. Later in the debate, the candidates began to get a little testy, especially Chris Christie with his comments about how the people don’t care about Trumps and Fiorina’s careers, while talking about his past as a U.S. Attorney.

The candidates for the most part were the class act on CNN. CNN’s structure of the debate was flawed and embarrassing.

Last night, people tuned in to see a fight and a debate broke out. However, even for this political junkie, a three hour debate is too long.

Two cuts from the debate that impressed me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cy5mYuyMCA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDW9J_yKLkk           

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Republic vs. democracy

Too many times politicians will go on talk shows or at press conferences talking about their particular topic and they will usually say at some point, “this is a democracy” or “the last time I looked we live in a democratic society” or even, “this is no way to run a democracy”.

So what is the difference between a democracy and a republic? It’s really a very simple definition. A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority. A republic is a representative government ruled by a Constitution, or laws.

In both forms, the people elect their representatives. In both forms, the one that gets the most votes wins the seat. It’s what happens after that election that shows which is which.

In the republican form of government, the Constitution limits the powers of the government to protect the people. Basically, that means that the power is in the hands of the people, or the citizenry, and that power is lent to the government.

In the democratic form of government, they only need to change the hearts and minds of the voters to make changes to the law or to create laws and the Constitution is not necessarily considered.

Try to imagine something if you can. Suppose the government didn’t have the money to give to people that didn’t have a job or were disabled. How would those people eat? Get shelter for themselves? Survive  the winters without heat? There’s really only three ways for them to achieve this that is legal. First, find a job. Second, charity, third, turn to a life of crime.

A life of crime is simple. They’ll eventually get caught and be put in jail. Food and shelter are then provided. Charity would depend on the hearts of those giving that cared enough for their fellow man. Charitable giving always goes up when taxes are lower and the economy is flourishing. But when taxes go up, charitable giving comes down. When the economy is bad, as it tends to get when taxes are increased, charitable giving goes down.

In the 1960’s, President Johnson called for a war on poverty and began the dependent society. However, the highest tax rate was 70% and they still didn’t have enough money to give to the poor and we’ve never eradicated poverty. President Reagan reduced the highest tax rate from 70% to 28% and more people went to work, but the welfare never stopped.

Now we are $18 Trillion in debt. The majority voted themselves money and continue to do so, but those in poverty are still in poverty. Those dependent on government for their existence are still dependant on government. We will reach a point, in a few short years where we will not be able to give money to the poor that don’t work but could. The government is likely to increase taxes at that point, which will drive the poverty rate higher causing the government to need more money, which means more debt until we’ve lost not only the poor, but the middle class as well. All because the majority voted for money for themselves without regard for their own responsibilities.

Another way is for the government to create a climate in this country where work is rewarded. Where earning money is not punishable. People will have more money, and not because they voted themselves more money but instead because they went out and earned more money. The economy would improve because people have more money to save and spend which creates more goods sold, taxes generated, and better and improving lifestyle for all.

We then have charities returning to help out the disabled. To either find them a way to create their own business that can fit their disability, or help them if they just aren’t able to work.

In a republic, our elected officials are required to give an oath to the Constitution. The Constitution is our rule of law. When our elected representative ignores laws he or she doesn’t like, they are not honoring their oath. They should be impeached and then removed from office and replaced with someone that will honor their oath. Their word.

Yes, a republic can be a bit tougher than a democracy. A republic isn’t for voting money for certain groups. It’s in place for all of the people equally. So when you pay your tax dollars, it’s going for the protection of our shores and running our limited government. When it’s given away to those that refuse to work, your money is paying for someone not to work. Or if the government is funding some institution that you don’t believe in, your money is being confiscated for a use that may go against your beliefs be they beliefs of conscious or even religion.

A republic vs. a democracy. It would be a good idea for all to know the difference and its application before they go into the voting booth and choose which person they want to put in the position of making the decisions of what to do with the hard earned money you pay in taxes.

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Outsider vs. Establishment

For years, the Democrats have been playing on people’s feelings while Republicans were talking about the actual outcomes of different policies that have been put out there and the Republicans were not fighting back against the Democrats rhetoric.

A very good example is government spending. During the 90’s the Democrats talked about how they were lowering spending when in fact, they weren’t cutting spending, they were only cutting the size of the increase in spending. If the government had paid 4% more last year than they did the previous year, and this year they were going only increasing spending by 3%, they would call that a reduction in spending. However, when the Republicans reduced the increase in spending from 4% to 3% the following year, the Democrats would call it a “cut” and then claim that Republicans hated children or the elderly or the homeless or whatever particular area was being cut.

Another example may be about to play out again soon. Recently, there have been videos come out that showed Planned Parenthood is selling body parts from aborted babies, for a profit, which is illegal. With the coming debt ceiling limit being reached, Republicans are saying they will cut funding for Planned Parenthood. President Obama says that if Planned Parenthood’s funds are cut, he’ll veto it. This standoff could lead to another government shutdown.

This is already being portrayed as the Republicans shutting down the government and not Obama. So what’s the message? It’s okay for the Republicans to cave in and fund Planned Parenthood to avoid shutting down the government. If they don’t, the Democrats will portray them as being women haters and not caring about the health of women, regardless of the law. So the Republicans are likely to back down, especially with the likes of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner running the two houses of Congress. They are the establishment. They don’t fight back, they capitulate to protect their image.

In 2013, Senator Ted Cruz was blamed by Democrats and the media for the government shutdown. What’s disturbing is that some in the Republican party also blamed Cruz for the shutdown. But, what were the results? The Republicans had massive gains in the election of 2014. They increased their lead in the House and they took over the majority in the Senate. Yet, the Republicans are still afraid of government shutdown talk and still back away.

The Republicans promised to defund Obamacare and to eliminate Obama’s executive order regarding illegal immigration. But, once elected, they backed down. It seems that the “establishment” Republicans feel that they saved themselves with the promise of defunding, from the shut down of 2013. Their re-election is more important than their words and their promises which is why they were elected and given a large majority in the House and the majority in the Senate.

The founding fathers didn’t want a monarchy. They wanted a citizen government and set it up that way. The people choose their representatives in government. The requirements were that you be natural born, at least had 14 years of residence in the U. S., and be over 35 years of age. Not born of a political family, or have a certain amount of schooling in Political Science, or any other criteria. A citizen government. Having professional politicians is what’s given us corruption, and an $18 Trillion debt that’s still growing .

Enter Donald Trump! Illegal immigration was dying. He revived it in his first speech saying Mexico wasn’t sending their best citizens, they were sending their worst. Murderers, rapists, etc. He also said that some were good, “I assume” but a good portion were not good citizens.

Because of Donald Trump, it was noticed nationwide when Kate Steinle was murdered by an illegal alien who had been deported 5 times and still came back. Because of Donald Trump we now know that 70% of illegal aliens are collecting welfare. They come here and we feed, clothe and house them and they get free health care. Well, free for them. The rest of us pay for them.

Trump has also given political correctness a huge smack down. What else do you call it when people come here illegally, have a baby and then stay because the baby is an American citizen? Anchor baby is the term. It’s not derogatory unless you consider using children to break the law and get away with it, derogatory.

Have you heard of McConnell or Boehner talking about Anchor babies? It’s too touchy for them. They don’t want to touch that. It’s too toxic for them because they may come out on the wrong end and cost them their precious leadership positions.

Donald Trump is an outsider. He’s not part of the establishment. Because he’s not part of the establishment, politicians have attacked. Senator Rand Paul attacked. He’s fallen way back and is not a factor lately. Former Texas Governor Rick Perry attacked and he fell in the polls so far that he’s now decided to drop out of the race. Now Governor Bobby Jindahl of Louisiana is on the attack. He’s already down in the polls and has been since he got in. Apparently, he’s trying to remind people he’s still out there.

Trump has made two mistakes, and yes, I realize it’s not a good idea to say he makes mistakes because everytime he says something that everyone thinks is outrageous, his numbers get better. However, he has made two mistakes. His attack on Megyn Kelly, saying “she’s bleeding out of her eyes and wherever”. He may not have meant anything regarding menstrual cycles, but it came across that way and it was an unwarranted attack on a female. Now in the past few days, it’s come out that he said to Rolling Stone about Carly Fiorna, who would elect that face.

Personal attacks on appearance or bodily functions are cheap shots. He’s not as rich as he claims when he says those things, and I’m not talking about financial wealth.

Dr. Ben Carson is another outsider. Soft spoken, deliberate, almost boring. Except in his words. He’s obviously been very thoughtful in what he believes and how he presents himself. He may be the only one that can get the GOP back into contention with people that are black and guide everyone to see each other as Americans and not as one color or the other who just happen to be Americans. Americans first, race second or ideally no race distinction at all.

Carly Fiorina is another outsider. She is also deliberate, although she speaks faster than Carson. However, that’s not hard to do. Fiorina came out and immediately went after Hillary saying Hillary has lied about Benghazi, lied about E-mail and lied about her server. When she’s asked a question it’s like she has a file cabinet in her head and she pulls out the file on that topic and gives her answer. She has a message, states it and never seems to lose her cool. Even after Trumps attack on her looks, her answer was to say “I am proud of every year and every wrinkle.”

The ones that are most likely not to accept the mainstream media, and the Democrat Party from labeling the Republicans as not caring about the children, women or immigrants are Trump, Carson.

Ideally, we’ll get Trumps enthusiasm, with Fiorina’s sharpness and knowledge  and Carsons demeanor. These three seem to be what the American people prefer.

Over the next year it will be interesting to see if we’re still talking about Outsider vs. Establishment when it comes down to Republican vs. Democrat.

If a prediction is required about the debate this week, the prediction would be that Carson and Fiorina would have the best debate results.

Which is the preference for the nominee of the Republican party? For my own part, I haven’t decided yet. As for my current preference, I’m not going to tell you who “she” is just yet. What’s a little writing without a bit of fun?

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

A Clerk Stands up for a Principle

A line in the sand has been drawn in Moorhead Kentucky. The recent Supreme Court ruling regarding same sex marriage has not only touched American business, but has now touched American Government!

Kim Davis is the clerk in Moorhead Kentucky. Her mother was the clerk before her for 42 years and Mrs. Davis was elected last November to replace her retiring mother. Among the duties of the clerk is to issue marriage licenses.

Davis is now refusing to issue any marriage licenses. She’s not issuing them to gays and she’s not issuing them to straight people wanting to get married. Her reasoning is based on her religious faith. She sees it as a choice between the Supreme Court of the United States and God. In her case, God wins!

Davis was ordered by a federal court to issue the licenses. She still refused. The Supreme Court refused to hear her appeal, so the last order was to stand, which meant that she was to issue marriage licenses. She continues to refuse. Finally!! Someone in this country that stands up for a principle and for God!

She faces up to a year in prison for refusing to follow a court order. The only way she can lose her job is to be impeached by the State Legislature. Are the courts really going to send an American citizen to jail for following her religious beliefs? Possibly. Will the legislature really impeach her?

Imagine if she’s sent to prison. She will be sent there in violation of her religious freedom. She could also remain clerk while in prison. She could order her employees to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses. What happens then? Do they start imprisoning all of the employees or just add on to Davis’ sentence?

Or another scenario. If she’s sent to prison, will the legislature then impeach her and remove her from office? If so, will the people of Moorhead stand up and re-elect her to the clerk’s position despite her being in prison?

The Supreme Court has created a very serious problem for themselves as well as the American people. At some point this topic could go back before the Supreme Court. Our Constitution says that Congress shall make no law respecting religion. But it doesn’t say anything about the Supreme Court making a law regarding religion which is what they have in effect done.

Kim Davis could actually be the catalyst to get this topic before the Supreme Court again and hopefully overturn themselves.

Kim Davis ought to be applauded for standing up for her principle and standing up for God! The amazing thing is that Kim Davis is a Democrat! Maybe there is still hope for this Country!

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett

Who Won the Fox News Debate?

Who won the Fox News Debate? There were seventeen candidates in all. Seven of them were on the stage at 5:00 and ten were on the stage at 9:00. The prime time debate had the top ten in an average of polls. The rest were at the earlier debate.

The bulk of the coverage leading up to the debate was about Donald Trump and then who would qualify to be on the Prime Time debate. Trump has tapped into something in this race that the pundits are trying to figure out and explain at the same time.

They call his comments controversial. Mostly because he doesn’t speak as a politician. Well, he’s not a politician. When Trump announced he was running for President, he gave his speech. It didn’t appear to be a written speech. He had an order he wanted to say things but he spoke off the cuff, I believe. Here’s what started it off:

“The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems. Thank you. It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.

It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast”.

Trump was right. He just wasn’t polished in what he said. Remember the summer of 2014? We were bombarded with stories of people coming from south of the border. They were taking trains through Mexico to get here. They were walking and crossing the border by foot. Children were being raped and murdered. Some were crossing with other adults that they weren’t related to. Then when caught here they were placed in facilities with scabbies, lice and other medical problems. We were flying them to other facilities because they were filling up at the crossing in Texas.

Donald Trump is a businessman. He’s a presence. He walks into a room and is dynamic and outspoken and upbeat. But he really doesn’t dot the “I’s” and cross the “t’s”. He hires the lawyers to put those things together. He’s like that with his run for presidency. He’s not a refined politician. He says what he thinks in a rambling sort of way then spends a day cleaning up others misunderstandings of what he’s said. It appears though that the American people, or a substantial number of them, understand what he means. He’s saying what they think. This has the “professional” politicians confused and upset.

Politicians have the wording down pat for the most part. They’ll say their piece, but not be overly offensive. They all get along together for the most part. They play war on debates, but they are pretty much buddy buddy the rest of the time. This has them very confused when it comes to Donald Trump.

Let’s look back. In 2008, did we really want John McCain for our candidate? Was he really the best? Just a couple of years earlier there was speculation that he was going to change parties. He wasn’t and isn’t a conservative. My own personal opinion was that I was not going to vote for him. I was going to leave the President selection on my ballot blank. But then he brought in Sarah Palin as his VP nominee. I could then vote for him. But it was really a vote for her. He just happened to be on the ticket.

2012. Mitt Romney. He wasn’t conservative. But he wasn’t Obama. He didn’t have socialistic tendencies. Was he the best we could have put out there? No. Also in 2012, we had the Republicans take over the House and make gains in the Senate although not enough to become the majority. The House promised to take three days to read bills. To be more inclusive with the Tea Party who were really putting the Republicans back on the map. But they didn’t follow through.

In 2014, they promised to defund Obamacare, not fund the executive order on amnesty. This gave the Republicans record numbers dating back to the 1920’s and in the Senate a substantial gain giving them the  majority. But once in office, they did everything the opposite  of what they’d promised. Trump has no hesitation in saying what we think.

Then the attacks come from the politicians on Trump. Senator Rand Paul and Senator Lindsay Graham claim that Trump isn’t qualified to be President. They should know better. Rand Paul shouts about the constitution all of the time. He should read it. Trump is qualified.

In the 2014 election, where I used to live Representative Justin Amash had an opponent, Brian Ellis, in the primary. He refused to debate Ellis. His reason was that he didn’t think his opponent was running a proper campaign. He said that Ellis didn’t have a “serious or credible” campaign. Now we’re seeing much the same thing with this crop of candidates regarding Donald Trump. Trump is not playing by their rules. They don’t know how to handle him.

The American people have heard the politicians and then seen if they do what they say when applying for the job and find that they don’t. How many years have we been hearing about fixing Social Security? Anything been done?

However, Donald Trump was not the winner in the Fox News Debate. There are seventeen candidates.

Former Governors: Bush, Gilmore, Huckabee, Pataki and Perry.

Sitting Governors: Christie, Jindahl, Kasich, and Walker

Former Senators: Santorum,

Sitting Senators: In their first term;Cruz, Paul and Rubio, and one experienced Senator, Graham.

Private Sector Candidates: Dr. Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and Donald Trump.

Governor Kasich, Senator Cruz, Senator Rubio, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina were probably the highlights and Fiorina wasn’t even on the prime time stage.

Having said all of this, you’re probably guessing that Donald Trump is thought to be the winner of this debate. You would be guessing wrong. The true winner of the Fox News Debates was actually the trio of Bret Baier, Meghan Kelly, and Chris Wallace!

They came prepared. They each asked very tough questions, especially in the first round of questions. They pointed out the contradictions of each candidate and what they’d said in the past and what they say now and asked them to explain themselves.

Fox News is ridiculed by the mainstream media as being biased towards Republicans. Even they were praising the debate and how Fox did. When have we seen this tough of a debate in the past? CNN throws softball questions at Democrat candidates. Last time, Candy Crowley went so far as to tell Mitt Romney that he was wrong about Obama’s words in the Rose Garden following the attack in Benghazi. Crowley was wrong but due to her interference and challenge to Romney where Obama wasn’t challenging him, Romney was off his game and many thought the debate went to Obama. It really went to CNN and Candy Crowley.

The same could be said for ABC, NBC, CBS when they moderate debates. It’s softball questions, or “feel good” questions to the Democrats. Fox News though was very tough on all of the candidates. That includes the early debate with Bill Hemmer and Martha MacCallum as moderators.

Fox News and their moderators were by far the winners in the debates!

You’re welcome to comment.

Brett