Aren't you glad this crap is about over? I sure am. That's sad to feel that way about a presidential election, but that's the way I feel. It's not only sad, it's foreboding. I don't see anything good for us or the country coming out of this election, and it matters not who wins. If you've been reading my past posts on my blog, you'll have noticed that I have not made any statements or implications that I favored one candidate over the other. I think of myself as a conservative, not a Republican, I don't associate with any party ideals. I have conservative values and that's it. Admittedly, it's the Republican candidate in past elections that most closely align with conservative values so that's who I've voted for.
But this election is different. My conservative values have had to take a back seat. There are much more important things to consider. Like some of the bad shit that will happen if either of these shitheads take office. But first, let me make one important point. Not that anything that concerns me is all that important, but humor me for just a minute. Right now, at this moment in time, I am not planning to cast a ballot for either Trump or Clinton. And yes, I am going to vote. Why, you ask? I thought you'd never ask...
Let's start with Trump. One of the topics in the debate last night was fitness for the presidency. Based on the responses, and everything I've heard either of them say or do, ever, in my opinion, no. When asked what made him fit to be president Trump answered "I started a phenomenal company, a great company that has made billions of dollars", blah, blah, blah... But being president is being the nation's top diplomat. We have to get along with the rest of the world and at times settle disputes when other countries have differences. When WE have differences with other countries and hopefully do it peacefully. It should be obvious to even the most casual observer that that would require someone with patience, tolerance and compassion. Someone with a sound mien and respected character. Someone who is respectful of others. Someone with a solid, unmovable vision of the right thing to do. Does that sound like Donald Trump? Stop laughing, I'm not done yet. By all appearances Donald Trump is a solipsistic prick. He likes things his way and when they don't go his way he becomes bullish. Can you imagine being a businessman and doing business with him? I can't.
Now let's take a look at Hillary Clinton. Do the qualities I listed above sound like Hillary's qualities? Ask the 46 people who have had some sort of conflict of interest or may have gotten in the way of the Clinton's interests who are now dead. Dead under dubious circumstances. Don't take my word for this, Google it and read for yourself. No, I'm sorry, 46 is not a long string of coincidences. That even goes way beyond Murphy's Law. Ask the parents and loved ones of the four who were killed by terrorists at the embassy compound in Benghazi. And lied to about it. Ask Mary Mahoney's family about it. She was a lesbian intern when Bill was president who the other interns often turned to regarding Bill's disproportionate interest in interns. She was murdered at a local Starbucks where she worked as a night manager. Her and two other employees were shot in the head, one's body was riddled with bullets. Guess which one. The restaurant was not robbed. This happened just a couple of days after the Lewinsky scandal broke and news of other Clinton dalliances. Coincidence? Maybe. Maybe not... She would have been a star witness in the impeachment trials.
If you really want to know what kind of person she is ask the Secret Service and White House staff assigned to the Clintons. It's public information, it's been published.
My biggest hang up with Clinton? She's disingenuous to the point of being a pathological liar. Lying does not bother this woman in the least. About anything... How can we in good conscience, elect someone who cannot, will not tell the truth when it serves her interest not to.
No, I will not vote for either on November 8th. Not gonna happen. For the next four years when everything is going to hell in a handbasket, I'll be able to at least say I didn't vote for either idiot.
So I know you're thinking, if he doesn't vote for Trump or Clinton that only leaves two other candidates. No name candidates that we know little to nothing about. One of them might make a good president, who knows. If you consider yourself an informed voter you don't vote for someone and hope for the best. At the least, you need a good reason to believe that they will be a good, competent president.
Competent president. How long has it been since we had one of those? Like most of my friends I consider myself an informed voter and a reasonably intelligent person. Someone who can sift through the muddy river of information that is the internet and figure out what's crap and what's not. This time, in this election, what we learn about the candidates is not good. It's discouraging and disheartening. But it's what we've got.
So what's really going on...
News just came out a couple of days ago that the Ecuadorian Embassy has cut off Julian Assange's internet access. The access that he has had since 2012. Now that's interesting, what could possibly be the motive behind that? Sure, he's a controversial fellow that has a tendency to piss off politicos (mostly American). And Sweden wants him extradited to face charges of sexual molestation of a couple of WikiLeaks supporters, but after four years, why now? There has to be some political pressure coming from somewhere but so far, no news as to where it's coming from or why.
Trump is bleating crap about the election being rigged, which is possible I suppose, but not really likely. The DNC is carrying on about the Russians being involved in trying to influence the outcome of the election. Of course, Putin denies it all saying we're not doing anything to influence your stupid election, what the hell do we care. Keep in mind that Putin is sort of like a lawyer, if his lips are moving, he's lying.
Let's go back to Assange. Losing his internet access is major. Then again, if drug lords and thugs can run their operations from inside prison walls then Assange can certainly carry on the business of WikiLeaks from inside the Ecuadorian embassy without internet access. Here's why I say it's major. I believe that some time before the election, WikiLeaks is going to release something that sinks Hillary. Something huge that literally blows her out of the water. I have no idea what, but I think it's coming. And with only about twenty-five days to go, it's coming pretty soon. I don't think Assange has any particular affinity for Trump or on the other hand a vendetta for Clinton, this is just what he does. But the implications of something like that, well, that's pretty obvious.
Whether Clinton wins or Trump it's not going to be good. There's no need to go into any details there, you've been keeping up just like I have. They both suck. Really bad. Neither is fit to be president. Not even close. I keep asking myself, just as you have probably, how the hell did this happen? We had a chance, lots of them to elect knowledgeable, competent, and not nearly as crooked candidates. And look who's standing on the stage. Bravo America. Bravo. Dare I say, we're going to regret this.
But these events that I have described above, there's an underpinning here. Don't know exactly what it is, but there's something going on. Something that is going to change history, and not necessarily for the better. There's some sly, cunning crap going on somewhere and I'm not talking about the sophomoric bullshit from Don and Hill. It's much bigger than that. But seriously, what is going on? I guess we'll find out soon...
Trump is bleating crap about the election being rigged, which is possible I suppose, but not really likely. The DNC is carrying on about the Russians being involved in trying to influence the outcome of the election. Of course, Putin denies it all saying we're not doing anything to influence your stupid election, what the hell do we care. Keep in mind that Putin is sort of like a lawyer, if his lips are moving, he's lying.
Let's go back to Assange. Losing his internet access is major. Then again, if drug lords and thugs can run their operations from inside prison walls then Assange can certainly carry on the business of WikiLeaks from inside the Ecuadorian embassy without internet access. Here's why I say it's major. I believe that some time before the election, WikiLeaks is going to release something that sinks Hillary. Something huge that literally blows her out of the water. I have no idea what, but I think it's coming. And with only about twenty-five days to go, it's coming pretty soon. I don't think Assange has any particular affinity for Trump or on the other hand a vendetta for Clinton, this is just what he does. But the implications of something like that, well, that's pretty obvious.
Whether Clinton wins or Trump it's not going to be good. There's no need to go into any details there, you've been keeping up just like I have. They both suck. Really bad. Neither is fit to be president. Not even close. I keep asking myself, just as you have probably, how the hell did this happen? We had a chance, lots of them to elect knowledgeable, competent, and not nearly as crooked candidates. And look who's standing on the stage. Bravo America. Bravo. Dare I say, we're going to regret this.
But these events that I have described above, there's an underpinning here. Don't know exactly what it is, but there's something going on. Something that is going to change history, and not necessarily for the better. There's some sly, cunning crap going on somewhere and I'm not talking about the sophomoric bullshit from Don and Hill. It's much bigger than that. But seriously, what is going on? I guess we'll find out soon...
OK, that's it. I mean really, that's it.
Last night we watched the second presidential debate. It is still hard for me to bring myself to believe that those two asshats are running for the office of the president of the United States of America. Really hard. What's even harder to believe is that one of them is actually going to win and assume the office. Which means making decisions that will affect our lives. At one point it got so ridiculous and absurd Kelly said this is like watching Saturday night Live. And it was. Sad. So very sad.
Politic analysis is not my thing, it's not even one of my aspirations. I have just become so concerned with this pathetic situation that I have started writing about it, and well... I'm still plenty concerned about it, I don't want to live my last years in a great country that is on it's way to being a socialist beta test.
So, enough is enough. I'm no Charles Krauthammer, if you want the best perspective on politics that a great mind can offer read his columns. Me, I'm sticking with other, more important life issues. Like writing great stories. I've got a novel to finish and that's where my mind needs to be. Not on the freak show these two clowns are putting on.
I hate that it is taking this long to write this book. It's terrible. My only excuse is life happened and I got distracted. But it's time to get back to business and get 'er done. I'll be heading up to Buffalo Valley next week. Actually being where most of the story is set should help matters. It'll help me clear out my head if nothing else. And getting back to what I do best. And stop being so distracted...
Politic analysis is not my thing, it's not even one of my aspirations. I have just become so concerned with this pathetic situation that I have started writing about it, and well... I'm still plenty concerned about it, I don't want to live my last years in a great country that is on it's way to being a socialist beta test.
So, enough is enough. I'm no Charles Krauthammer, if you want the best perspective on politics that a great mind can offer read his columns. Me, I'm sticking with other, more important life issues. Like writing great stories. I've got a novel to finish and that's where my mind needs to be. Not on the freak show these two clowns are putting on.
I hate that it is taking this long to write this book. It's terrible. My only excuse is life happened and I got distracted. But it's time to get back to business and get 'er done. I'll be heading up to Buffalo Valley next week. Actually being where most of the story is set should help matters. It'll help me clear out my head if nothing else. And getting back to what I do best. And stop being so distracted...
Are you a liberal or a conservative? And how did you get that way?...
Growing up in the 50's and 60's, there were Democrats and Republicans. I happened to grow up in a family of Democrats. The first election I can remember was that between John Kennedy and Richard Nixon. To be honest I have no recall of any talk about liberals or conservatives back then. I'm sure there were some biases at work in choosing a candidate such as physical attractiveness and charisma, I mean come on, this was John Kennedy. Camelot himself. And Nixon? If here had been a grandpa character on Leave it to Beaver it would have been him. I have no doubt that there were plenty of Republicans that were drawn to Kennedy and had no qualms about it. He convinced voters that he would do a great job and we all know history has borne that fact.
I dare say though, that the ideals of the parties have changed over the decades since. Democrats have been the force behind some of the greatest federal programs this country has known. Roosevelt's' New Deal and the creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps was the 'magic' the country needed to recover from the Great Depression. And this was no small feat. FDR's Social Security Act has been taking care of older Americans for almost 90 years. Johnson's Civil Rights Act did more to bring racial equality than any other act of American government. And none of those landmark programs exploited any subgroup of Americans in order for them to succeed. They succeeded because Americans saw the value in them and got behind them.
Such programs seem to be erstwhile memories of our better days as a nation. Legislation and programs today don't measure up to being good for all Americans. They target particular constituencies and it seems, invariably for the purpose of getting votes. As the national debt has grown through the years to fund literally a billion things, government has tried to get creative in ways to fund these partisan oriented programs. In doing so it seems an insipid problem came to light; in order to give someone something you have to take from someone else. As the awareness of this fact of life surfaced we were no longer Democrats and Republicans, we were now liberals and conservatives. The liberals supported the social programs such as welfare and were for increased regulations to keep big business under control. And of course to administer these programs and enforce the regulations government had to grow bigger and more powerful. More money was needed. There is one way for a government to obtain money, to tax. No one likes to pay more tax and the government has taken to targeting a specific sub groups of Americans to tax at higher rates. A mantra that has become so popular is "The rich need to pay their fair share". As if they have been rolling along all this time not paying their fair share. A couple of things need to be clarified (as if that were possible...) though. One is who exactly are "the rich"? The other is what exactly is "their fair share"? The bandwagon to make those freeloaders pay their fair share started filling up quickly, and it only made sense. The rich had too much money, they weren't paying their fair share (if they were they wouldn't have so much money) and if we took more from them we could fund these social programs. Then the poor and needy would benefit (and the sponsoring politicians would get the votes). The rich wouldn't be hurt, after all they have too much money anyway. Laisse fare is doing a terrible job of distributing the wealth so we'll do it for them. How do we know the rich have too much money? The government said so... Now, everyone is better off. Right?
Wrong. Higher taxes stifle economic growth. Handouts (entitlements) to the disadvantaged discourages them from working. The "rich" are the ones who start and operate businesses (that pay taxes) and hire people, i.e. they create jobs. Government cannot create jobs and expand the economy. Taxing the rich increasingly more means there will be fewer jobs. This is all basic economics. If you went to college and don't know that, then you simply weren't paying attention.
The liberals cry, "But these social programs are absolutely necessary. Our elderly and poor will die without them." Jesus himself was about helping the downtrodden. Taking care of our neighbor. It is our moral and Christian obligation to do this. Besides, even the Bible said, "Tis easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than get a rich man into heaven". Sounds pretty clear to me, rich people aren't nearly as important as poor people. They're not even worthy of heaven. We're actually doing them a favor, they're not about to go to heaven as long as they are rich, so...We can help them and the poor at the same time.
So where did conservatives come from and how did they acquire those peculiar characteristics?
From the time the first settlers came to America till the twentieth century in order to survive and provide for a family, they had to hunt, fish and farm the land. It required tremendous work. If one took from someone who happened to have more than themselves it was called stealing and the punishment was often getting shot or hung from a tree. It was universally understood that it was each for his own. No one else, including the government was going to provide anything for you. If you wanted to have more you simply worked harder and longer. American conservatism has it's roots in those times. Individualism was once respected and admired. These were proud people who took care of themselves and expected others to do the same.
During Roosevelt's and Kennedy's time there was a nice balance to Democrat's and Republican's ideals. And civility. Instead of a balance now we have tension and conflict between the parties. Each has a platform of slandering and defiling the other. Trashing is probably a more appropriate word. You do whatever you have to do to win and that includes humiliating, insulting, falsely accusing, associating them with bottom feeders, digging up dirt (no time limits on how far back you can go), nothing is off limits. The labels 'Democrats and 'Republicans' are words associated with the concept of a free and independent nation of people who value freedom. With a government of the people, by the people and for the people. If we keep electing the kind of people that we did eight years ago and like those that are running for office now, we're going to regret it. Our country is going in the direction of becoming a socialistic government and we the people are allowing it to happen. This, in spite of the fact that we have all the tools to maintain the brilliant form of government that we have had for over two-hundred years. Three independent branches of government, checks and balances, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, free elections, leaders elected by the people, we have it all. And in spite of that...
So, are you a liberal or a conservative? Are you part of the problem, or part of the solution?...
I dare say though, that the ideals of the parties have changed over the decades since. Democrats have been the force behind some of the greatest federal programs this country has known. Roosevelt's' New Deal and the creation of the Civilian Conservation Corps was the 'magic' the country needed to recover from the Great Depression. And this was no small feat. FDR's Social Security Act has been taking care of older Americans for almost 90 years. Johnson's Civil Rights Act did more to bring racial equality than any other act of American government. And none of those landmark programs exploited any subgroup of Americans in order for them to succeed. They succeeded because Americans saw the value in them and got behind them.
Such programs seem to be erstwhile memories of our better days as a nation. Legislation and programs today don't measure up to being good for all Americans. They target particular constituencies and it seems, invariably for the purpose of getting votes. As the national debt has grown through the years to fund literally a billion things, government has tried to get creative in ways to fund these partisan oriented programs. In doing so it seems an insipid problem came to light; in order to give someone something you have to take from someone else. As the awareness of this fact of life surfaced we were no longer Democrats and Republicans, we were now liberals and conservatives. The liberals supported the social programs such as welfare and were for increased regulations to keep big business under control. And of course to administer these programs and enforce the regulations government had to grow bigger and more powerful. More money was needed. There is one way for a government to obtain money, to tax. No one likes to pay more tax and the government has taken to targeting a specific sub groups of Americans to tax at higher rates. A mantra that has become so popular is "The rich need to pay their fair share". As if they have been rolling along all this time not paying their fair share. A couple of things need to be clarified (as if that were possible...) though. One is who exactly are "the rich"? The other is what exactly is "their fair share"? The bandwagon to make those freeloaders pay their fair share started filling up quickly, and it only made sense. The rich had too much money, they weren't paying their fair share (if they were they wouldn't have so much money) and if we took more from them we could fund these social programs. Then the poor and needy would benefit (and the sponsoring politicians would get the votes). The rich wouldn't be hurt, after all they have too much money anyway. Laisse fare is doing a terrible job of distributing the wealth so we'll do it for them. How do we know the rich have too much money? The government said so... Now, everyone is better off. Right?
Wrong. Higher taxes stifle economic growth. Handouts (entitlements) to the disadvantaged discourages them from working. The "rich" are the ones who start and operate businesses (that pay taxes) and hire people, i.e. they create jobs. Government cannot create jobs and expand the economy. Taxing the rich increasingly more means there will be fewer jobs. This is all basic economics. If you went to college and don't know that, then you simply weren't paying attention.
The liberals cry, "But these social programs are absolutely necessary. Our elderly and poor will die without them." Jesus himself was about helping the downtrodden. Taking care of our neighbor. It is our moral and Christian obligation to do this. Besides, even the Bible said, "Tis easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than get a rich man into heaven". Sounds pretty clear to me, rich people aren't nearly as important as poor people. They're not even worthy of heaven. We're actually doing them a favor, they're not about to go to heaven as long as they are rich, so...We can help them and the poor at the same time.
So where did conservatives come from and how did they acquire those peculiar characteristics?
From the time the first settlers came to America till the twentieth century in order to survive and provide for a family, they had to hunt, fish and farm the land. It required tremendous work. If one took from someone who happened to have more than themselves it was called stealing and the punishment was often getting shot or hung from a tree. It was universally understood that it was each for his own. No one else, including the government was going to provide anything for you. If you wanted to have more you simply worked harder and longer. American conservatism has it's roots in those times. Individualism was once respected and admired. These were proud people who took care of themselves and expected others to do the same.
During Roosevelt's and Kennedy's time there was a nice balance to Democrat's and Republican's ideals. And civility. Instead of a balance now we have tension and conflict between the parties. Each has a platform of slandering and defiling the other. Trashing is probably a more appropriate word. You do whatever you have to do to win and that includes humiliating, insulting, falsely accusing, associating them with bottom feeders, digging up dirt (no time limits on how far back you can go), nothing is off limits. The labels 'Democrats and 'Republicans' are words associated with the concept of a free and independent nation of people who value freedom. With a government of the people, by the people and for the people. If we keep electing the kind of people that we did eight years ago and like those that are running for office now, we're going to regret it. Our country is going in the direction of becoming a socialistic government and we the people are allowing it to happen. This, in spite of the fact that we have all the tools to maintain the brilliant form of government that we have had for over two-hundred years. Three independent branches of government, checks and balances, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, free elections, leaders elected by the people, we have it all. And in spite of that...
So, are you a liberal or a conservative? Are you part of the problem, or part of the solution?...
And what about you?...
Have you ever been in one of those arguments where you were upset with someone about something they did, or didn't do, as the case may be? "You left the mayonnaise out", or "You didn't put the car in the garage last night." Or something like "you really piss me off when you say that."
"Oh yeah, well what about you, you never put the butter back in the frig when you're through with it, you always leave it out like someone is going to come behind you and put it away for you." or "I ALWAYS have to remind you to do things or you'd never do anything."
If you point out someone else's fault that is bothering you or something they did is causing a problem you're immediately met with a rebuttal that points out yet but one (or more) of your own shortcomings. It immediately becomes a circular argument. You, or whoever started it, want to make a point that the other person has a fault that is a problem. But instead of "Oh, OK, you know you're right, I shouldn't do that. I can see how that would be an annoyance to others." Instead you open the tap for a flow of admonishments for your own faults. And back and forth you go. Or round and round you go, whichever you like.
What if your boss called you in and told you, "You know Bob, you're not finishing those TPS reports on time." And you let loose with "Well you know Herb, you never finish shit. Ever. All you do is start something then send it to me or someone else to finish. So, if you don't finish shit, why should I?" Just another circular argument. It's the same as if your wife says "You never put shit up,
you leave everything out." "Oh yeah, what about you? You leave makeup all over the bathroom counter. You never put it up."
Does anyone leave a circular argument feeling like "Well, we certainly took care of that." No. Except your boss, when he fires your ass.
I know, you're wondering, where is this going? Think about the presidential debates. Each time Hillary or Donald criticized the other they were immediately hit with a return cheap shot. You never pay taxes. You deleted 33,000 emails. You are a racist. You're incompetent. Shit, why don't y'all just get married. You'd make a hell of a couple...
I hate circular arguments. "I don't like what you did."
"What about you? I hate when you..."
"Hold on, first let's talk about when you..."
"Bullshit. You think you have a right to complain about me when you..."
Everybody gets pissed off and keeps on doing whatever they were doing to piss the other off. Nothing gets better, in fact the circular argument makes things worse if anything. It's pointless and futile. which is probably why politicians do it. Hell they were probably the ones that started the circular argument.
"Oh yeah, well what about you, you never put the butter back in the frig when you're through with it, you always leave it out like someone is going to come behind you and put it away for you." or "I ALWAYS have to remind you to do things or you'd never do anything."
If you point out someone else's fault that is bothering you or something they did is causing a problem you're immediately met with a rebuttal that points out yet but one (or more) of your own shortcomings. It immediately becomes a circular argument. You, or whoever started it, want to make a point that the other person has a fault that is a problem. But instead of "Oh, OK, you know you're right, I shouldn't do that. I can see how that would be an annoyance to others." Instead you open the tap for a flow of admonishments for your own faults. And back and forth you go. Or round and round you go, whichever you like.
What if your boss called you in and told you, "You know Bob, you're not finishing those TPS reports on time." And you let loose with "Well you know Herb, you never finish shit. Ever. All you do is start something then send it to me or someone else to finish. So, if you don't finish shit, why should I?" Just another circular argument. It's the same as if your wife says "You never put shit up,
you leave everything out." "Oh yeah, what about you? You leave makeup all over the bathroom counter. You never put it up."
Does anyone leave a circular argument feeling like "Well, we certainly took care of that." No. Except your boss, when he fires your ass.
I know, you're wondering, where is this going? Think about the presidential debates. Each time Hillary or Donald criticized the other they were immediately hit with a return cheap shot. You never pay taxes. You deleted 33,000 emails. You are a racist. You're incompetent. Shit, why don't y'all just get married. You'd make a hell of a couple...
I hate circular arguments. "I don't like what you did."
"What about you? I hate when you..."
"Hold on, first let's talk about when you..."
"Bullshit. You think you have a right to complain about me when you..."
Everybody gets pissed off and keeps on doing whatever they were doing to piss the other off. Nothing gets better, in fact the circular argument makes things worse if anything. It's pointless and futile. which is probably why politicians do it. Hell they were probably the ones that started the circular argument.
One Nation Under God...
Just about the time we think Obama has reached his lowest point, he surprises us. The lies, the scandals, the deception, now he has outdone himself. No doubt he has gotten carried away with his use of executive order. He has been in office for 250+ days now and has produced no less than 1.03 executive orders per day at a cost of compliance to American business and taxpayers of just under one trillion dollars. Now he has written one that while it doesn't have a dollar value of destruction, it does have an immense, intrinsic cost to us all.
Last Friday BH Obama wrote into law the banishment of the Pledge of Allegiance. It is not allowed in any federal institution or any of our public schools. He defended his actions by saying that the language in the pledge was divisive and that it did not reflect the true values of Americans. He did this unilaterally, without counsel of his cabinet, either house of Congress or anyone else. All he needed was his pen and a mighty sense of solipsism. Now we can all rest better knowing that our nation is once again fair to everyone. Even those who do not revere our republic and those who do not believe in God. And thank the Lord, all you terrorists in sleeper cells resident here in the U.S. your precious children will no longer be required to recite that vile diatribe.
You can be an American and be atheist. You can be an American and not possess a strong sense of nationalism. You can be an American and not be a Christian. But you cannot be an American and not have some respect the founding principles of the country. This great country was founded on Christian principles, the same principles that serve as a foundation of western civilization. No one can change that. It's our heritage and the vast majority of us are proud of it. The only one who appears to have a problem with it is BH Obama, and ISIS. Or perhaps I should say the only ones who are making an attempt to change the Christian based principles of our system of government are the aforementioned. One party is using deception and a pen, the other is using terrorism and murder.
You are soon to be gone from the privileged position of power that you were accorded, Mr. Obama. At that time you will possess no power to erode our sense of governing and justice. You may have influence but you will not have power. Thanks to the brilliance of our founding fathers you will be but a chapter of disgrace in our history and no more. We can only hope, and pray that our next leader will guide our ONE NATION, UNDER GOD better than you did.
Last Friday BH Obama wrote into law the banishment of the Pledge of Allegiance. It is not allowed in any federal institution or any of our public schools. He defended his actions by saying that the language in the pledge was divisive and that it did not reflect the true values of Americans. He did this unilaterally, without counsel of his cabinet, either house of Congress or anyone else. All he needed was his pen and a mighty sense of solipsism. Now we can all rest better knowing that our nation is once again fair to everyone. Even those who do not revere our republic and those who do not believe in God. And thank the Lord, all you terrorists in sleeper cells resident here in the U.S. your precious children will no longer be required to recite that vile diatribe.
You can be an American and be atheist. You can be an American and not possess a strong sense of nationalism. You can be an American and not be a Christian. But you cannot be an American and not have some respect the founding principles of the country. This great country was founded on Christian principles, the same principles that serve as a foundation of western civilization. No one can change that. It's our heritage and the vast majority of us are proud of it. The only one who appears to have a problem with it is BH Obama, and ISIS. Or perhaps I should say the only ones who are making an attempt to change the Christian based principles of our system of government are the aforementioned. One party is using deception and a pen, the other is using terrorism and murder.
You are soon to be gone from the privileged position of power that you were accorded, Mr. Obama. At that time you will possess no power to erode our sense of governing and justice. You may have influence but you will not have power. Thanks to the brilliance of our founding fathers you will be but a chapter of disgrace in our history and no more. We can only hope, and pray that our next leader will guide our ONE NATION, UNDER GOD better than you did.
It's all about them...
As you go about your business in the course of a normal day, if you're like me you stop at least a couple of times to check on what's going on in the world. And of course, at the present, it's hard not to hear something about the upcoming election. I mean U.S. politics is the topic right now and it will be until November 8th. So you hear about the candidates, their scandals, gaffes, improprieties, ideas, strategies, polls, and the insults they hurl at one another. Front and center of what is being rammed down our throats is Hillary and Don. On and on. Incessantly. Then you'll get something about Ted Cruz or some other senator running to keep his seat since he couldn't hang with the Donald and has nothing better to do. Politicians. On and on and on... Oh, Donald Trump isn't a politician you say? Well he is now.
That's all we hear, all about the politicians, their trials and tribulations and their lives. We hear about Anthony Weiner and the sick, perverted things he does. And cant seem to stop doing. It's all about them. Why? Because the media wants it to be about them. The U.S. media has a liberal slant and they also have a sordid perversion of publicizing politicians character flaws (the ones they don't like i.e. conservatives). When I say character flaws I mean the all-inclusive version. The media hangs out all their dirty laundry daily and lets it fly in our faces. And we consume it voraciously. Oh yeah, we the people have our own character flaws but we'll go into that another time.
How much discussion is there of what these people are doing on the floor in the House and Senate. And how what they are doing will affect us. There's a fair amount of talk about how the things Obama is doing will affect us and future generations but that's mostly because it's so profoundly negative. How about some talk concerning topics of real substance? Some, dare I say most of us, don't want to hear about these peoples contemptible behavior. We have perfectly good tabloids that lay out the dirt on celebrities for that. These people, politicians, are supposed to be working for us. For our country. Their job is supposed to be bigger than they are. Trump has always had a tough time with that. So has Hillary for that matter. We elect them to do very important jobs. It's the JOB that matters. WE don't give a crap about them. It's not about them. Try telling them that...
That's all we hear, all about the politicians, their trials and tribulations and their lives. We hear about Anthony Weiner and the sick, perverted things he does. And cant seem to stop doing. It's all about them. Why? Because the media wants it to be about them. The U.S. media has a liberal slant and they also have a sordid perversion of publicizing politicians character flaws (the ones they don't like i.e. conservatives). When I say character flaws I mean the all-inclusive version. The media hangs out all their dirty laundry daily and lets it fly in our faces. And we consume it voraciously. Oh yeah, we the people have our own character flaws but we'll go into that another time.
How much discussion is there of what these people are doing on the floor in the House and Senate. And how what they are doing will affect us. There's a fair amount of talk about how the things Obama is doing will affect us and future generations but that's mostly because it's so profoundly negative. How about some talk concerning topics of real substance? Some, dare I say most of us, don't want to hear about these peoples contemptible behavior. We have perfectly good tabloids that lay out the dirt on celebrities for that. These people, politicians, are supposed to be working for us. For our country. Their job is supposed to be bigger than they are. Trump has always had a tough time with that. So has Hillary for that matter. We elect them to do very important jobs. It's the JOB that matters. WE don't give a crap about them. It's not about them. Try telling them that...
Lies, lies and more lies...
"In times of universal deceit telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." George Orwell
Kind of sounds like he really was accurately prescient, doesn't it? Was he thinking about 2016 when he said that? Was he thinking about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? Lord knows the two of them have done enough lying to last us all for a few generations. No need to recite the instances each has lied, I don't type posts that long and besides if you don't know of most of them then you just aren't paying attention. I will say this though, there have been numerous, yes numerous people that have 'showed up dead' in direct relation to Clinton's habit of lying. Thank goodness most of us aren't close to her but if you are and she starts lying I'd run like hell. How do you know for sure when she's lying, if her mouth is open and her lips are flapping, then she's lying. (I know, you saw that one coming...)
Seriously, if your habit of lying is costing people's lives, you might want to stop lying. That is, if you care. Obviously Clinton doesn't care. Trump lies too, though his lies so far haven't proved to be lethal to anyone. At least not yet... What is the difference between lying and embellishment? That's nitpicking. Like back in 1997 when Bill Clinton was asked if he was having a relationship with Monica Lewinsky and responded "that depends on the definition of 'is'". And he dished out this barge full of bullshit to a congressional subcommittee. The boy either has large cajones, he's dumber than shit or he thinks everybody else is dumber than shit.
It really matters not what party you may associate yourself with. Forget about political parties for a moment. Just think about behavior, what a person actually did or said. Be it Bill, Hillary or The Donald. Was Bill telling the truth when asked about his relationship with Monica? No. Was Hillary telling the truth when asked about the reason the Embassy compound was attacked on 9-11? No. Was Donald telling the truth when he said the FBI just found 15,000 MORE emails of Hillary's this week? No. Were they aware that they were lying at the time? Yes, but that doesn't matter. Pleading ignorant wont get you off the hook with your mother or a traffic ticket. So it sure as fuck doesn't count when you are in or close to the office of the presidency.
Sounds like it's high time for a revolution, huh George?....
Kind of sounds like he really was accurately prescient, doesn't it? Was he thinking about 2016 when he said that? Was he thinking about Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump? Lord knows the two of them have done enough lying to last us all for a few generations. No need to recite the instances each has lied, I don't type posts that long and besides if you don't know of most of them then you just aren't paying attention. I will say this though, there have been numerous, yes numerous people that have 'showed up dead' in direct relation to Clinton's habit of lying. Thank goodness most of us aren't close to her but if you are and she starts lying I'd run like hell. How do you know for sure when she's lying, if her mouth is open and her lips are flapping, then she's lying. (I know, you saw that one coming...)
Seriously, if your habit of lying is costing people's lives, you might want to stop lying. That is, if you care. Obviously Clinton doesn't care. Trump lies too, though his lies so far haven't proved to be lethal to anyone. At least not yet... What is the difference between lying and embellishment? That's nitpicking. Like back in 1997 when Bill Clinton was asked if he was having a relationship with Monica Lewinsky and responded "that depends on the definition of 'is'". And he dished out this barge full of bullshit to a congressional subcommittee. The boy either has large cajones, he's dumber than shit or he thinks everybody else is dumber than shit.
It really matters not what party you may associate yourself with. Forget about political parties for a moment. Just think about behavior, what a person actually did or said. Be it Bill, Hillary or The Donald. Was Bill telling the truth when asked about his relationship with Monica? No. Was Hillary telling the truth when asked about the reason the Embassy compound was attacked on 9-11? No. Was Donald telling the truth when he said the FBI just found 15,000 MORE emails of Hillary's this week? No. Were they aware that they were lying at the time? Yes, but that doesn't matter. Pleading ignorant wont get you off the hook with your mother or a traffic ticket. So it sure as fuck doesn't count when you are in or close to the office of the presidency.
Sounds like it's high time for a revolution, huh George?....
I know you've heard it before, but...
I know you're heard it before but, what in the name of hell is the world coming to? Politics, yeah, well, we'll leave that one alone for now. U.S. politics is currently on a trip to hell in a handbasket. One of my favorite pastimes is people-watching. Well, maybe not people watching as much as people observing. How they behave, react, and the things they do. I heard on the news this morning that a group of people are suing the makers of the game Pokémon Go. They say it is ruining their life. Yep, That's what I said... Pokémon Go is ruining their lives so they sued the makers of the game. Property owners are suing as well saying it directs people onto their property. Private property. Now that one I can go along with. In fact, more power to them. I'd love to be the judge presiding over the case of the people suing because the stupid game is ruining their life.
"And just how is this game ruining your lives?"
"Well, your honor, it' just so addicting we just cant stop. Like a dangerous drug."
"Really you don't say? Do you take dangerous drugs?"
"Yessir. I mean no sir. And it leads us into freeways and roadways where there are cars and stuff."
"What, the dangerous drugs?"
"No sir, Pokemon."
"Oh. Go ahead."
"And it keeps us outdoors causing us to suffer sunburns and aggravating our allergies."
"Uhm, uhm, uhh. That's terrible. have you tried stopping that behavior? You know, like turning your phone off or something like that?"
"Oh no your honor, it's too addicting for that. Remember, it's like a drug addiction. You cant just stop cold turkey."
"Hmm. I see. Is there a rehab program for such an addiction?"
"We don't know, your honor. But we're here because it's the fault of Nintendo for developing and producing an app that inherently puts it's users (us) in harm's way. They gave us something intended for recreation that leads us to danger. And they gave it to us for free. Very deceptive and misleading."
"Hmm. I see. Are you aware that Nintendo didn't produce this game at all. Nor were they in a position to profit from it?"
"What, you cant be serious?"
"Excuse me, but you shall refer to me as Your Honor."
"Sorry your Honor. Nintendo didn't produce this game, sir? Really? Who did?"
"I am the presiding judge in this case, not your attorney. Nor will I do your case research for you. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Now get the hell outta here."
Yes indeed. What is the world coming to...
"And just how is this game ruining your lives?"
"Well, your honor, it' just so addicting we just cant stop. Like a dangerous drug."
"Really you don't say? Do you take dangerous drugs?"
"Yessir. I mean no sir. And it leads us into freeways and roadways where there are cars and stuff."
"What, the dangerous drugs?"
"No sir, Pokemon."
"Oh. Go ahead."
"And it keeps us outdoors causing us to suffer sunburns and aggravating our allergies."
"Uhm, uhm, uhh. That's terrible. have you tried stopping that behavior? You know, like turning your phone off or something like that?"
"Oh no your honor, it's too addicting for that. Remember, it's like a drug addiction. You cant just stop cold turkey."
"Hmm. I see. Is there a rehab program for such an addiction?"
"We don't know, your honor. But we're here because it's the fault of Nintendo for developing and producing an app that inherently puts it's users (us) in harm's way. They gave us something intended for recreation that leads us to danger. And they gave it to us for free. Very deceptive and misleading."
"Hmm. I see. Are you aware that Nintendo didn't produce this game at all. Nor were they in a position to profit from it?"
"What, you cant be serious?"
"Excuse me, but you shall refer to me as Your Honor."
"Sorry your Honor. Nintendo didn't produce this game, sir? Really? Who did?"
"I am the presiding judge in this case, not your attorney. Nor will I do your case research for you. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Now get the hell outta here."
Yes indeed. What is the world coming to...
And they keep getting crazier...
After a few discussions about politics I have learned something. It's OK, in fact it's good to learn about what's going on in the world of politics. Learn about the people that want to lead our country. Be informed. Know what the issues are and how the candidates plan to address them. Get involved, even if it's by just being an informed voter. By doing this you'll be able to make up your own mind about what is right for the country, including who should be elected to lead it. Everything we learn and witness throughout our lives effects our political leanings. It forms the basis of our worldview and our political beliefs. Discussions about politics are fine IF you are discussing it with someone who has a mind that is open to at least listen to another's point of view. But that type of person is becoming about as rare as an honest politician. What I have learned is this; don't enter into a discussion about politics with the slightest intention of convincing a person with different political beliefs that yours are right, or even better in some way. I say that because it's never going to happen. Ever.
Granted, there are those that switch over to the other side but they too are quite rare.
I have a good friend, a person I have known most of my life and who is a good man. Mild-mannered, intelligent and kind-hearted. But he has become 'agitated' when it comes to politics. When he hears someone of a conservative bent speak out he lashes out usually with a derogatory and condescending remark. In his world conservatives are ignorant and thoughtless. I think most of the time it's best to keep our political beliefs to ourselves. It's not like by expressing your views you're going to change someone else's. Even if you did, it's not going to change anything in the bigger picture. Your views in fact aren't even going to help elect a president. Because our views and votes don't directly elect presidents. Delegates to the electoral college do. Which is not a bad thing. If you look into the reason the electoral college was created I think you'll agree. It evens the playing field amongst the states, and hence the people. The advantage of the big states goes away. We are all wanting fairness, well with the electoral college we got some. But if it doesn't help their choice of candidate get elected most people don't like it. I mean, if the people aren't directly electing the president, then that's just wrong, right? Why should some elitist group of electorates be choosing our presidents? Let me say this, the wisdom and prescience of our forefathers should never be understated. They obviously understood something that few people of today understand. To put it simply, states with more people should not have more power in electing the president. Besides, based on recent history we're not very good at electing quality leaders anyway.
Granted, there are those that switch over to the other side but they too are quite rare.
I have a good friend, a person I have known most of my life and who is a good man. Mild-mannered, intelligent and kind-hearted. But he has become 'agitated' when it comes to politics. When he hears someone of a conservative bent speak out he lashes out usually with a derogatory and condescending remark. In his world conservatives are ignorant and thoughtless. I think most of the time it's best to keep our political beliefs to ourselves. It's not like by expressing your views you're going to change someone else's. Even if you did, it's not going to change anything in the bigger picture. Your views in fact aren't even going to help elect a president. Because our views and votes don't directly elect presidents. Delegates to the electoral college do. Which is not a bad thing. If you look into the reason the electoral college was created I think you'll agree. It evens the playing field amongst the states, and hence the people. The advantage of the big states goes away. We are all wanting fairness, well with the electoral college we got some. But if it doesn't help their choice of candidate get elected most people don't like it. I mean, if the people aren't directly electing the president, then that's just wrong, right? Why should some elitist group of electorates be choosing our presidents? Let me say this, the wisdom and prescience of our forefathers should never be understated. They obviously understood something that few people of today understand. To put it simply, states with more people should not have more power in electing the president. Besides, based on recent history we're not very good at electing quality leaders anyway.
These are crazy times...
Yes, these are crazy times. In many ways. This year has not been a good one by any measure. Terrorist attacks for one. The crazed Tunisian who drove a truck through a crowd celebrating Bastille Day in Nice, France. The multiple incidents involving the murder of police officers in the U.S. The exit of Great Britain from the European Union. Police shootings. Hillary being nominated by the Democratic Party. Trump being nominated by the Republican Party. What in the hell has gotten into people. Seriously, nominating these two to lead our country? Come on, people. Hillary is dishonest and unscrupulous. Trump is brash, impulsive and stupid. Yes, stupid. No one does some of the shit he's pulling off unless they are stupid. There are plenty of brilliant, capable people who can tell him to shut the fuck up and go away and make him do just that. Where are you? Step up, please...
Like many of you I am not looking forward to four years of leadership from either of these two buffoons.
And just what are we to do about terrorism? How do we stop this insanity? These insane monkeys are wandering about the world killing innocent people as they are going about their lives. Doing it in the name of Allah because we don't adhere to their ignorant, inane beliefs. This is serious folks. These people want and fully intend to kill you. They are not playing around. And they don't mind killing themselves to do it. It's very serious. And you think that Hillary or Donald can come up with something to stop it? Hillary, no. Fuggitaboutit. Donald, well he's just stupid enough he might come up with something. You fight fire with fire, why not fight crazy with crazy...
Like many of you I am not looking forward to four years of leadership from either of these two buffoons.
And just what are we to do about terrorism? How do we stop this insanity? These insane monkeys are wandering about the world killing innocent people as they are going about their lives. Doing it in the name of Allah because we don't adhere to their ignorant, inane beliefs. This is serious folks. These people want and fully intend to kill you. They are not playing around. And they don't mind killing themselves to do it. It's very serious. And you think that Hillary or Donald can come up with something to stop it? Hillary, no. Fuggitaboutit. Donald, well he's just stupid enough he might come up with something. You fight fire with fire, why not fight crazy with crazy...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)