Category Archives: Opinion

Memorial Day – A Day to Acknowledge Heroes!

For many, the significance of Memorial Day seems to be lost in the temporal anticipation of the first holiday of summer. The day’s true significance is found in acknowledgment of the ultimate sacrifices made for our freedom, by our men and women in uniform. As such, it is much more than simply a day for a picnic, or a weekend getaway. It is a day of reflection, acknowledgment, and gratitude, for the sacrifices made by relatively few, so the many may enjoy freedom and liberty today.

memorial-day-rememberIt is a day to pause from the daily grind and celebrate the lives and sacrifices of those who have perpetuated this Republic, this One Nation Under God. It is a day to reassess our own convictions to the principles that those who have worn the uniform of our young nation have been willing to sacrifice their own lives for, in order to preserve the legacy of liberty, from one generation to the next. The torch of Madam Liberty has been perpetually and successively passed from the earliest generations of Americans to those who yet wear the uniform. And to them we owe our all.

There is nothing we can do which can repay those who have so sacrificed that we might be free, but everything we do does count in some small way. Abraham Lincoln put into proper perspective what we do to celebrate the lives of those who have been willing to pay the uttermost farthing for our freedom. “We cannot dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow – this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us – that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion – that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

The Civil War has long since ended, yet the veracity of Lincoln’s statement rings equally true today as it did 150 years ago. We cannot hallow the ground where our brave have fallen. They consecrated it with their blood and their lives. And not only the ground fought over during our Civil War, but around the globe where we have fought to prevent expansion of liberty-destroying socialism, the fiendish tyranny of dictators and freedom-trampling totalitarians and terrorists around the world.

IMG_1807The necessity of these men and women willing to serve and fight in inconceivably horrendous conditions in our behalf should be self-evident. Contrary to the platitudes of a popular bumper sticker, sometimes war is the answer. And as appalling as war is, there are worse things, like the expunging of personal liberty by communism, socialism, and totalitarian regimes, and the heinous cruelty and tactics of terror or radical extremist groups.

The English philosopher John Stuart Mill put this dichotomy into even more stark personal terms. He reasoned, “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. A man who has nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety is a miserable creature who has no chance at being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

Since the earliest days of our republic, tens of millions of Americans have served honorably, wearing our nation’s military uniforms. Of those, 1.2 million have made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives, and more than 1.4 million have been wounded in combat, in defense of liberty. Yet the value of their sacrifices, and those made by their families, is truly inestimable and incalculable.

General Douglas MacArthur delivered his farewell speech to the cadets at the U.S. Military Academy in May, 1962. He used the occasion to eloquently reference the nature and character of those who so choose to serve us. “When I think of his patience under adversity, of his courage under fire, and of his modesty in victory, I am filled with an emotion of admiration I cannot put into words. He belongs to history as furnishing one of the greatest examples of successful patriotism. He belongs to posterity as the instructor of future generations in the principles of liberty and freedom. He belongs to the present, to us, by his virtues and by his achievements. In twenty campaigns, on a hundred battlefields, around a thousand campfires, I have witnessed that enduring fortitude, that patriotic self-abnegation, and that invincible determination which have carved his statue in the hearts of his people.”

IMG_8166President Ronald Reagan, at Arlington National Cemetery, on Memorial Day, 1982, expressed the profound gratitude of a thankful nation. “I have no illusions about what little I can add now to the silent testimony of those who gave their lives willingly for their country. Words are even more feeble on this Memorial Day, for the sight before us is that of a strong and good nation that stands in silence and remembers those who were loved and who, in return, loved their countrymen enough to die for them. Yet, we must try to honor them not for their sakes alone, but for our own. And if words cannot repay the debt we owe these men, surely with our actions we must strive to keep faith with them and with the vision that led them to battle and to final sacrifice.”

His ensuing counsel for the citizens of America is as appropriate and proper now, as it was then. “Our first obligation to them and ourselves is plain enough: The United States and the freedom for which it stands, the freedom for which they died, must endure and prosper. Their lives remind us that freedom is not bought cheaply. It has a cost; it imposes a burden. And just as they whom we commemorate were willing to sacrifice, so too must we – in a less final, less heroic way – be willing to give of ourselves.”

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Harry Reid Retire Already

There is no doubt in my mind that Harry Reid is mentally off the rails, once again he sticks his nose where it does not belong. Reid renewed his crusade against the Washington Redskins, using time on the Senate floor to decry the team’s name as “racist.” Enough already!

First of all it is a private company, they can call themselves what ever they want, second 90% of people surveyed have no problem with the name Redskins, and third 85% of American Indians have no problem with the name as well. Shouldn’t he be more concentrated on things like our lousy economy, or ISIS invading our shores?

To quote this mental midget, “I find it stunning that the National Football League is more concerned about how much air is in a football than with a racist franchise name that denigrates Native Americans across the country,” he said. “I wish the commissioner would act as swiftly and decisively in changing the name of the D.C. team as he did about not enough air in a football.”

Harry, while you go on a rant about things that a majority of people don’t give a crap about, how about this:

RedskinsWhat about that Harry, anything to say about it. Harry Reid, the most evil man in Washington.

1830523363_2254746936_Harry_the_crook_Reid_84216882653_xlarge_xlarge“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.

 

This is one man’s opinion.

 

Word of the day – “MICROAGGRESSION”.

The word “microaggression” has cropped up with increased frequency over the last year, to the point that now I see it almost daily! What does it mean?

Webster’s says it has “no meaning.” It’s not a word. It doesn’t exist! Various blogs, papers, and online source provide a definition, but they’re not “official” dictionaries.

And then, I found www.microaggressions.com. This site was obviously built by people who can’t stand anyone who might, kinda, sorta, could have some kind of privilege going for them. According to this site “microaggression” is defined as:

“Racial micro aggressions are brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.”

I have said it before… words no longer have meaning and this is another perfect example of why. This definition specifically says it’s aimed at people of color.

Based on the many “microaggression” stories I’ve covered, the definition should read as follows:

micro aggressions are brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative slights and insults towards; __________. (INSERT – anyone identifying as LGBTQ, a woman, a minority, or some other subset of people, no matter how ridiculous).

Recently at Brandeis University, the Asian American Students Association was accused of microaggression for putting up a display to explain microaggression using only Asians… REALLY?

A group at Oberlin University had to issue a warning of microaggression or triggering alerting readers they were about to see “Discussion of rape culture, online harassment, victim blaming, and rape apologism and denialism. REALLY? They needed a warning?

Recently Johns Hopkins University refused to allow Chick-Fil-A to open on campus because the campus LGBTQ club considered it an act of microaggression. So now anyone or anything that offends is microaggression? Well, kinda sorta. It really only seems to apply to certain groups.

If you ask me to remove my Bible from view, you would consider that your right not to be “assaulted” by my belief. But by the definitions above, wouldn’t that be considered a microaggression toward me and my religion?

The latest in microaggressions was reported at Arizona State University. Students petitioned staff to change the name of pedestrian walkways. Why, you ask? Because not everyone can walk and that COULD be viewed as a microaggression to someone in a wheelchair or on crutches. Even the people who were supposed to be offended (those in wheelchairs or on crutches) thought this was ridiculous.

Read the rest at: microaggressions

How the Left Uses Racism, and Will Use Sexism, to Stifle Dissent

Ever since the junior senator from Illinois announced his candidacy for the presidency eight years ago, those who have criticized his politics and his ideology have been pummeled with a charge of “racism.” It’s been the perfunctory, knee-jerk response – devoid of intellectual integrity or factual relevance – to avoid the substantive issues, while attempting to simultaneously stifle dissent and silence critics. And it’s clear from early indications with regard to the 2016 presidential race, that the same modus operandi will be employed against those critical of Hillary Clinton. Only this time it will be gender based – the charge of sexism.

Tea-Party-RacistDuring the Obama tenure, the charge of “racist” has been unavoidable to any who were critical of the president. Whether it was criticism of Obamacare, lack of transparency, fiscal profligacy, inscrutable foreign policy, class-envy fomentation, and anti-capitalist policies, it didn’t matter. Regardless of the logic, data, facts, or strength of argument, if you opposed the administration policies and initiatives, you were a racist. At least according to the sycophants, who were either oblivious to logic, data, or facts, and had an empty logical quiver from which to fire back with anything except blanks.

And what’s pathetic, from a free speech, open discourse, and cogent political discourse perspective, is that it worked. The millions of Americans who flocked to Tea Party rallies, Glenn Beck confabs, and other conservative functions, were successfully labeled “racists” because of their opposition to the liberal, destructive policies of the administration. It didn’t matter what color, race, creed, or socio-economic status they hailed from, they were all racists.

democrats-racist-end-is-near-cartoonFor some reason, the fact that the policies propounded and foisted on the nation the past six years are not race-based seems lost on the vapid purveyors of the “racist” tactic. Big government, massive debt, onerous regulations, expansive government control, and the concomitant loss of personal liberty are naturally opposed not because they might be advanced by someone of a certain color, ethnic background, or native language. They’re opposed because they’re antithetical to the founding principles of our republic! It matters not who is foisting the destructive policies and ideology on the nation; it matters that they’re distinctly anti-American. Conservative Ben Carson’s current lead in the crowded GOP primary race underscores that fact.

racist_0What’s brilliant about the tactic, is that you don’t have to worry about any facts, data, or common sense to employ it. Just by hurling the accusation several things have been accomplished with one fell swoop. 1) The argument has been misdirected, so it’s no longer about the policies or the substance of the disagreement, it’s now whether the dissenter is truly racist or not. 2) It neutralizes and diminishes the objections of the dissenter, for now the greater issue is whether he is in fact racist, or not. And 3) it successfully stifles dissent, since no one, probably even real racists, likes to be called one, so why go out on a limb and face the probability of such an accusation?

And now it appears that Hillary Clinton supporters will use the same tactic. Just last month a pro-Hillary group, self-dubbed the HRC Super Volunteers, warned journalists that they were going to be watching vigilantly how the media reports on Hillary’s campaign. Group member and co-founder, John West, was thoughtful enough to serve as an early warning system on the words that cannot, I repeat, cannot be used to describe the probable Democrat candidate for president. According to West, “polarizing,” “calculating,” “disingenuous,” “insincere,” “ambitious,” “inevitable,” “entitled,” “over-confident,” “secretive,” “will do anything to win,” “represents the past,” and “out of touch,” are all apparently sexist code-words that the media are to not use when describing the candidate.

hillar_c_wordsAccording to West, “Already we have seen the coded language of sexism and innuendo used by major news outlets and we are not happy,” followed by a list of examples from major news sources and their egregious use of such sexist vernacular. As a student of language and etymology, I have to admit I was unaware those words and phrases were definitionally sexist.

But alas, I shouldn’t let myself fall into their misdirection and accusatory trap. It’s not that those words are sexist, it’s just that they’re so accurately descriptive of the presumptive Democrat nominee that using the terms will earn the consternation of Hillary devotees, hence justifying accusations of sexism. By couching those terms in a sexist context, they can as easily avert factual criticism of Hillary as they did in protecting Obama. Just like the accusations of “racism;” it has nothing to do with what is true or what is factual, it has everything to do with ensuring electoral success and neutralizing the opposition by attempting to shape and control the language.

UnknownThose of us who are bitter clingers to our freedom, our liberties, and the principles the nation was founded on, shouldn’t allow ourselves to be rebuffed or silenced by the non-thinking Alynski devotees who utilize these nefarious and polarizing tactics. And remember, if that’s their primary tool to fight back with, you know that logically you’ve already won, because their only defense is casting aspersions ad hominem.

There are two things even more disturbing than a group attempting to regulate political speech. One, that the liberal-biased media may well comply, and play their game; and two, that for a large segment of our unenlightened and uninformed electorate, their “sexist” tactic will work.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Can A New President Unravel Obama’s Mess?

There is no doubt that Obama is one of the worst presidents this country has seen, his domestic policies and foreign policies have weakened this country so that America has become a joke around the world. I feel sorry for the next president.

There is no doubt that Obama inherited a bad economy, a recession that the majority of Americans say never ended. American history has shown us that the more severe the recession, the stronger the recovery, but Obama has prevented growth in this country with his anti job growth policies, A.K.A Liberal-Progressive policies. In Obama’s recovery, annual growth has been the slowest since the U.S. began compiling economic statistics, a measly 2.9%. This year is off to an even slower start, with GDP growing 0.2% in the first three months.

Jobs also will be on that list, it took from June 2009 to April 2014, almost five full years to get back to having the same number of people working as when the recession began in December 2007. A third of Americans between 18 and 31 last year were living with their parents, the labor participation rate was at the lowest point since 1978. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says 4.5 million Americans were working part time for economic reasons in December 2007, meaning they could not find full-time work. Last month the number was 6.6 million, a 46% increase. More part-time workers are getting fewer than 30 hours a week.

Let’s not forget the size of Americans paychecks. Inflation-adjusted median household income has dropped, from $54,059 in 2009 to $51,939 in 2013, the only time this has happened during an economic recovery. According to a recent Brookings Institution study, every year of Obama’s presidency more American businesses have closed, merged or gone bankrupt than have been created.

The national debt has risen to 74.1% today from 40.8% the month Obama took office. The Congressional Budget Office says that within 25 years the public debt will exceed 100% of GDP unless Washington changes its policies. Obama wasted six years by refusing to make reforms to hold down growth in entitlement spending, which means programs that will go bust are Social Security disability trust fund in 2016, the Medicare hospital trust fund in 2030 and Social Security’s Old Age and Survivor’s trust fund in 2032.

Let us not forget Obama has made us less safe around the world, calling ISIS the JV team, pulling out of Iraq when all the generals told him not to. Not helping the Ukraine after they were invaded by Russia. Foreign leaders think he is a joke and insult him when ever they can, drawing red lines that mean nothing, and our enemies know it.

Yes there is much more, you can fill in the blanks, Obama-Care which is a disaster, and let’s not forget his unconstitutional executive orders, many have been shot down by the Supreme Court. Obama came into office and divided a nation, I have not seen this country so divided since the mid-1960’s.

Yes, Obama is leaving one hell of a mess and no matter who the next president is they are in for a rough ride, it is gonna take many years to undo the damage this Liberal-Progressive president has done. Will the American people finally learn that Liberal-Progressive policies don’t work and are destructive to our country? Some how I don’t think so.

“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.

Responsible

This is one man’s opinion.

Our very own Baghdad Bama!

Yes, we have Baghdad Bama and his trusty sidekick John Kerry! As national and satellite pictures were showing American troops taking over Baghdad airport and moving towards the city, Baghdad Bob proclaims, “There are NO AMERICANS infidels in Baghdad. Never!” on live TV… as you can hear the shells going off in the background! Reports came in from various news sources with Baghdad Bob saying, “I blame Al-Jazeera – they are marketing for the Americans!” When asked by reporters how the Iraqi army would do against the Americans he replied, “My feelings – as usual – we will slaughter them all.” And let’s not forget, “Our initial assessment is that they will all die.” Baghdad Bob had so many gems that he tries to sell but failed.

I believe we are seeing that same thing here in America. We consistently hear from the White House that the economy is good, jobs are on the rise, people are feeling better, and the biggie… we are living in the safest time in history! In what universe? Consumer confidence is down, most jobs created are part-time, the economy can’t maintain a 2% misery index, credit card debt is up, home sales are down. Do you need more?!

This Administration also goes on to say there are no scandals, and no issues at the IRS. Benghazi, though a tragedy, was played out by the U.S. perfectly and it all happened because of a movie maker. We are stuck in a Twilight Zone marathon featuring the Obama Chronicles.

The economy, after the (real) Great Depression of 1930 made a strong comeback. The US saw growth rates of 11, 8, and 13 percent over the 3 years it took to recover. Most experts agreed, if the government had gotten out of the way recovery would have been so much quicker! What wouldn’t I give for a 5 or 6% recovery today?

Read the rest at:  Baghdad Bama

Another Black Man Kills a Cop

“It’s with great regret and sadness that we announce the passing of New York City Police Officer Brian Moore. Shield number 469. New York City police officer, hero of the city, killed in the line of duty,’’ Police commissioner Bratton told reporters outside the hospital.

It happened again, decorated NYPD Officer Brian Moore died Monday with his stricken family at his hospital bedside, we have seen this happen to many times.

Back in December of 2014 I printed an article titled Another Black Man Kills A Cop, I am going to reprint it here because it must be said. It gives me no pleasure to do it.

Well it has happened again, another black man kills a cop, but where is the outrage, where are the protests, is there an epidemic of blacks killing cops in this country? I don’t expect to see any outrage or protests, because in today’s upside down society the criminal, the bad guy, is the one that seems to get all the sympathy, the cops, the good guys, are the one’s being treated like the criminals.

In May of 1971 Officer’s Joseph Plagentini and Waverly Jones were gunned down while responding to a fake 911 call by three black gunmen laying in wait.

In January of 1972 Officer’s Rocco Laurie and Gregory Foster were gunned down by three Black Liberation Army members, shot in the back as they were on patrol.

In April of 1972 Officer Phillip Cardillo was gunned down by a gang of black men when he responded to a fake 911 call at a Nation of Islam Mosque.

In February of 1988 police officer Eddie Byrne, just 22 years old was gunned down by four black men, on orders by a black drug dealer named Howard “Pappy” Mason.

Now, in December of 2014 two officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, who were working overtime as part of an anti-terrorism drill, were gunned down in their squad car by a lone black gunman. Liu, 32, a newlywed of only two months, had seven years on the force; Ramos, 40, dad to two sons, had two years on the job.

These murders happened in New York City, but there were many more around the country. Police Commissioner of New York City William Bratton said, “No warning, no provocation, they were quite simply assassinated, targeted for their uniform.” These murders were in retaliation for Eric Garner and Michael Brown, the two criminals who died while resisting arrest. Eric Garner and Michael Brown had a chance, they would be alive today if they had only followed the cops orders, what chance did those two officers have, none.

Black leaders are quick to condemn the police when a black criminal dies, but where are they when a cop is killed, not a peep. Over the past month we have heard protesters shouting “Black lives matter,” why don’t the lives of cops matter? Cops are there to protect the community, while black criminals destroy a community, where is the justice.

Here is a novel idea for the black leaders, instead of protesting when a black criminal dies, why don’t you teach young black men not to be criminals. Communities would be safer, jails would not be over crowded and lives would be saved. Making martyrs out of criminals will only make way for more criminals.

Black leaders keep shouting that there is an epidemic of police killing young black men, which makes as much sense as saying that there is an epidemic of black men killing cops. Black leaders refuse to accept the fact the majority of crimes are committed by blacks, and you wonder why people profile. When you pick-up a newspaper or watch the news on TV and 90% of the criminals you see are black, you can’t’ blame people for profiling, I do, and I don’t feel guilty doing it, it’s better to be safe than dead.

New York City Police Officer Brian Moore is seen in an undated picture released by the New York City Police Department. Moore, 25, a plainclothes police officer shot in the head over the weekend has died of his wounds, local media reported.  Moore was shot on Saturday as he and his partner, sitting in an unmarked car in a residential neighborhood of Queens, were trying to question a local man wanted for illegal gun possession.    REUTERS/New York City Police Department/Handout

New York City Police Officer Brian Moore is seen in an undated picture released by the New York City Police Department. Moore, 25, a plainclothes police officer shot in the head over the weekend has died of his wounds, local media reported. Moore was shot on Saturday as he and his partner, sitting in an unmarked car in a residential neighborhood of Queens, were trying to question a local man wanted for illegal gun possession. 

Liberal-Progressive Policies Equal Devastation

 

If anyone wants to see how destructive Liberal policies are, they only have to look at the worst cities in the country. As if we didn’t learn anything from the collapse of Detroit, a once thriving city where the birth of the automobile industry began, but after decades of Liberal Democratic leadership has become a waste land.

What about the other cities, not only Detroit, but also Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and Washington, DC, among other cities have all become riddled with crime and poverty. All these cities have one thing in common; they have been run for decades by the Liberal Progressives.

Now we see Baltimore, a once vibrant city also run by Liberal Progressives for decades. On MSNBC, Michael Eric Dyson said, “Society refuses to help [young blacks] in a serious fashion,” Is this guy kidding or what, we have spent trillions of dollars since the 1960s trying to help, but Liberal Progressives seem to be blind to that fact, all they seem to cry for is more money.

Instead of looking into the heart of the problem, black leaders seem to be content making excuses for the rioters. The mayor of Baltimore walked back calling the rioters’ thugs, as well as many other black leaders did as well. Making excuses and not prosecuting these thugs will only ensure one thing, more violence.

Matthew Hennessey of the City Journal said; “Who owns Baltimore’s rage? Some facts: Every member of the Baltimore City Council is a Democrat. Every mayor since 1967 has been a Democrat. Such political homogeneity invites corruption. If some element of the city’s police department is brutal and corrupt, it’s because no one in Baltimore has lifted a finger to stop them.”

Over the past couple of years the one thing that these black men who were shot by cops all have in common, they were all criminals, but they seem to be glorified instead of calling them what the really are, a menace to a civilized society. More money is never the answer despite what those Liberal Progressives say.

U.S. Army lieutenant colonel Allen West said it best:

West

“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.

This is one man’s opinion.

It’s the LEFT who keep racism alive!

This week, among all the garbage that was going on in Baltimore, we saw something we don’t see very often… a parent taking charge of her teenage child who was going down to where the riots were happening. Once the vandalism started it turned to from protests to riots. But she marched through the crowd not caring about her safety to save her child’s life. God bless that woman!

She was a real hero doing something that we don’t see much of today… a parent saying “no, no way, not my child, not today.” She said she wasn’t going to allow her son to disrespect property, disrespect the police, and destroy the community. She said he promised her he would not go down there! So, as SHE said, he lied and went where he should not have been.

This single mom of 6 children took time off from work to be involved. She said when she saw him with his face covered and a brick in his hand she knew he was up to no good. She grabbed him and started smacking him around (with an OPEN hand.) She told him if he wanted to protest he should be a man, show his face, and do it the right way… using nonviolence. (Remember, all you who love Dr. King – nonviolence.)

She did a good thing. She held her son accountable for his actions!

But did she really? The loons on the Left say “no”! They say what she did was wrong. And now Baltimore child protective services is investigating her out. Their statement, “If she would do this to her son in public, what is she doing to her kids in private?” WHAT?! Are they serious?

Read the rest at:  Responsability

Oral Arguments at SCOTUS on Same-Sex Marriage

The oral arguments before the Supreme Court this week stimulated vigorous legal discourse not just between the counsel for the represented parties, but amongst the justices themselves. The questions posed to counsel cannot reliably serve as tealeaves, prognosticating the court’s ultimate ruling, but they did indicate some of the struggles the court faces when they rule on same-sex marriage.

marriage_dictionaryAt issue is whether several state’s referenda or state statutes defining marriage as between one man and one woman shall stand. Based on public opinion trends on the issue, the ruling may be a moot point, but the legal arguments before the court clearly indicate why the rush toward a redefinition of marriage will have a significant impact on our society and the republic.

Justice Anthony Kennedy pointed out that thinking marriage is the union of a man and a woman “has been with us for millennia. And it—it’s very difficult for the Court to say, oh, well, we—we know better.” He went on to observe that even the concept of same-sex marriage has “only been around for 10 years,” and compared with human history, he conjectured, “I don’t even know how to count the decimals when we talk about millennia.”

Chief Justice John Roberts echoed that observation, by stating, “Every definition that I looked up, prior to about a dozen years ago, defined marriage as unity between a man and a woman as husband and wife.” He then correctly observed, “You’re not seeking to join the institution, you’re seeking to change what the institution is. The fundamental core of the institution is the opposite-sex relationship and you want to introduce into it a same-sex relationship.”

700Making the case that the definition of marriage really has nothing to do with “discrimination,” Justice Stephen Breyer observed that the male/female definition “has been the law everywhere for thousands of years among people who were not discriminating even against gay people, and suddenly you want nine people outside the ballot box to require states that don’t want to do it to change … what marriage is.”

Justice Samuel Alito made the same observation when he declared, “There have been cultures that did not frown on homosexuality. … Ancient Greece is an example. It was well accepted within certain bounds. People like Plato wrote in favor of that.”And yet, ancient Greece and people like Plato never thought a same-sex relationship was a marriage. Alito concluded: “So their limiting marriage to couples of the opposite sex was not based on prejudice against gay people, was it?”

Justice Roberts clarified another significant issue as well, when he alleged that what the petitioners are arguing for in this case is not freedom from government, but government affirmation. Roberts explained that in a previous Supreme Court case, “the whole argument is the State cannot intrude on that personal relationship. Now people are suing saying “the State must sanction. It must approve that relationship. They’re two different questions.”

supreme-court-gay-marriage_mtJohn Bursch, the lawyer defending the traditional marriage laws in Michigan, echoed this point. Based on precedence, he noted that while “the government cannot interfere in private, intimate conduct, the Court cannot as a constitutional matter … force the State into these relationships by forcing them to recognize and give benefits to anyone.”

Bursch made another critical point in his oral arguments. He said, “the marriage institution did not develop to deny dignity or to give second-class status to anyone. It developed to serve purposes that, by their nature, arise from biology.” He pointed out that the same-sex marriage argument is significantly different. “Now, the marriage view on the other side here is that marriage is all about love and commitment. And as a society, we can agree that that’s important, but the State doesn’t have any interest in that.”

He continued by illustrating that redefining marriage to say that it’s primarily about emotional commitment would have consequences. “When you change the definition of marriage to delink the idea that we’re binding children with their biological mom and dad, that has consequences. The consequences of redefining marriage won’t happen overnight, but the law will have an impact. We’re talking about something that’s going to change the meaning of the institution over generations.”

Chief Justice Roberts tendered perhaps the most significant indicator on how the court may rule. He noted that a court-imposed 50-state solution would not lead to civil peace, but to anger and resentment. “If the Court unilaterally redefined marriage, there will be no more debate. Closing of debate can close minds, and it will have a consequence on how this new institution is accepted. People feel very differently about something if they have a chance to vote on it than if it’s imposed on them by the courts.”

MW3_My_Parents_Divorce_and_Video_Games1The premise of the same-sex marriage argument is that adults have the “right” to marry whomever they choose to, regardless of gender. But there is no such premise inherent in the institution of marriage. It is, rather, based in natural law, lex naturalis, which is the system of law that is determined by nature and is thus universal. Same-sex marriage is therefore, logically, preternatural. It has no logical basis in nature, nor can a presumed right can be extrapolated constitutionally, based on equal protection.

Based on logic and strength of arguments, and the types of questions the justices posed during oral arguments, it would seem the court may be inclined to defer such matters to the states respectively. If they do so, given the Roberts Court’s tendency to enjoin the legislative branch, they’ll likely encourage making provision for universal recognition of same-sex couples rights by states which uphold traditional marriage. But that’s logic, which can merely be presumed from the Court, based on precedence.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

Evidently, ‘Black America’ Doesn’t Get It

One Baltimore protester exclaimed to FOX News’ Geraldo Rivera, “I want to tell White America to stop not giving a damn about Black people.” And there you have it in a nutshell, the underlying sentiment trying to be vocalized by a violent, frustrated Black urban demographic that has taken to the streets in cities areas across America. There is just one thing wrong with that narrative. It is based in obliviousness of a cultural reality that has been prevalent for the last two to three generations. And it is truly sad.

I grew up in the 1960s. I remember full well the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The 1960s and the 1970s were decades of true and real change; change that reshaped and redefined American culture in many ways, some for the better, some for the worse. Those years gave way to the Civil Rights movement and the understanding of a need for gender equality, to name but a few of the good things that came from that era. But it also gave way to a degradation of the importance of personal responsibility, civility and a need to be a productive and positive member of a community.

During those years, children were taught to be painstakingly aware of what today would be referred to as racial privilege. In our schools and in our homes, Americans of all racial backgrounds began to understand, fully, the brilliance of the words of Civil Rights movement leaders, especially Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. We were brought up – taught in our schools and by our parents – that we were to form our judgments of other people not on the color of their skin but on the conduct of their character. It made sense. And for at least two to three generations now that is the way White American children have been raised, the first of those generations now in their mid- to late-50s.

But where in the 1960s and 1970s, there was a real issue with racial disparity and discrimination, today we face a moment in time when an entire faction of American society – urban “Black America” – either won’t acknowledge or is incapable of acknowledging the fact that racial disparity and discrimination – societally and systemically, as history accurately recalls – has ceased to exist in the form they have been led to believe.

That sounds like a denial that racism exists in today’s culture. It is not. Rather, it is an observation – based in reality – that systemic racism and discrimination against Black Americans does not exist today, not in the form in which they are led to believe. Are there racists among us? Yes. That intellectually stunted way of thinking, sadly, will always be with us. It is human nature, and humans – no matter how dedicated Progressives are to perfecting the human race (even going so far as to practice eugenics, which is intrinsically detrimental to Black Americans) – will never reach perfection. But that societal malady is not systemic. It is a malady that affects individuals, not the entirety of cultures. Three generations of White Americans have been taught and conditioned to see past race; to see past the color of a person’s skin. Three generations have learned and benefited from a simple idea, that people should form opinions of other people based on their character, the actions, their deeds and the way they interact with others, not their skin color. But, evidently, sadly, urban “Black America” doesn’t seem to get this fact.

“I want to tell White America to stop not giving a damn about Black people.”

I don’t doubt that the person who made that statement truly believes in what he says. In fact, I am certain that he does. I am certain that he believes that every single White American that he passes on the street sees a difference between them. But that is a perception issue based on assumption, not a racial issue. And therein lays the crux of the problem we are facing today in Baltimore, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Ferguson and elsewhere. Entire urban Black American communities are judging the entirety of “White America” by the sins of eras past (even though over 600,000 men, mostly White, died in pursuit of eradicating slavery in the US Civil War) and by the intellectually stunted actions of individuals today. The sad irony in all of this is that Black America is judging White America by the color of their skin and not the content of its character. Black America – especially urban Black America – is being racist against White America. Where post-Civil Rights Movement White America has learned from the wisdom of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., it appears urban Black America has jettisoned his wisdom in preference to special interest racial privilege, at least in a macro sense.

“I want to tell White America to stop not giving a damn about Black people.”

Logic mandates that there is no possible way that one person can ever truly know what is in another person’s heart – regardless of their race – unless they engage them one-on-one. I would suggest that the man who made that comment has never taken the time to actually talk to the average “White American” about the issue; that he has never had an honest “conversation” about the issue outside of his own like-minded community. Instead, the person who made this statement has been conditioned by the opportunistic politicians and the permanently disgruntled to believe a false narrative, one that divides the nation along racial lines for the purposes of acquiring and maintaining power, and one that will be hard to remove from society unless we all – not just White Americans – start looking past skin color and more towards the character of all Americans, individually.

As for me, I will not be bullied back into the false narrative. I do not judge anyone on the color of their skin, nor do I know anyone, anywhere who does. It is an antiquated thought process that serves no good thing. Instead, I judge people on their actions, their deeds; the way they interact with others, whether they are kind and supportive or jaded, uncaring and indignant, whether they live by the rule of law, working to affect change through a peaceful process, or use violence to destroy, to bully, to intimidate and coerce…I judge them on their character.

Today, as I watch Baltimore burn, I can’t say much for the character of the urban Black American community. Their actions speak for themselves. They are, sadly, disappointingly, trapped in the death-cycle false narrative that institutional racism still exists in the United States…blind to the fact that they could, alternatively, truly be “free at last.”

We Live In A Mad House, A Mad House

Who could forget the scene from the original Planet of The Apes when Charlton Heston was in a cage getting hosed down by one of the apes; he shouted “This is a mad house, a mad house.” Well it seems the whole world has turned into “A mad house, a mad house.

It seems for the first time in US history, a judge has granted two chimpanzees a petition  through human attorneys to defend their rights against unlawful imprisonment, arguably bestowing the status of “legal persons” on the primates. Just last week, Manhattan

Supreme Court justice Barbara Jaffe granted a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of two non-human plaintiffs, Hercules and Leo, chimpanzees used for medical experiments at Stony Brook University on Long Island.

But this is not the first time this has happened, in one failed bid to remove another chimpanzee, Tommy, from captivity in a trailer in Gloversville, New York, an appeals court argued that chimpanzees do not participate in society and cannot be held accountable for their actions. I guess this judge forgot that in 2009 a chimpanzee in Connecticut, bit both hands off a woman and also ate her face off. Chimpanzees are animals and should be treated as such, I think this judge needs to go back to law school, or get a mental evaluation. A person is a person and a chimp is an animal.

chimp_suit-300x180

In another event that proves the world is going mad, a traditional values leader is exposing the Girl Scouts for its continued move toward far-left causes. The latest announcement, says Linda Harvey of Mission America, is that little boys from kindergarten through high school can join the Girl Scouts, if the boy considers himself a girl. “In other words, he calls the shots,” Harvey says of young males. “He is the one that determines the rights and privacy of authentic girls.”

So let’s see, a 16 year old boy can get up one day and say he thinks he is a girl and they have to let him in the Girl Scouts. I don’t know about you, but if my daughter went on a camping trip with the Girl Scouts and I found out that a boy was gonna sleep in the same tent, there would be hell to pay. A while back I was reading that there are parents that actually ask there kids “What do you feel like today, a boy or a girl,” if that ain’t child abuse, I don’t know what is. It’s the same thing with the Boy Scouts allowing homosexuals in the group. Do I want my son sleeping in the same tent with a homosexual, hell no?  I won’t even mention trans-gender bathrooms.

Over the years the Girl Scouts have been trying to push a liberal left wing agenda by pushing liberal sex education, as well as ties to Planned Parenthood. But out of this madness comes a bright spot, a pro-family rival organization to the Girl Scouts, who believe in family, God and country, American Heritage Girls, is celebrating 20 years this year. Also a chapter is being organized for homosexual and lesbian families, see there is a solution for every thing if we just use our heads.

In a resent news article, the headline read; U.S. Army FORCES Cadets to Wear High Heels to Promote Feminist Campaign –  Army ROTC cadets are complaining on message boards that they were pressured to walk in high heels on Monday for an Arizona State University campus event designed to raise awareness of sexual violence against women. How demeaning is this to our future soldiers.

“Attendance is mandatory and if we miss it we get a negative counseling and a ‘does not support the battalion sharp/EO mission’ on our CDT OER for getting the branch we want. So I just spent $16 on a pair of high heels that I have to spray paint red later on only to throw them in the trash after about 300 of us embarrass the U.S. Army tomorrow,” one anonymous cadet wrote on the social media sharing website Imgr, IJReview.

For those of you who watch the O’reilly Factor know that on Wednesday nights he has on Dennis Miller, one thing he is always saying is the world is going mad, I have to agree with him.

“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.

images

 

 

This is one man’s opinion.

The LEFT wants facts, but just THEIR facts!

This week Hillary’s “misspeaks,” “misleads,” and “what difference, at this point, does it make” sagas continue to be in the news. And I mean, the REAL news.

The news gods may be having a little change of heart. ABC, NBC, CBS, and, yes, even MSNBC have been asking questions and making comments about Hillary’s blatant disregard for the law and her failure to think things through when it comes to taking money from countries and questionable characters. Just when I thought the clouds were going to part and some sanity set in, in steps George Stephanopoulos, a very left-wing journalist, who, after speaking with the author of “Clinton Cash” basically said, “Move along nothing to see here.” His whole premise is that since we have no hard evidence that money changed hands for favors through the White House for the Clinton’s that all is well in OZ.

Well, Mr. Stephanopoulos, all is not well in OZ. And you, sir, are a MAJOR part of the problem. It used to be that journalists gave us all sides of the issue and allowed us to draw a conclusion. They didn’t decide what the truth was and then paint a picture that would lead us to their truth.

This same group of mainstream media people made many assumptions about George W Bush and had no problem accusing him while “misspeaking” their facts as truth.

HillaryCoverUp

Mr. Stephanopoulos is floored that anyone would draw any conclusion of wrongdoing starting with Mrs. Clinton’s email issue. She simply made a mistake and since the president knew about it, all is well! Really? Turn the tables and see what would have happened if it was done by a Republican.

Nothing “fishy” about Mr. Clinton getting on average $70,000 for speaking gigs before Hillary became Secretary of State. But after her appointment, all of a sudden he is worth $500,000 to $1.3 million per speaking gig. Did he take a speech writing class? Get better teleprompters? That’s not important. And no worries, most of those were events with some connection to donors.

In the immortal words of Yul Brynner in the “King and I”… “iz a puzzlement.”

Here’s a quick rundown… Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, $25 million to the Clinton Foundation for the betterment of the Clintons. Australia, $10 million to the Clinton Foundation for the betterment of the Clintons. Sultanate of Oman, $5 million to the Clinton Foundation for the betterment of the Clintons. And the list goes on to the tune of $150 million to the Clinton Foundation for the betterment of the Clintons (CFFTBOTC).

Who else? What other legislator? What other past president? What other past legislator has received this kind of money from foreign entities? I’ll save you the time… NO ONE! Donations are made to Presidential Libraries for the purpose of upkeep and purchasing artifacts for the library, not the presidential families. But Georgie says you have nothing that actually ties to an agreement to provide services.

A uranium (shell) company donated big bucks to the CFFTBOTC. Shortly after the donation, coincidentally, Mrs. Clinton changed her mind about the U.S. blocking the uranium mining deal and even encouraged such deals in some of her speeches.

Then, there is the “re-filing” of past tax returns. Since it was brought to their attention that they forgot to include many, if not all, of the Canadian deal-based donations on their reports. Let’s pause here a minute. Hillary says she is a person of integrity and ethics. They have an elite team managing this foundation. How did they miss MILLIONS of dollars in donations with such an experienced team of employees at The Foundation? Not once, not twice, but 4 years in a row! Tax experts say it’s highly unusual for a foundation to refile this many years because of omissions.

Well, not to worry. Hillary stepped down from the foundation’s board of directors this month but her husband, Bill, and their daughter, Chelsea, remain directors. I’m sure she will keep and arm’s length (or at least a bedroom length) away from Bill and the foundation. After all, she has always been honest and up front with us on all issues. Right?

That whole, Benghazi debacle where she swears they never refused to send help. Oh wait… never mind! OK, then there is the “I turned over all the correspondence and emails pertaining to Benghazi and my term as Secretary of State” thing. Oh, wait… never mind. At least she only erased the emails that had to do with her daughter’s wedding, her aunt’s death, her yoga routines, and her personal transactions on the homes they purchased. Yup, all 33,000 of the personal emails. Oh, wait… never mind. OK then, we’ll just track down the entities and people she probably sent emails to and ask them for them… guess what? The first dozen or so refused to share. Can you see my shocked face?

Read the rest at CantFindTheTruth

It’s time for hard assets

waste_of_moneyI spend a great deal of time sorting through PMI reports, GDP releases, key corporate financials and more – at this point – I’m just moving money into hard assets.

Cash is not a hard asset. It has no intrinsic value – only that assigned to it by an arbitrary entity.

Gold does not feed a hungry person or keep a cold man warm. It is .. just a soft metal that looks “perty.”

Ultimately, if things get upside down – which they are likely to do – tangible assets will be the most useful.

Tangible assets are things that have value regardless of an arbitrary government entity saying they are worth something. Chickens have value, cows, guns, ammo and whiskey all are worth something because there is a demand for them – not simply because the government says some piece of paper with a president on it is worth a buck.

I am not telling you that the end is near – who could know that?

I’m just saying that if you are concerned, cash in the bank may not be yours much longer and the government has confiscated gold before. This time, go hard.

Obama Lunches Suck – School Chefs Skirt Regs to Feed Kids

school-lunch-michelle-obamaMichelle Obama’s lunch menu sucks and the “lunch lady” lobby joins the rest of America in telling President Obama’s wife where she can stick her terrible food.

The LA Times reports that the ingredients school cooks are forced to use are terrible:

A school system’s nutritional director finds there’s one advocate for healthy food whose demands she just can’t meet — Michelle Obama.

 

 

“We have tried every noodle that is out there,” said Gitta Grether-Sweeney, the Portland nutritional director who says she is exasperated by the federal school lunch rules the first lady champions.

 

 

“Whole-wheat noodles just don’t work in lasagna. We are having to go lawless to use regular pasta.”

The locally sourced macaroni and cheese the schools had been serving turned to mush when it was made with whole-grain macaroni to meet the new rules, Grether-Sweeney said.

Mrs. Obama has the advantage of having her children in expensive private schools and fed by well-paid White House chefs. Professing from the balcony that America’s kids should eat crappy food just seems kind of …. crappy.

« Older Entries